The U.S. has just attacked Syria. As of 3:33pm EST on Sunday, October 26 2008, few in the American MSM (mainstream media) online are reporting it.
There has been no word from the U.S. government yet. But that’s not stopping even outlets like the BBC from making up Washington’s excuses for them.
US aircraft attack Syria border
(Page last updated at 19:21 GMT, Sunday, 26 October 2008)US helicopter-borne troops have carried out a raid inside Syria along the Iraqi border, killing eight people including a woman, Syrian authorities say.
The official Syrian news agency Sana said the raid took place in the Abu Kamal border area, in eastern Syria.
It said that American soldiers on four helicopters had stormed a building under construction on Sunday night.
The US says it is investigating. It has previously accused Syria of allowing foreign militants into Iraq.
“Four American helicopters violated Syrian airspace around 16:45 local time (1345 GMT) on Sunday,” state television and Sana news agency said.
It said that “American soldiers” who had emerged from helicopters “attacked a civilian building under construction and fired at workmen inside, causing eight deaths”.
“The helicopters then left Syrian territory towards Iraqi territory,” Sana said.
“We are in the process of investigating this,” Sgt Brooke Murphy, a US military spokesman, told the AFP news agency in Baghdad.
The area is near the Iraqi border city of Qaim, which had been a major crossing point for fighters, weapons and money travelling into Iraq to fuel the Sunni insurgency.
Washington has accused Damascus of turning a blind eye to the problem.
Thank you, BBC for allowing us to rest assured that the killings of eight human beings are probably justified.
Related posts:
- Iraqi Refugee Situation Part II: The Strain on Syria
- Syria (Maybe) Kills Prisoners of All Stripes
- UnNews: When Muslims Are Attacked
- Arabina-whoops! I mean “Angelina”-Jolie visits Iraqi Refugee camps in Syria
- Israel May Add Iran to Long List of Countries it Attacked
How come the fact that the US illegally occupied and destroyed Syria’s neighbor is never used as justification by the media for Syria’s lax patrolling of the border?
Posted by Mohammad | October 26, 2008, 1:27 pmUh… It appears it *was* justified?
Posted by Joe | October 26, 2008, 3:39 pmUh… Joe:
I never respond to anything your vicious ass has to say, but I can’t help it today. Don’t ask, and don’t expect it will be repeated.
Thank you for proving my point. I’ve respected not one thing you have ever had to say on this blog, and this latest response–SURPRISE!!–is perfect. You and everything single thing you stand for disgust me.
Posted by QuiQui | October 26, 2008, 4:14 pmIf they knew this was a major crossing point for arms, money and fighters, surely they could have attacked the supply train from the Iraqi side of the border, where presumably they have both better intelligence and better control than on the Syrian side. If the Syrians were arming the resistance the resistance would have RPG-29s which can take out our tanks. Yet they have no weapons they didn’t have when Saddam was in power. Fancy that. Accusing the Syrians of letting arms through while we’re just as responsible for “our” side of the border is laughable. That would be like blaming Mexico for not stopping illegal immigrants. What a load of bullshit. It figures these evil bastards would look to start a war before that malignant cancer on the asshole of America left office. Fucking scumbags.
Posted by Sean | October 26, 2008, 6:07 pmI like how MSM is used as an acronym for Mainstream media. How much more self righteous can one get?
Posted by Anonymous | October 26, 2008, 6:46 pmwhat does self-righteous have to do with acronyms?
Posted by Anonymous | October 26, 2008, 7:31 pm“”You and everything single thing you stand for disgust me.”"
QuiQui: I stand for human rights, secularism, liberal democracy, social and economic justice, and peace when possible in service of the above.
Which of these are you opposed to?
Posted by Joe | October 27, 2008, 2:14 amThis makes no sense just at a time when Syria is in talks to end isolation. Everytime you think you have plumbed the depths of US foreign policy, the idiots come up with something even more damnably stupid.
I agree with Sean above on both points, this action was probably unecessary and as for “not doing enough to stop insurgents” one has to ask why the hell should they?
Posted by xoggoth | October 27, 2008, 9:21 amJoe, you have a very odd way of demonstrating your belief in human rights, since you justify human rights abuses in the name of ‘secular liberalism’.
Posted by Mohammad | October 27, 2008, 10:19 amI wonder if any of the presidential candidate will comment on this action, I would like if some jurnalist pops a question about this attack in a campaign press conference.
Posted by b-cell | October 27, 2008, 1:57 pmThe BBC has been mum on all kinds of invasions; the most glaring that comes to find is the Israeli war on Lebanon in 2006, which they seemed to report with in pitch-perfect “neutrality” which seemed ridiculous then and now.
Posted by NotBored | October 28, 2008, 7:17 amObviously this was not justified. Anyone who thinks otherwise is either misinformed or simply a fool.
Posted by Kalash | October 31, 2008, 11:53 pm