Attack on Syria launches June 30th, Debka

When i finished reading this article, in the very last sentance is where i thought the real news is, burried at the very end.
"US-Russian concurrence on a plan for Assad’s removal could avert the operation. The failure of their talks would spell a worsening of the Syrian crisis and precipitate Western-Arab military intervention, which according to military sources in the Gulf is scheduled for launch Saturday, June 30."

June 30th is the news out of this article that isnt being noticed really, if its true or not remains to be seen, might also be a PSYOP to add more fuel to the fire i dont know, but i thought it was worth a mention.

www.debka.com...

reply to post by 1947flxible


Caught this as well:

The tools for such an attack are all operational” and the US is coming around to suspect that Iran has already conducted its first nuclear test in North Korea.

Yup, just throw those two Nations into the same sentence and the masses get riled. Is there any proof of this actually happening?

Peace

the talks shall not progress further, they shall conclude similar to commencing

they are just stalling until an 'Accident' happens upon the border which engages Turkey to retaliate,

reply to post by 1947flxible


Well, the first thing to note is that it comes from Debka, which is not exactly known for it's reliability as any kind of real source. Good for sensationalism however. I would be willing to wager dollars to donuts that we wake tomorrow with nothing like what Debka says is supposed to happen, actually happening.

The peace talks are continuing on today and before we go following the hype of Debka, I think we should instead be following how those peace talks are progressing. Here is a link to a Reuter's article I've just finished reading on the subject: Russia and West tussle at Syrian Peace Talks

While it sounds as though things may be getting close to the "Grab your pitchforks and torches", I don't think we are quite there yet. Tense and troubling situation...absolutely but I don't think we are willing just yet to step into full on invasion mode. I could be wrong though..we have another 11 hours to go to see if Debka is actually correct.... I believe that would be a first.

Debka isn't the most reliable source out there. The article quoted on AvWeek, is a blog post, talking about POSSIBLE ways an attack on Iran could happen.

Debka:

“Evidence is mounting that the US defense community and the Obama administration view 2013 as the likely window for a bombing attack on Iran’s nuclear and missile facilities. It could be earlier, timed to use the chaos of the Syrian government’s fall to disguise such an attack…”

AvWeek:

Evidence is mounting that the U.S. defense community and the Obama administration view 2013 as the likely window for a bombing attack on Iran's nuclear and missile facilities.

It could be earlier, timed to use the chaos of the Syrian government's fall to disguise such an attack, or later, if international negotiations with Iran stretch out without failing completely.

They completely fail to put some quotes by retired war planners, that really change the tone of the article.

AvWeek:

“I think it would take an extraordinarily dumb move on the part of the Iranians to force U.S. kinetic interventions before the U.S. presidential election [by abandoning negotiations],” says the first official. However, “post-election, I think the viable responses [negotiations, more cyberattacks and bombing] are wide open.”

By 2013, U.S. political pressure to avoid an attack will be at its lowest ebb with the presidential election just over and the mid-terms still two years away. The situation has also stabilized in Israel. “Israel has fewer reservations [to a U.S. kinetic attack] given the recent solidification of their government,” he says.

The nearest window of opportunity—that carries the least potential for political backlash from a bombing attack on Iran—is 2013 or 2014. However, there are threats of retribution attacks on the U.S. by Hezbollah. The stateless Islamist organization occupies southern Lebanon and is supported by Syria and Iran.

“The assessment I'm betting on is continued watching, but [with U.S. forces] close to action,” says the second planner.

The tools for such an attack are all operational.

“We would employ a totally stealthy force of F-22s, B-2s and Jassms [joint air-to-surface standoff missiles] that are launched from F-15Es and [Block 40] F-16s,” says the third planning veteran. “We should give Iran advanced warning that we will damage and likely destroy its nuclear facilities. It is not an act of war against Iran, the Iranian people or Islam. It is a pre-emptive attack solely against their nuclear facilities and the military targets protecting them. We will take extraordinary measures to protect against collateral damage.”

The reason for avoiding a bombing campaign is the ease with which the attacker can be identified. Cyberattack offers an offensive capability without removing the cloak of anonymity.

“Cyberattack is not always preferred to physical damage,” says Lt. Gen. (ret.) David Deptula, former U.S. Air Force chief of intelligence. “It depends on what the objectives are. What we want to be able to do is to get our foes to act in accordance with our strategic objectives without ever knowing they have been acted upon. Operations in cyberspace allow that to happen.”

AvWeek Article

Oh, and the article was posted on June 25th, NOT after the "failed meeting on June 29th".

?????????
its nearly 7/1 over there

?????????

and while I am at it,

where is the collapse of USA? Dow gains where how much this last week?

Bombing of Iran?

There are like 3 hours left...(Jerusalem time) until June 30th finishes.

However, TODAY, Debka posted some another article, and on the bottom is some giberrish phrase that gives 48 hours ( which means June 30th + July 1st) for the start of the same operation.

I don't know...DEBKA is meh.But to give a date (or 48 hours window) for something that will be HUGE if will actually happen it's quite risky for DEBKA.They are already known as BS site.After this won't happen, nobody will even look at that site.But if it happens...

Also, 4th of July, USofA national day.Obama probably giving a speech.Wouldn't be "nice" for that speach to be about the fall of Assad (tbh, after first bombs wil fall on his palace, he will be in hiding - if it starts on July 1st Assad will be running before the day it's over) or how the nation must unite against Russia and China (after bombs start falling, Russian and China go in with troops and w/e else) ?

Will see.It will start in the next 3 hours, or next 27 hours, or later.If MUCH LATER, DEBKA loses every bit of credibility that might have.

Does this happen before or after the aliens land?

Originally posted by nighthawk1954
Does this happen before or after the aliens land?

War happen you know?

Alien invasions...not yet.

To put them in same sentence is at least childish.

reply to post by Recollector


WOAH WOAH WOAH .....debka had credibility? when did this happen? A site that repetedly predicts "massive regional conflicts" and fails to provide credible sources is by definition not a credible site....Just like ATS xD j/k

Originally posted by sanic9k1
reply to post by Recollector

 

WOAH WOAH WOAH .....debka had credibility? when did this happen? A site that repetedly predicts "massive regional conflicts" and fails to provide credible sources is by definition not a credible site....Just like ATS xD j/k

Read more carefully...I said "MIGHT HAVE".I read DEBKA for like 6 years now.Sometimes (VERY RARELY) they are quite in the spot.This is why I said "DEBKA loses every bit of credibility that might have.".

reply to post by MyMindIsMyOwn


re this article
www.reuters.com...

My guess is that the question being raised is, does America want in?

The Silk Road, Tartus is a port, the SCO has already began plans to reinvigorate the Silk Road.
Russia China Pakistan Iran many countries in a commercial venture coalition.

Then on the other side you have Europe, gearing up on their end, looking to fund projects perhaps that stimulate growth in the economy and jobs.

So its a trade route to Europe, and the IMF raised 456 billion, America did not contribute.

So if we want to make it instead a large global project, since Brazil and other countries pledged funds then maybe America wants to contribute 44 billion and then we could make it a global trade route infrastructure project. Syria is a key hub in that plan.

So if we build 90 hubs at 5 billion each around the globe, we don't need America's money, but we want them as trading partners, so they stand to benefit if we put a few hubs there and the network stands to benefit.
Warehousing, data storage, food and goods, basic Internet commerce backbone. All brand new.
Lots of jobs.
So if they want to encourage Syria to make Tartus an International port, and not just a port for the SCO,
Check out the SCO then America should join hands with the IMF, ante up some dough, and be a major player.

Well, it is getting pretty late. Still on US-Israeli-NATO attack on Syria.


I reckon this is going to kick off after the London Olympics.

Originally posted by Trajan
Well, it is getting pretty late. Still on US-Israeli-NATO attack on Syria.


I reckon this is going to kick off after the London Olympics.

Hopefully WAAAAY LONG after London Olympics.Tho, if you think a bit more, a war in same time with the Olympics it is much more "acceptable" for TPTB.

The "benefits" ? MOST people will watch the Olympics and the war in Syria can go unbated, with atrocities that even if on TV, most will NOT watch them.

Ofc, there is the nasty side here...a war in Syria could start WW3.And then MOST people will probably not watch the Olympics.

Will see.

reply to post by Rocketman7


The other problem they are having at their conference is that if they manage to make a deal with Russia and the SCO, regarding Syria as a hub on the Silk Road, and everyone decides to invest there to help them, to raise the Syrian GDP per capita which is extremely low, then we can't give the money to Assad because he has already been painted negatively. He has been slandered in the press.

So then he would have to step aside for the good of his country, and be put in charge of economic development as some type of figurehead. You want to maintain the economic ties which have already been established because countries and individuals have already been part of an investment plan there.
Syria has implemented policy in the last few years to encourage investment.

So we want to build a 5 billion dollar trade hub there, we just can't give him the money, it has to be done through a unity form of government. So he steps aside for peace with handshakes and whatever.
He becomes a figurehead and maybe an ambassador because remember he has close ties with several other countries.

well they've got an hour and a half to invade.

Its not so much that Debka is "wrong" a lot, much of what they foretell about regional wars and stuff is true AT THE TIME THEY RELEASE THE INFO-the issue is that the world powers many times do things behind the scenes to avert these situations at the last minute. If anyone doesnt believe that i tell you there are MANY times during a year that countries are close to war or things getting out of control (which is usually what Debka reports but the main stream does not) and powers behind the scenes make sure a lot of these things dont happen.

reply to post by princeofpeace


My problem is that they quote mine, and leave out important parts of articles that change the tone of the article. Like the example earlier of the AvWeek article. They also claimed it was published on the 29th, but I read it several days ago, and it's clearly dated the 25th of June.