US fired cruise missile strikes on Syrian air base

[Mr. Analog]

http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/u-s-blasts-syrian-base-with-dozens-of-missile-strikes-1.3358473?autoPlay=true

[Thorin]

I'd seen you post this last night but I wasn't ready to delve into it yet.  The subject matter will most likely turn heavy and political very quickly.

A day later, and there's some interesting developments.

How many cruise missiles fired: The number that was getting reported this morning was 59, now some reports say around 70 (apparently some were intercepted by Russian mobile air defenses deployed at the Syrian airbase), for a total cost between $30mil and $100mil (because no one knows what version of the cruise missiles was launched).  http://www.thesquander.com/how-much-tomahawk-missiles-cost/
Russia claimed only 23 of 59 cruise missiles made it to the airbase, and that the other 36 were intercepted or downed somehow.

The Syrians appear to have been forewarned: There are reports from eyewitnesses that say the Syrians and Russians removed a bunch of equipment from the airbase before it was hit.  http://abcnews.go.com/International/eyewitness-syrian-military-anticipated-us-raid/story?id=46641107
There are now satellite pictures that are grainy that purport to show damage to airplane shelters, as well as pictures of destroyed aircraft.

The Syrians were still taking off and landing at the airbase after the attack: There were fresh sorties from the airbase, and the aircraft that flew from Sharyat on Friday bombed the same area that the sarin attack occurred.  https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/07/syria-bombing-base-was-home-to-jets-allegedly-used-in-sarin-attacks

Some people say Trump did this to take the heat off investigations: There are people who are suggesting this is a ploy by Trump to get everyone to stop paying attention to the investigations into his campaign's contacts with Russian agents during the election.  Which, by the way, I'm convinced there's something there.  Not because of all the reports and leaks and what-not, a lot of that is so politicized there's no way to even sense whether they're true.  But what convinced me is the story by DNS researchers about a server at Alfa Bank (run by a Putin buddy) that only ever seemed to lookup the IP for a server at Trump Tower: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/cover_story/2016/10/was_a_server_registered_to_the_trump_organization_communicating_with_russia.html.  Lots of detail in there, but as a techie I read it and agree with the conclusions that are being drawn.
I mean, really:
- Alfa Bank server only looks up mail1.trump-email.com during Russian business hours (could be Russians answering their emails?)
- mail1.trump-email.com only looks up Alfa Bank server during American business hours (could be Americans answering their emails?)
- mail1.trump-email.com returns errors when other mail servers try to connect with it
- reporter asks Alfa Bank about the servers and a day later mail1.trump-email.com is removed from service (reporter hasn't talked to Trump org at all yet; did Alfa Bank tip them off?)
- about a week after the reporter asked Alfa Bank about the servers, a new server called trump1.contact-client.com is set up (he just can't help but put his name on everything)
- the very first lookup of this new server is from the Alfa Bank server; how did Alfa Bank know about this server unless someone from the Trump org gave them the details?
To me, that just screams "private communication channel which no one wants to admit to".

Russia is diverting war resources to Syria: Reports say a frigate (bigger than the American guided missile destroyers that launched the cruise missiles) has been redirected to the Mediterranean.  Also, statements coming from Russian officials hint at the possibility of open war between Russian and American forces.

Some people say Trump did this to show he's a tough guy: Maybe he's trying to impress Xi Jinping, who he's hosting this weekend?  Or maybe he's trying to show Kim Jong-un that he means business?  Of course, both of those guys are bullies themselves and won't be easily cowed.

[Mr. Analog]

The time to strike was well past its due date, Obama had the opportunity to strike the chemical weapon stockpile directly before they were used but chose not to (for obvious reasons, exploding chemical weapons not the best idea plus striking the delivery mechanisms like air base(s) / artillery was deemed politically sensitive at the time despite dropping over 12 thousand bombs on Syria in 2016

Watching the live feed yesterday it was made clear that the White House had notified Russian forces in advance of the strike, however the real test will come in the near future. If a manned US aircraft goes down things could get awful tense awful fast. Russia is weak from a conventional military perspective, however escalation between two nuclear powers is usually not a good thing.

TBH I think I'm with the crowd that thinks this was a display of power for Xi Jinping to put pressure on dealing with the ongoing NK situation. NK is weak right now with a lot of internal power struggles going on at a time when SK is also in disarray, the whole region could destabilize under the wrong circumstances, that would send half the Pacific Rim into chaos trying to figure out what to do with a whole nations worth of refugees.

"May you live in interesting times" indeed...

[Thorin]

Well, the US under Obama in 2016 dropped all those bombs on ISIS targets, not government installations.  Which made it internationally legitimate - Syria had "asked" for the US's help fighting ISIS.  To target government installations made it internationally illegitimate - this would be an attack on another nation's sovereignty.  Obama also had requested permission from Congress for such strikes and was denied, and he decided not to act against Congress's decision.

I think this was done for a mishmash of reasons - sabre-rattling at China / North Korea and at Iran, distraction from the problematic investigations at home, and being thin-skinned and probably easily cajoled into doing this by his advisers.