US and Allied Warships off the Syrian Coastline: Decided “Before” the August 21 Chemical Weapons Attack

By Accidents

A massive United States and allied naval deployment is taking place in the Eastern Mediterranean off Syria’s coastline as well as in the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf.

While this action of military might could not be part of an immediate attack plan on Syria, it is creating an atmosphere of fear and panic within Syria.

The Navy of the United States has deployed the USS San Antonio, an amphibious transport vessel to the Eastern Mediterranean. The USS San Antonio ship is joining five US destroyers that “are already in place for potential missile attacks on Syria, a defense official announced on Sunday.”

The USS San Antonio, with several helicopters and lots of Marines onboard, is “on station in the Eastern Mediterranean” but “has obtained no specific tasking,” stated the defense official, that spoke on condition of anonymity. United States Navy deploys five war vessels, one amphibious ship to Mediterranean for Syria.
While the USS San Antonio ship has amphibious landing equipment that may be used to land some 6 thousand sailors and marines, “no boots on the ground”, however, remains the official motto.

So why then has the US deployed its most advanced amphibious landing ship? The reports suggest that this is routine and there are no attack plans:

“No amphibious landing is in the works, however, as President Barack Obama has ruled out any “boots on the ground” (Ibid)

USS San Antonio

There are currently 5 destroyer ships off the coast of Syria: the USS Stout, Mahan, Ramage, Barry and Graveley, not to mention the San Antonio amphibious landing ship.

The destroyers are equipped with Tomahawk cruise missiles that “are ready to fire … if Obama gives the order.”

On August 28th, the United States Navy stated the deployment of  the Arleigh Burke-class destroyer USS Stouten route to join four other destroyers “amid allegations, which the regime of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad used chemical weapons against civilians on 21st of August.″

In a not unusual twist, this deployment of the United States forces and allied naval forces preceded the chemical weapons attack that is being blamed on president Bashar al Assad.

According to Naval records of the U.S. naval forces, the guided missile destroyer USS Stout (DDG 55) departed Naval Station Norfolk, Va. on 18th of August, 2013, “for deployment to the U.S. 6th Fleet area of responsibility” (see image below upon its departure in Norfolk on August 18).

The USS Ramage destroyer left Naval Station Norfolk on August 13 for the Eastern Mediterranean, “to relieve the Mahan”.

Yet in fact what was decided was to deploy all five destroyers along the Syrian coastline. This decision was taken by the Pentagon well in advance of the chemical attacks of August 21, which constitute Barack Obama’s pretext to intervene on humanitarian grounds.

The amphibious transport dock USS San Antonio, which was carrying elements of the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit, has joined the 5 Navy destroyers in the eastern Mediterranean Sea, a defense official confirmed.

“No specific tasking has been received at this point,” the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. “The San Antonio is being kept in the sea as a prudent decision should ship capabilities be required.”

The 5 U.S. destroyers positioned near coast of Syria are the: Barry, Gravely, Mahan, Ramage and Stout.

The U.S. Navy had been operating with 3 destroyers in the Med, and the Ramage and Stout were expected to replace Mahan and Gravely, respectively, when they arrived there this month. But maritime officials decided to keep all 5 in place as the U.S. weighs an attack. Each U.S. destroyer ship is capable of carrying up to 90 Tomahawk cruise missiles, although they usually have fewer on hand during deployment.
Ship Carrying Marine Arrives in Med, August 30, 2013

This massive naval deployment that also is also consisted by strategic submarines was ordered prior to the tragic event of chemical weapons attack of 21st of August that begs the question:

If the chemical weapons attack is a justification for intervening, why was the order to launch an R2P “humanitarian” naval operation against Syria decided upon “Prior” to 21st of August?

Was there advanced knowledge or intelligence regarding the timing and occurrence of the August 21 Chemical Weapons attack?

USS Stout leaving Norfolk on 18th of August. USS Stout was used as part of Operation Odyssey Dawn in the 2011 US-NATO war on Libya.

A strike against Syria in the immediate short-term is unlikely. Barack Obama stated on 31st of August that he would seek formal approval of the U.S. Congress that reconvenes on 9th of September.

With independent news reports providing firm evidence, which the U.S. sponsored Al Qaeda rebels (recruited and trained by Allied Special Forces) have chemical weapons in their possession, this delay doesn't favor the president’s political credibility.

Furthermore, there's evidence that the U.S. sponsored Al Qaeda rebels used chemical weapons against civilians.

In providing those chemical weapons to Al Qaeda “rebels”, the US-NATO-Israel alliance is in violation of international law, not to mention their own anti-terrorist legislation.

Overtly supporting Al Qaeda has become the “New Normal”.

When the various pieces of evidence are put together, the picture which emerges is that of a covert “flag flag operation” carried out by the US sponsored “rebels” and special forces, intent upon blaming president Bashar Al Assad for killing his own people. As mentioned above, the naval deployment was decided upon ex ante, before the August 21st chemical Weapons attack.

This diabolical false flag attack that consists in killing civilians and blaming the Syrian government constitutes the justification for military intervention on “humanitarian grounds”.

The U.S. naval forces and its allies are still in the process of deploying their naval forces off the Syrian coastline.

The Pentagon has confirmed that  aircraft carrier USS Nimitz and its carrier strike group has moved into the Red Sea from the Indian Ocean, but, according to official statements, “it has not been given orders to be part of the planning for a limited U.S. military strike on Syria”

“The official said the carrier strike group has not been assigned a mission and the move to the Red Sea was a prudent move in case its resources are needed to “maximize available options”.
The other warships in the USS Nimitz strike group are: USS Princeton and 3 destroyers: USS William P. Lawrence, USS Stockdale and USS Shoup.

USS Nimitz

Recent reports are that the USS Harry S. Truman aircraft carrier and strike group is in the northern Arabian Sea.

In the meantime reports confirm that France has sent its anti-air warfare frigate “Chevalier Paul” to the eastern Mediterranean. The French war vessel is joining the flotilla of U.S. and British warships “including U.S. navy destroyers and British and American submarines armed with Tomahawk cruise missiles.”

Syria is being portrayed in the French media as the aggressor:

The Chevalier Paul ship is one of France’s “most up-to-date destroyers of the Horizon-class, …[ it ] is going to be “extremely useful” if Syria decides to launch its air attacks against the international flotilla.”

Nuclear-powered French aircraft carrier the Charles de Gaulle remains in dock at the southern French naval port Toulon, according to news agencies.”

Russian Warships to the Syrian Coastline

A critical situation is unfolding:

Moscow has revealed that is also sending 2 war vessels to the Eastern Mediterranean to reinforce its naval strength that operates out of Russia’s naval base at the port of Tartus in Southern Syria.

The agency quoted a source in the armed forces’ general staff as saying an anti-submarine ship and a missile cruiser will be sent in the coming days because the situation “required us to make some adjustments” in the naval force. French and Russian warships ‘head for Syria’ – SYRIA – FRANCE 24

Syria’s Air Defense System

The Russian constructed S-300 is functional. The deployment of the S-300 Surface to Air Missile system in Syria has been on the drawing board of the Russian Ministry of Defense since 2006.

Syria also possesses the Pechora-2M air defense system,  The Pechora-2M is a sophisticated ground to air multiple target system that may also be used against cruise missiles.

Had this air defense not been in place, the implementation of a US-NATO led “no fly zone” would no doubt have been contemplated at an earlier date.

Moreover,  in response to the U.S.-allied missile deployments of Patriot missiles in Turkey, Russia delivered advanced Iskander missiles to Syria that are already fully operational.

The Iskander is described as a surface-to-surface missile system “that no missile defense system can trace or destroy”:

The superior Iskander is able to travel at hypersonic speed of over 1,3 miles per second (Mach 6-7) and has a range of over 280 miles with pinpoint accuracy of destroying targets with its 1,500-pound warhead, a nightmare for any missile defense system.

Iskander Mach 6-7

Concluding Remarks

The World is at a dangerous crossroads.

The Untied States Government and allied naval deployment in the Eastern Mediterranean with US-NATO war vessels is contiguous to the deployment of Russian war ships out of Russia’ naval base in Tartus.

Syria has an advanced air defense system that is definitely going to be used in the case of a US sponsored attack. Russian military advisers are assisting Syrian forces.

Syria also has considerable ground forces.

Syria has been building up its air defense system with the delivery and installation over the last few years of the Russian S-300 system.

Looking back, history tells us that wars are often triggered unexpectedly as a result of “political mistakes” and human errors. The latter are all the more likely within the realm of a divisive and corrupt political system in the United States and Western Europe.

US-NATO military planning is overseen by a centralised military hierarchy. Command and Control operations are in theory “coordinated” but in practice they are usually marked by human error. Intelligence operatives often function independently and outside the realm of political accountability.

While military planners are acutely familiar with the dangers of escalation, civilian politicians responding to dominant economic interests ultimately decide on the launching of a major theater war.

Any form of US-NATO direct military intervention against the citizens and government of Syria would destabilize the whole region, potentially leading to escalation over a vast geographical area, extending from the Eastern Mediterranean to the Afghanistan-Pakistan border with Tajikistan and China.

Military planning involves intricate scenarios and war games by both sides including military options pertaining to advanced weapons systems. A 3rd World War scenario has been contemplated by US-NATO-Israeli military planners since early 2000.

Escalation is an integral part of the military agenda. War preparations to attack Syria and Iran have been in “an advanced state of readiness” for a few years.

We are dealing with complex political and strategic decision-making involving the interplay of powerful economic interest groups, the actions of covert intelligence operatives.

In the case of Syria, US intelligence and its Western and Israeli counterparts are supporting an armed insurgency largely integrated by Al Qaeda mercenaries and death squads.

The role of war propaganda is paramount not only in molding public opinion into accepting a war agenda, but also in establishing a consensus within the upper echelons of the decision-making process. A selective form of war propaganda intended for “Top Officials” (TOPOFF) in government agencies, intelligence, the Military, law enforcement, etc. is intended to create an unbending consensus in favor of War and the Police State.

For the war project to go ahead, it is essential that both politicians and military planners are rightfully committed to leading the war “in the name of justice and democracy”. For this to occur, they must firmly believe in their own propaganda, namely that war is “an instrument of peace and democracy”.

They have no concern for the devastating impacts of advanced weapons systems, routinely categorized as “collateral damage”, let alone the meaning and significance of pre-emptive warfare, using nuclear weapons.

I should be noted that the Humanitarian warfare consensus is extremely fragile will large sector of public opinion taking a stance against the war-makers.

Wars are invariably decided upon by civilian leaders and corporate interests rather than by the military. War serves dominant economic interests which operate from behind the scenes, behind closed doors in corporate boardrooms, in the Washington think tanks, etc.

Realities are turned upside down. War is peace. The Lie becomes the Truth.

War propaganda, namely media lies, constitutes the most powerful instrument of warfare.

Without media disinformation, the US-NATO-Israel led war agenda would collapse like a deck of cards. The legitimacy of  the war criminals in high office would be broken.

It is therefore essential to disarm not only the mainstream media but also a segment of the self proclaimed “progressive” alternative media, which has provided legitimacy to NATO’s “Responsibility to protect” (R2P)  mandate, largely with a view to dismantling the antiwar movement.

The road to Tehran goes through Damascus. A war on Iran would involve, as a first step, the destabilization of Syria as a nation state. Military planning pertaining to Syria is an integral part of the war on Iran agenda.

The war on Syria could evolve towards a US-NATO-Israel military campaign directed against Iran, in which Turkey and Israel would be directly involved.

It is crucial to spread the word and break the channels of media disinformation.

A critical and unbiased understanding of what is happening in Syria is of crucial importance in reversing the tide of military escalation towards a broader regional war.

Our objective is ultimately to dismantle the US-NATO-Israeli military arsenal and restore World Peace.

It is vital that people in the United States, Canada, UK, France, Italy, Israel, Turkey and around the World prevent this war from occurring.

Updated: September 3, 2013