U.S. President Donald Trump’s strike on a Syrian airbase last week caught everyone off guard. The situation rapidly disintegrated into military action after a chemical attack on Syrian civilians last Tuesday.
Trump was reportedly moved to action by the images of dead and dying children, despite widespread skepticism surrounding the origins of the attack and a comprehensive appreciation of how ‘fake news’ works.
So how could Trump, the red-pilled candiadate who promised to end the cycle of regime change and war, suddenly start implementing what to the untrained eye looks a lot like Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy?
Of course, the only people who could initiate such a policy under a Trump presidency, are the artchitects of that policy – the Deep State, and in order for that to happen, Trump’s administration would have to be compromised.
But let’s start at the beginning with the background players and their motives & interests. The intelligence services and western media has stated that this was the work of Assad. The first question people asked themselves was, what would Assad get out of such a move? And the answer is: Nothing.
As the NYT stated in an article that same day: A chemical weapons attack, if carried out by the government, would be a brazen statement of impunity, coming during a major international meeting in Brussels where officials are debating whether the European Union and other countries will contribute billions of dollars for reconstructing Syria if it is presided over by a government run by Mr. Assad.
With Russian & Iranian support, the Syrian army has been making sustained gains in its six year civil war. To launch a chemical attack on civilians that is sure to draw the attention of Western nations makes no strategic sense at all. However, a timely attack of this nature richly benefits those who seek to unseat Assad – the rebels and the Deep State.
Until last week, the Trump admin held the poition that Assad was the best of the bad options. US signals openness to Assad staying put.
In an article for Disobedient Media this week, William Craddick wrote, It is strategically counterintuitive to assume that Bashar al-Assad would engage in a chemical attack on Syrians just one week after figures in the American government expressed the opinion that they would be willing to allow him to remain in power. The Syrian government no longer even possesses chemical weapons, as the United Nations and U.S. Department of State have already confirmed. Read Full Article
There’s also been broad speculation that the release of chemical weapons was the result of a dump being hit rather than the gas being dropped by the regime.
On Thursday night, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said the U.S. intelligence community assessed with a “high degree of confidence” that the Syrian government had dropped a poison gas bomb on civilians in Idlib province. But a number of intelligence sources have made contradictory assessments, saying the preponderance of evidence suggests that Al Qaeda-affiliated rebels were at fault, either by orchestrating an intentional release of a chemical agent as a provocation or by possessing containers of poison gas that ruptured during a conventional bombing raid.
Rebels Are Known To Have Possessed And Used Chemical Weapons In Syria For Some Time
While the Syrian government surrendered their chemical arms stockpiles for destruction several years ago, evidence indicates that rebel groups in Syria have ramped up their own supplies of the deadly weapons systems and have not hesitated to deploy them in combat. On June 23rd, 2014, The Wall Street Journal reported that the Syrian government had completed the removal of all chemical weapons from the country per and agreement they had reached with the United States. The handover was confirmed by the United Nations Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. While the Syrian government have surrendered their chemical weapons, rebel groups have acquired and used them in increasing numbers. Read More
The authenticity of the footage of the attack, which proports to show aid workers treating victims of Sarin gas without the necessary protective equipment – a practice that would have put them in physical danger, has also been brought into question.
2013: Repeat Offenders
The last time there was a chemical attack broadly attributed to Assad in Syria back in 2013, it turned out that rebel forces were responsible. But at the time a concerted effort was made by the Obama admin & western liberal media to pin responsibility on Assad.
According to the United Nations 2013 mission led by Carla del Ponte:
“evidence from casualties and medical staff indicated that rebel forces in the civil war had used the deadly nerve agent sarin.
‘Our investigators have been in neighbouring countries interviewing victims, doctors and field hospitals, and there are strong, concrete suspicions, but not yet incontrovertible proof, of the use of sarin gas,’ said Del Ponte in an interview with Swiss-Italian television.
‘This was use on the part of the opposition, the rebels, not by the government authorities.’ Read More
Trump Playing 4D Chess?
The Alt Right seems to have split into two camps on Trump’s Syria strikes; those who support the man before all else – loyal Deplorables who will back Trump regardless, and those who see the war against globalism as the real battle; for whom attacking Syria singals that the integrity of this administration has been compromised in some way.
Those loyally supporting Trump through this believe that he is playing what is referred to as 4D Chess – the playing of multiple interconected games on different boards at one time and conveying signals via a range of theatres to a variety of players, as explained by Charles Hugh-Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,
A signal is a form of communication, but its cost must be high to be persuasive. A signal can provide information on intent, depth of commitment, willingness to accept risk and much more. And is often intended to communicate different things to different audiences. The Media’s Missing The Point: Syria, Empire, & The Power Of Signaling
The one thing that Trump has managed with the strike against Assad, is to dispel the Deep State & Democratic Party narrative that he is in the pocket of Vladimir Putin. Although whether this episode was intended to that end, seems questionable.
A War in Heaven: Bannonites Vs Globalist Errand Boys
For anyone who supported Trump to this point, last week’s developments are troubling. News of a power struggle within the Whitehouse between cheif strategist Steve Bannon and Ivanka’s husband & Trump senior advisor, Jared Kushner have surfaced. And those fears of a compromise can’t be helped by reports that it was Ivanka who inspired her father to act on the footage of the aftermath.
The Daily Beast reported that fighting had been nonstop between Bannon and Kushner for weeks and that the two often clashed face-to-face. One official told the news outlet that Bannon said Kushner was trying to “shiv him and push him out the door.” They said Bannon recently vented about Kushner “being a ‘globalist’ and a ‘cuck.'”
If someone wanted to get to Trump, they would need to do it through his inner circle. Is the anti-globalist Bannon being pushed out of the nest by the cuck Kushner, who has the ear of Ivanka and her father? It would explain a lot.