Israel attacked Syria for no good reason

"There is no evidence that the Syrian government was responsible for setting up a booby trap that injured four Israeli soldiers, but Israel's defense minister says it holds "the Assad regime responsible for what happens in its territory" as Syria's civil war spirals out of control The wave of airstrikes Israel carried out on Syria overnight not only demonstrated how it’s being drawn into the civil war there, but also the challenges awaiting Israelis on a battlefield crowded with non-state actors. Israel launched the attacks, which the Syrian government said killed one soldier and injured seven, to retaliate for the injuries to four of its own soldiers by a booby trap buried along the border fence with Syria the day before. The device was detonated after the Israelis left their armored vehicle to proceed on foot toward a shepherd, who may have been stationed near the fence to draw them toward the bomb according to the Israeli military. It was the fourth violent incident on Israel’s northern border this month, and the first to result in injuries, one of them serious. Yet there was no sign that the Syrian military was involved in placing the booby trap or was involved its detonation."  Time


Israel's action is a transparent act of Chutzpah intended to damage Syria's government.  The belief persists in Israel that the fall of the Syrian government will greatly weaken Iran.  This is nonsense, but they choose to believe their own nonsense.  pl

This entry was posted in Israel, Syria. Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to Israel attacked Syria for no good reason

  1. cloned_poster says:

    I was in a taxi in Dublin some months back, after chatting with the driver I established he was an Egyptian sunni. To paraphrase and cut a story short this individual hated Shia with a passion, far more than the Israelis, and for more of the shia actions in Syria. Will Sunnis start to totally revounce Shia over allegiance to Irsael for enabling money transfer to Sunni?

  2. toto says:

    The “fall” of the Syrian government? No.
    Weakening Assad a little bit, maybe delaying the crushing of the rebels and thereby prolonging this remarkably convenient conflict for as long as possible? Seems to make sense.

  3. turcopolier says:

    If you don’t thing bibi and his pals want to bring down the Syrian government you are very mistaken. pl

  4. Fred says:

    Since they are getting their asses kicked by Assad and the US won’t use its airpower to intervene ISIS and others chose to attack Israel to give Bibi a chance to intervene? What is likely to happen if the IDFAF runs into some of that modern Russia AAA Syria has? How does the Israeli government think this will bring down the Syrian government since the rebellion gets weaker by the day and even the Saudi’s are disowning the jihadis?

  5. turcopolier says:

    “How does the Israeli government think this will bring down the Syrian government since the rebellion gets weaker by the day and even the Saudi’s are disowning the jihadis?” You must accept the idea that often the Israelis are inept fools. pl

  6. JohnH says:

    I think that this is part of a new strategy to get Assad. Israel will take out some key posts in the south to pave the way for “moderate” jihadis trained in Jordan by the US to infiltrate. It is probably also part of a strategy to seize the Hauran, get Hezbollah, and finally seize Litani water.

  7. Will says:

    it’s actually simpler than damaging Iran. The Israelis use any reason or no reason to sow chaos in any neighboring state. that way. they figure, they can have their own way with the Palestinians.
    it’s killing us over here in the U.S.- bankrolling them and having them drag us into debilitating constant war.

  8. kyooshtik says:

    With Russia tied up with the Ukraine, Israel as proxy can try to undermine Assad further in Syria. I don’t think the timing of Ukraine is a coincidence. Surely it was anticipated to some degree Russia would respond the way they have to the Ukraine coup. It will require Putin’s full attention and significant resources. and we shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that despite Russia’s still prodigious nuclear arsenal, their military capability is a shadow of its former Soviet self.

  9. fanto says:

    IMHO, you are only partly correct (that Israelis want to create chaos in the neighborhood, in order to get their way with Palestinians), it seems to me that they want to parcelize the entire ME, including Syria, Iraq, Iran, possibly Turkey, also make another new entity – Kurdistan – because they would feel somewhat less of a little state among large states, but all of them would be kind of small, and Israel could “forever” rule over the whole ME (a new 1000-year Reich). It is said that the Israeli flag was to have the two blue strips vertically, symbolizing the two rivers – Nile and Euphrates, as the future Great Israel – but it was changed to horizontal stripes in order to eliminate this association and not to scare people in the early phases of the project.

  10. nick b says:

    “I don’t think the timing of Ukraine is a coincidence.”
    Here’s some fuel for the fire. Vineyard saker had this link on his blog a few days ago.

  11. Bill H says:

    You’ve said it yourself, colonel, “Do not be to hasty to assume as conspiracy that which can be explained by ineptitude.”

  12. Fred says:

    Israel does have an advantage of not facing any possibility of chemical weapons use, thanks to Putin’s efforts, but they still have to face Hezbollah’s light infantry, which stopped the IDF in 2006.

  13. kassandra says:

    More interesting, it seems that there will be fall-out from Ukraine in the direction of Iran on several levels.
    Russia has hinted at not cooperating with the West on Iran, which would strengthen Iran’s hand. When the Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons, its territorial integrity was guaranteed by Russia and the US. Iran has no doubt taken the hint.
    Europe very much wants to not be dependent on Russia’s oil and gas. What’s the closest place to get that? Europe is much more lukewarm on Iran sanctions than the USA.
    Is it possible that the USA may be forced to make a choice somewhere down the line between the nitwits in Israel pushing Iran sanctions, and a policy of containing an expansionist Russia? After all, Putin’s speech made it fairly clear that Russia reserves the right to defend Russians everywhere and that Russia considers it Russian territory anywhere the Russian/Soviet jackboot has fallen.

  14. Fred says:

    The nuclear weapons belonged to the USSR, with Russia being the owner, not a member republic.

  15. shepherd says:

    Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons. Its security was not guaranteed, except by the Budapest Memorandum, which is an odd diplomatic document that does not have treaty force and, as such, is being ignored by all signatories. I knew a Ukrainian diplomat who was very proud of his role in cutting that deal. He was a drunk and a bore.

  16. CK says:

    And yet, to assume folks are idiots and inept grifters is to eventually make an ass out of you and me. If you are ever tempted to doubt the efficiency and efficacy of conspiracy just remind yourself of Bletchley Park and how long it remained a conspired secret among not dozens but thousands of people. 30 years I believe before the secret was finally partially revealed.

  17. turcopolier says:

    I am neither an idiot not an inept grifter but the Israelis often are just that. “Bletchley Park?” A well kept secret. There are many secrets that the US and UK governments have kept successfully for a long time. The Israelis are ham handed blunderers who manipulate the people of the United States in a most cruel way. they will pay for that some day. pl

  18. Babak Makkinejad says:

    I do not believe that Ukraine had the wherewithal of maintaining such weapons.

  19. different clue says:

    Is Russia really expansionist? Hasn’t the Russian leadership spent 20 years grinding its teeth over Clinton et al’s cheap cynical betrayal of the Reagan-Bush promise not to expand NATO towards Russia’s border? Wasn’t the Obama Administration-backed naziform Banderista hijacking of the Ukrainian protests the cinder block which broke the camel’s back? And forced Putin into a final corner which he could either surrender abjectly in or charge his way out of?
    I halfway think that part of why Putin took Crimea in such a brazenly cynical way . . . with a cardboard-replica referendum and etc. was to demonstrate a brutal cynicism right back to the West to match what he considers its own brutal cynicism in conspiring to bring Ukraine into NATO
    under potemkin pretenses and protester cover.
    If Russia is really expansionist, one would expect them to try taking and annexing the most fertile northern part of Kazakhstan because some Russians live there. If Russia leaves northern Kazakhstan alone as long as Kazakhstan does not try to join EU/NATO either proactively or under US/EU inducement, then that shows that Russia is at least not THAT expansionist.

  20. confusedponderer says:

    I iirc read (can’t recall where) that the Ukrainians tried hard to crack the codes of the Russian nukes they had their hands on, failed in that, and then decided to give up their nuclear weapons.
    Given the current people that call themselves the Ukrainian government, that failure was a blessing.
    Imagine the Banderistas with nukes. Just think about Russia’s warning times.
    Relevant in this context: Video (German) of Banderista MPs beating up the head of Ukrainian state TV, trying to force him to resign.
    Brownshirt is as bronshirt does.
    Viccy, you’ve done a heck of a job!

  21. Thomas says:

    It is understandable in regards to the constant lying, it is a daily fact of life. Too bad the house manager wasn’t from India and living in New York, then justice would be served. Or not considering who was involved.

  22. JohnH says:

    Eric Margolis,”a veteran of many conflicts in the Middle East,” is thinking along the same lines as I–Israeli is going to get more involved, “destroy Assad’s air force and armored formations,” and massively attack Hezbollah. Eric doesn’t mention Litani water.

  23. oofda says:

    And this past week in DC, retired Navy officer and bankruptcy judge Ahren Jay Cristol made the rounds pushing his new book- an ‘update’ of his ‘definitive account’ (realy appologia) of the IDF attack on the USS LIBERTY in 1967. In both his book and presentation, he cherry-picks facts- using ones that support his version and ignoring those which don’t. Several observers in the audience wondered why he was doing this…he is merely making a couple of generations aware of the attack. And of course, those who don’t agree with his version- have ‘other agendas,’ notwithstanding inconvenient facts that go against his version.

Comments are closed.