In the early morning hours of April 14, President Trump authorized an attack by a coalition of U.S., French and British military forces against Syria. The attack involved 103 cruise missiles fired upon Syrian facilities previously associated with chemical weapons productions. These facilities were allegedly involved in a chemical weapons attack nearly a week earlier on April 8, on Douma, a suburb of Damascus.
After the limited missile strike, Trump said the attacks had been successful and declared “mission accomplished”.
Just as Trump had clearly signaled to the world via Twitter that he was about to launch an attack on Syria, he was now clearly transmitting via Twitter that the attack was completed with the mission goals achieved.
Many alternative media analysts accept that the April 8 chemical weapons attack was not orchestrated by the Syrian government, because it did not have any strategic purpose for doing so given recent battle field successes. In their view, the chemical weapons attack was a false flag event staged by Deep State actors wanting to drag the US and its major allies deeper into the Syrian Civil War, as a prelude to a major attack on Iran.
So was Trump’s attack really a prelude to the U.S. getting drawn more deeply into the Syrian and Iran conflicts via a very transparent false flag event, or was Trump’s real goal to achieve an entirely different strategic purpose, to bring about a speedy end to the Syrian Civil War and prevent a new war with Iran?
In finding an answer we can first take a look at what QAnon, which is a group of US Military Intelligence officials leaking classified information, has to say about the missile strike. QAnon used a coded message to predict back on April 8, the day of the Douma chemical weapons incident, that 2 B-1 bombers would be involved in an upcoming Syria missile attack, and these would launch 19 missiles:
The post suggests that QAnon was aware of advance plans for the Syria attack, and the craft to be used in it. According to another Q Anon post, one that coincided with the April 14 missile attack itself, the U.S. Coalition strike was a limited military operation that would only involve missiles, no ground force or plane overflights of Syrian territory, and that we should trust Trump:
Once again, Q Anon refers to “Sparrow Red” which is likely a reference to an older kind of guided missile, AIM-7 Sparrow, that is produced by the Raytheon corporation and used by many world militaries including Israel and Saudi Arabia. Was the intent to use older missiles launched by the B-1 bombers and other craft in the U.S. French and British coalition so that many of these could be shot down in a staged event coordinated with the Russians (Sparrow Red)?
This appears to be exactly what happened if consider a statement put out by the Russian Ministry of Defense describing the results of the U.S., French and British missile strikes on Syria. The Russians said:
As evident by the available data, 103 cruise missiles have been launched, including Tomahawk naval-based missiles as well as GBU-38 guided air bombs fired from the B-1B; the F-15 and F-16 aircraft launched air-to-surface missiles.
The Tornado airplanes of the UK RAF launched eight Scalp EG missiles.The Syrian air defence systems, which are primarily the USSR-made AD systems, have successfully countered the air and naval strikes.
In total, 71 cruise missiles have been intercepted. The S-125, S-200, Buk, Kvadrat, and Osa Syrian AD systems were involved in repelling the attack. It proves high efficiency of the Syrian armament and professional skills of the Syrian servicemen trained by the Russian specialists.
Over the last eighteen months, Russia has completely recovered the Syrian air defence systems, and continues its development.
It is to be stressed that several years ago given the strong request by our western partners, Russia opted out of supplying the S-300 AD systems to Syria. Taking into account the recent incident, Russia believes it possible to reconsider this issue not only regarding Syria but other countries as well.
The most telling point in the Russian statement was that almost 70% of the U.S. coalition’s missiles were shot down using old Russian air defense technologies.
These shoot down figures are publicly disputed by Pentagon sources, who instead have highlighted the missiles success in hitting their targets. Chief Pentagon spokesperson, Dana White, said:
This operation was carefully orchestrated and methodically planned to minimize potential collateral damage. I can assure you we took every measure and precaution to strike only what we targeted and we successfully hit every target.
So which is a more the accurate assessment of the missiles success? If we accept the QAnon information suggesting older missile technology was to be used, then it is likely that the Russian statement is more accurate.
Russia has said that given the strike, it now plans to move forward with upgrading the Syrian air defense system using their more modern S-300 technology.
This will significantly increase the defensive capability of the Syrian air defense system, to make it virtually impervious to the kind of limited air attack witnessed on April 14 using cruise missiles and modern aircraft.
The Russian intent to upgrade Syria’s missile defenses will eventually change the strategic balance of power. Having a virtually impenetrable air defense system to limited air strikes will deny most foreign actors the ability to militarily intervene in the Syrian Civil War.
So the real loser from the missile attack may ultimately be Israel, which has launched over a hundred air attacks against Syrian forces and their main allies, Iran and Lebanon’s Hezbollah, during the Syrian Civil War. This is because Russia has now been given a suitable rationale for upgrading the Syrian air defense system with their advanced S-300 system.
This will soon make it very difficult for Israel to intervene in the Syrian Civil War, as it has previously done with virtual impunity up until February 10 when one of its jets was shot down on after an attack on an Iranian site.
This means that Iran and Hezbollah will have a greater capacity to attack the remaining militia groups fighting the Syrian regime in order to end the Civil War, and allow them to move closer to the Israeli border. This will ultimately put pressure on Israel to reach an agreement with the Assad regime on unresolved issues with Syria.