South Korean president says that Donald Trump deserves the Nobel Peace Prize for the North Korean talks.

Presidents Donald Trump and Moon Jae-in. NPR/AFP.

South Korean President Moon Jae-in says that Donald Trump deserves the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts towards North Korea. NPR. The comment comes after a historic meeting between Moon and Kim Jong Un, the leader of North Korea. In a diplomatic whirlwind, much progress has been made towards denuclarization and ending the Korean War. Moon was responding to a letter from the widow of former South Korean President Kim Dae Jung, who also won the Nobel Peace Prize. Moon said, "It's President Trump who should receive the Nobel Prize. We only need to take peace." If peace and denuclularization were to happen, both Kim Jong Un and Moon Jae-in would be front runners, but many are saying that Trump deserves it as well. 

My Comment:

It's probably a bit premature to be campaigning for the Nobel Peace Prize. After all, there hasn't been an agreement just yet. It sure looks like one is coming, but a million and one things could happen between then and now that could derail the whole thing. Talking about it now is a good way to get egg on your face if the deal falls apart. 

My sincere hope is that won't happen though. It seems very clear that all the players are at least attempting to make it work. With Kim Jong Un saying he will give up his nukes for a promise that the United States will not invade, it looks like a deal might happen. Plus the fact that North and South Korea have agreed to end the Korean War, which is technically still on due to ending in an armistice, not a peace deal, is a very good sign. 

If it does that I think that everyone involved probably deserves a Nobel Prize. Moon Jae-in, modesty aside, definitely deserves one. His handling of the Korean crisis has been superb and his poll numbers are reflecting it. Without Moon, I don't think the Trump/Kim meeting happens. He deserves a lot of credit and should be considered a Nobel frontrunner. 

Kim Jong Un probably deserves credit as well. Sure he's a bloodthirsty dictator but he's also doing the right thing. A war on the Korean peninsula would be devastating for everyone and he looks like he is serious about preventing it. And if he wasn't willing to back down and come to the negotiating table none of this would be happening. 

But I also think Trump deserves quite a bit of credit for this. The naysayers are saying that Trump didn't do anything but tweet at Kim Jong Un. Though I would argue that the tweets were important, especially the ones where he hinted that the US and North Korea could be friends, that isn't anywhere near the only thing he and his government did. 

Trump also put a lot of pressure on China to put the economic screws to Kim Jong Un. Trump threatened a trade war and doing so forced the Chinese to put their own sanctions on Kim. Doing so was a major departure from previous presidents and it seemed to work well. This hurt North Korea's economy and may have encouraged Kim to come to the negotiating table. And when North Korea tried to bypass sanctions, Trump cracked down hard on the people that were helping them do it. 

I also think that there is a difference in respect that Trump showed the North Koreans. Though publicly it was mostly saber rattling, Trump often tweeted that he wanted to be friends with Kim Jong Un. Through back-channels, Trump indicated that he would be willing to meet with Kim, showing him a level of respect that wasn't present with other presidents. That carrot and stick approach seems to have worked and I think President Trump deserves a lot of credit for it. 

Will Trump win the Nobel though? I kind of doubt it. Indeed, I could see Trump being left out on purpose while Kim Jong Un, who is still a murderous dictator, gets one. I just don't trust the Nobel Committee to do the right thing. Remember, they gave Barack Obama the prize simply for being elected and having politics they liked, before he even took the oath of office. The fact that Obama then became a warmonger that overthrew Libya's government didn't matter, only the fact that he was Obama. 

My guess is that the Nobel committee hates Donald Trump and would never recognize him even if he got rid of every nuclear weapon in existence. Preventing a war doesn't matter when you are a conservative... I hope I am wrong but given how the world is these days I wouldn't be surprised. 

Of course all of this is just speculation because the peace deal hasn't happened yet. It looks like it will, but until it does this is all wishful thinking. I want to be an optimist about it but you never know how things go. We have been close to peace in Korea before but time will tell if this time it will stick... 

Sarah Huckabee Sanders got roasted at the White House Correspondents' Dinner...

Sarah Huckabee Sanders. Via Wikipedia/government photo. 

As you are surly aware of, the White House Correspondents' Dinner happened last night and once again President Trump skipped it. Given how horribly White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders was treated it seems pretty obvious why. The comedian who attacked her, who I am not going to name, went pretty low, attacking Sanders for her appearance and comparing her to an unattractive person on the Handmaiden's Tale tv show. 

This is only notable for a few reasons:

1. Sarah Huckabee Sanders isn't unattractive. She's not a knockout or anything but for a woman in her thirties she looks just fine. At worst she's average. More importantly she's well dressed and is very good at her job. Her looks don't matter anyways, but comparing her to some old school marm looking character (I haven't watched the show) is pretty stupid. Plus the woman that was attacking her wasn't in a position to attack her on looks since she is just average looking herself and will probably get some harsh criticism her way as well. The whole thing is stupid. 

2. There is a huge amount of hypocrisy here. Of course some attacks were going to happen anyways given the nature of the event, and even then I don't know that this crossed the line between joke and attack. The problem is that the left has been lecturing everyone for years that the worst thing you can do is attack a woman for her appearance. And that's what happened here. Either it's ok to do it all the time or it isn't ok when it's someone liberals don't like. To their credit there are a few people on the left that are calling this over the line, so at least they aren't being hypocritical. 

3. Donald Trump was right to skip this event. If there is one thing this country is saturated with right now, it's unfunny comedians attacking President Trump. Trump would gain nothing by showing up and would get into the news for all the wrong reasons. He's actually doing pretty well right now with the North Korea deal looming, the economy rolling and the tax cuts being popular, there is no reason to give the reigns of power over to people that will do everything in their power to cut him down. Having another rally was a much better use of his time. 

Speaking of better uses of time, that's all I am going to spend on this story. It was pretty dumb, but so is the White House Correspondents' Dinner. I honestly don't know why they even have it and even when the President showed up I thought it was undignified, especially when it has been a GOP president...  

Syrian government is attempting to remove the last pocket of ISIS in the Damascus area.

The Damscus suburb of Douma. Reuters. 

The Syrian government is attempting to clear out the last pocket of ISIS in the Damascus area. Reuters. Heavy fighting has broken out with many gun battles and heavy artillery being fired. The Syrian government is advancing rapidly at one of the last areas in Syria under ISIS control. The enclave is the last outpost near Damascus and other than some parts of the Eastern desert and near the border with Israel and Jordan. The area in Damascus is the last under control of non-government forces as the former rebel enclave in Eastern Ghouta has been taken. 

My Comment:

Looks like the age of ISIS in Syria is rapidly coming to an end. There is very little territory left under ISIS control and what is left is under a large threat. The only safe area for ISIS seems to be the tri-border region with Jordan and Israel and those aren't even core ISIS fighters, just a group that pledged allegiance to them. 

There is little doubt that ISIS will lose this battle. I am guessing that Damascus is Syria's number one priority right now. They care little about what is happening in the North of the country compared to the threat letting ISIS hold on in Damascus. I am sure the Assad government really wants to be able to say that Damascus is totally under their control. 

And I think it's pretty clear that Assad does want Damascus under his control. After all, they did just launch a chemical strike there. Though that strike ended with a major retaliation from the United States, France and England, it did accomplish the goal of forcing the rebels to flee the area. The last rebels left on a convoy to Turkish controlled parts of northern Syria. 

Which makes me wonder if Syria might strike again with chemical weapons. The downside is obvious. There is a very good chance of yet another major retaliation attack and this one will likely be much large. On the other hand if it's ISIS getting gassed, will the demand for retribution really be that high? Probably. The rebels gassed in the last attack aren't much better than ISIS but the fact that civilians get caught up in these attacks is the major reason they get condemned. 

Plus, it seems very likely that Syria will win the battle with more conventional means. They have tanks, artillery and air support that ISIS won't be able to stand up against for very long. Honestly, I can't imagine that those fighters, cut off from the other surviving groups and low on arms and supplies, can last very long at all. Indeed, it seems as though Syria is making rapid progress already. Hopefully the battle will be over soon. 

What happens next? My guess is that Syria will shift their forces around again. But I doubt their new targets will be the small ISIS enclaves in the southwest and far east of the country. Instead I am guessing the major offensive will be targeting rebel areas held north of Homs. Taking out those rebel areas will essentially end the war leaving the small ISIS pockets for clean up. It would also help to counter Turkish and American moves in the region. 

Given that the last rebels left are mostly either affiliated with Turkey or with al-Nusra, I won't be too upset once Syria wins this battle. Shifting away from ISIS and towards ending the actual war is something that should have already happened. Once it does the war will almost be over... 

Mass stabbing in China killed 9 children and wounds 10 more

Civilians donate blood after the attack. BBC/EPA.

A mass stabbing in Shaanxi Province in China has killed nine children and wounded 10 more. BBC. The attacker, a 28 year old man named Zhao, was reportedly upset over being bullied when he was in school. Seven girls and two boys were killed in the attack, and were most likely between 12 and 15 years old. China has a long history of knife attacks. 

My Comment:

What a difference in coverage between this case and the Parkland shooting in America. Obviously a few more people died in Parkland but you would think that another mass killing of children would make the headlines. 

But it's being reported as an afterthought. Why? Well the obvious thing is that it happened in China. These kinds of attacks are fairly common in China for some reason and it seems like stories about a mass stabbing in China happens a couple of times a year, with the victims often being children. It is, unfortunately, common enough that it isn't really shocking anymore.  

I think that is more evidence to the theory that these kinds of mass killings are memetic in nature. In America the most famous cases are shootings so anyone who wants to kill large numbers of people do so with a gun. In China the most famous cases are stabbings so the copycats use knives. And in Europe it seems that bombings and car ramming attacks are common. 

Of course the other reason that this case kinda proves wrong the idea that gun control stops these kinds of mass casualty events. China has draconian gun laws that people like Michael Bloomberg could only dream of. Private ownership of guns essentially doesn't exist in China. But they still have these kinds of horrible mass casualty events. 

I have said for awhile the biggest factor in how many people die in one of these attacks isn't what weapon was used but how long it takes for someone to fight back. In the last three major mass shootings in America, Las Vegas, the Sutherland Springs church shooting and Parkland, effective resistance didn't show up until a lot of people died. Sutherland springs ended when an NRA member shot the attacker with an AR-15 but it was as the suspect was leaving the scene. My guess is that in China the police were a bit slow on getting to the school if the attacker was able stab 19 people. 

As for the attack itself it is completely disgusting. Being bullied is never an excuse to take out your anger on a bunch of innocent school children who had nothing to do with it. Killing a bunch of innocent children is a special kind of evil and it makes me glad that China still has the death penalty. 

My take on the meeting between the leaders of North Korea and South Korea.

Kim Jong Un shakes hands with Moon Jae-in. AFP/Getty. 

As you are almost certainly aware of, North Korea and South Korea's leaders, Kim Jong Un and Moon Jae-in, met together in South Korea yesterday and the meeting went well. Both leaders agreed to an end to the Korean War, which ended in a stalemate and not a peace treaty. They have also agreed that denuclarization is a major goal with Kim Jong Un agreeing to give up his nuclear arms. 

This is a welcome first step to actual peace. The fact that the two leaders of Korea could meet in person with Kim crossing the border is a huge sea change and is unprecedented since the war. The actual moment is going to go down in history as either the moment that ended the conflict in Korea for good... or the last attempt at diplomacy. I sincerely hope that it is the former and not the latter. Given the importance of the moment, I will post video of it below, courtesy of the Associated Press. 

So what is next? The entire world will be waiting with bated breath for Donald Trump and Kim Jong Un's meeting. That meeting hasn't been announced yet but I am guessing it will be soon. If that meeting goes well than then peace is a very real possibility. If it doesn't...

I think it will go well though. The initial meeting between new Secretary of State Mike Pomepeo and the North Koreans went well. And Trump himself seems cautiously optimistic on Twitter and in various interviews. For their part it seems like America's leadership is sincere about peace. 

It also looks like North Korea is ready for peace as well. Yesterday I mentioned that their nuclear program was getting too expensive and could cause an unintentional environmental disaster as their test site collapses. They could save millions of dollars by giving up the program and make a lot more money by the reduction in sanctions and increase in trade a deal would give them. Plus, Kim Jong Un would know that his regime and his personal safety would be guaranteed for the foreseeable future. It's a deal he is going to want to take.  

There are some things that could derail the peace process. North Korea's ballistic missile technology is a threat even without nukes. As are their vast chemical and biological weapons. And we also can't forget their horrible treatment of their civilians. Anyone of those things could be major sticking points, but right now they don't seem to be getting in the way. 

If this deal happens, all the major players should probably get the Nobel Peace Prize. The four men most responsible for this deal, Kim Jong Un of North Korea, Moon Jae-in of South Korea, President Trump of America and President Xi of China have done a very good job of trying to prevent a very ugly and very horrible war. I think that the Nobel committee would give Kim Jong Un the prize over Trump, given how much they loath him, but without Trump I don't know if this deal happens. It still might not, but it won't be because of lack of trying. 

This whole situation makes me happy that Trump won in 2016. I have no doubt that Hillary Clinton would have not gotten this outcome. The best case scenario with her would have been the status quo ante. More likely, regime change would have been attempted and there would have been a decent chance of a few major cities in Asia and the United States being turned into radioactive craters...

Thankfully, that nightmare scenario didn't happen. And if we luck out it won't happen in the future, at least not from North Korea. It really looks like there is a decent chance that peace will prevail. And peace is something Korea has needed for a very long time... 

North Korea claims to have shut down their nuclear test site, but the damage to the area is so severe it might be a risk.

Satellite photo showing the Punggye-ri nuclear test site. Washington Post/Digital Globe/38 North.

North Korea claims to have shut down their nuclear test site but concerns have been raised that the site is a risk due to extensive damage. Washington Post. The move has been cheered as a step towards denuclearization but the danger of the site remains, even as it is shut down. Chinese scientists believe that the site has already collapsed and is no longer useful for testing. Even worse, cracks in the mountain may leak radioactive material. Satellite images have shown that the mountain has shifted after North Korea's last nuclear test in September. The information about the Punggye-ri test site comes before a major meeting between North and South Korea and a decrease in tensions between the two countries as well as between North Korea and the United States. 

Our friends at @AirbusDefence shared radar images of North Korea's nuclear test site showing post-test subsidence.https://t.co/DtWBQY2jUN pic.twitter.com/jII5NNJzKs

— Jeffrey Lewis (@ArmsControlWonk) September 13, 2017

My Comment:
This report might be another reason why North Korea is willing to shut down their nuclear program. It seems pretty clear that the Punggye-Ri test site is done as a base and if the North Koreans were to continue to test warheads there it could cause a major environmental disaster. Indeed, they might have one on their hands already. 

How dangerous a release of radioactive material from this site would be is beyond my abilities to speculate. The fact that it was the Chinese who are saying that another test could lead to a disaster means that I am guessing the fallout would be severe, literally and figuratively. Given how impoverished and poor North Korea is anyways, there is no way that they can seriously attempt another nuclear test at this site. It's not worth the risk at all. They could lose a lot of lives and would endanger their neighbors who might be infuriated enough to go to war after their population gets a large dose of radiation as well.

Of course the North Koreans could pick a new site and attempt another test but that too would be a major undertaking. They would have to commit to a large building project and move their existing resources to the new site. That would cost a large amount of money. And money is a resource that North Korea doesn't have. Plus, the environmental concerns wouldn't go away as larger and more powerful bombs could lead to a collapse there as well.

They could, of course, try above ground or sea based testing but that would be a massive escalation and would likely result in a war. Plus there would be a lot of fallout to deal with and it would be very damaging to the environment. North Korea probably doesn't have too many areas they can afford to use for nuclear testing above ground either. They don't really have much in the way of remote wilderness or deserts to test in. And doing so would pretty much guarantee strikes on the regime.

I think this is important context onto why the North Koreans are suddenly willing to deal with the South and United States. In addition to the other factors, their nuclear weapons just aren't worth developing anymore. In order to continue to test weapons they either have to risk a collapse at their base or have to spend a massive amount of money moving the test site. Neither is a realistic option so they are trying to make a deal.

As for the meeting, I hope it goes well. North Korea has been taking a major risk with their nuclear weapons program and to have it dismantled is a good thing for everyone. Obviously the risk of nuclear war goes down for everyone but it looks like we are avoiding the possibility of a major environmental disaster as well. I think there is a decent chance that very soon North Korea's nuclear program will be nothing more than a bad memory...

Illegal immigrant "caravan" may cross into the United States this weekend.

A Central American gets a medical checkup. Reuters. 

An illegal immigrant "caravan" may attempt to cross the American border with Mexico this weekend. Reuters. Hundreds of Central Americans from Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras are gathering in Tijuana and may plan to cross the border soon. The caravan may complicate US-Mexico relations. Donald Trump has repeatedly called on Mexico to stop the flow of migrants from Central America and this has threatened the NAFTA deal.  

My Comment:

Missing from the Reuters report is the fact that the group that organized this caravan, Pueblos Sin Fronteras, is a far left group. Their goal isn't to get these people to safety, if it was they would have stopped in one of the safer places in Mexico. Their goal is to attack the very idea of borders. They are open borders extremists and their ideas are not popular to say the least. I consider this to be a lie of omission from the US media when it comes to covering this story. 

I am rather confused that this story is coming up again. I didn't follow it closely earlier in the month but I remember hearing that the convoy had been broken up due to pressure from the United States. But now it is apparently back? I don't understand why those reports were made when it's pretty obvious that it isn't the case. 

There is still a chance that Mexico could do the right thing here. Obviously making sure that these people don't cross the border would be a good faith gesture towards the United States. Given that these people are breaking Mexico's immigration laws it would be a good thing if they were rounded up and deported before they ever had a chance to cross the America border.

I doubt that will happen though. US-Mexico relations aren't that great and I don't see the Mexican Government risking the wrath of these far left groups. Plus if they do crack down on these people it would become Mexico's problem. If they cross the border with the United States they no longer have to care. 

So what should we do about the migrant caravan when they cross over? Deport them. Deport all of them. None of them deserve to come into the United States, especially if they are teaming up with the far left Pueblos Sin Fronteras. They aren't trying to find a better life, they are trying to make a political statement, and a odious and terrible one at that. They should not be let in. 

Why? Because it isn't fair. I won't deny that the countries that they are coming from are terrible, and that Mexico isn't much better, but that doesn't mean that they deserve to come here. Why should they be allowed to come in illegally when there are so many people here that want to come here the legal way? I'm not sure we should let all of those people in either, but if anything the people that follow the rules and try to come here the right way should be let in way before these people are. 

Iraq used converted An-32 cargo planes as bombers more often than their fleet of F-16's in the war against ISIS.

One of Iraq's An-32's modified to drop bombs. Warzone/The Drive/Iraqi Air Force. 

Iraq used converted An-32 cargo planes as bombers in the war against ISIS and even used them more than their fleet of F-16 fighters. Warzone/The Drive. A newly released graphic shows that the converted bombers were used more often than Iraqi F-16's and their Aero L-149 light attack jets. Though the SU-25 Frogfoots under Iraqi command conducted most airstrikes, the An-32 came in second with almost 1000 missions. The An-32's used "dumb" bombs, some mounted on racks and some even rolled out of the aircraft, as opposed to the precision strikes made by the F-16's. The use of those unguided bombs may have contributed to the heavy civilian casualties during the battle of Mosul and the conversion of these An-32's shows how desperate for air cover the Iraqis were during the first stage of the war against ISIS. It is unclear if Iraqi will continue to use these aircraft as bombers in the future. 

Iraqi graphic showing the statistics. Warzone/The Drive/ Iraqi Government

My Comment:

Very interesting bit of history with this story. I hadn't known that Iraq had essentially converted cargo planes into World War II style bombers. It shouldn't have been that much of a surprise thought. Iraq was truly desperate in the bad old days of the ISIS war and it looked like for awhile that they might even lose Baghdad, their capital, and thus the war. 

Thankfully that didn't happen and the liberal application of air power is a large reason for it. The Iraqi Air Force, along with their US allies and special forces on the ground were able to turn the tide. Once that happen the long slog to liberate captured areas begun and the An-32's were just as useful in an offensive role as they were in a defensive one. 

Of course the SU-25's took care of most of the work load and as the war went on other planes took up some of the slack as well. But having a heavy bomb truck to drop ordinance at will helped immensely. The F-16's and L-159's were not ready to go and the SU-25's could only do so much. The A-32's filled an obvious gap in Iraq's air power.

Do I think that the article was right that using the An-32 increased casualties? Of course. Dropping unguided bombs is always going to cause collateral damage. When those bombs are dropped on a city the size of Mosul, or any populated area, civilians are going to suffer. That's the whole problem with unguided munitions. It's why most western nations have moved away from strategic bombing, it's bad press to say the least.

That being said, I do think that the Iraqi's were totally justified in using these unguided bombs. Though a few civilians probably were killed in the crossfire, it likely ended the war that much quicker. ISIS would probably be largely defeated by now anyways, but it would have taken more weeks and months, during with a lot more people that are alive now might be dead. And if the Iraqi's hadn't used these planes it's possible that Iraq could have been completely overrun by ISIS...

I do have to admire the Iraqi's creativity here. Sure other countries have done the same thing with the An-32's but I still think it is impressive. It's pretty clear that they were trying everything they could to win the war and I have to admire that.

I also have to say that this entire story is giving me a lot of nostalgia for the old World War II bombers. I've had the privilege to see most of them in person, and have even been inside a few of them, and it is cool to see a more modern version of the same concept, even if it is a jury rigged and slapdash effort. I'm hoping some day Iraqis will be able to look at these An-32's the same way... 

Pro gun Parkland student Kyle Kashuv harassed by school security for tweet about a visit to a gun range.

Kyle Kashuv at a gun range. Fox News/Twitter. 

Kyle Kashuv, a pro-2nd amendment advocate and a Parkland shooting survivor was pulled out of class by school security and question about a visit to a gun range. Fox News. Two security officers took Kashuv out of class and according to Kashuv they questioned him intensely. 

Kashuv said “First, they began berating my tweet, although neither of them had read it; then they began aggressively asking questions about who I went to the range with, whose gun we used, about my father, etc. They were incredibly condescending and rude.”

Kashuv has drawn media attention as a counterpoint to other Parkland students who have come out in support of gun control. Kashuv has been very vocal in support of gun rights. 

It was great learning about our inalienable right of #2A and how to properly use a gun. This was my first time ever touching a gun and it made me appreciate the #Constitution even more. My instructor was very informative; I learnt a lot. #2A is important and we need 2 preserve 2A pic.twitter.com/4rcOZbpl88

— Kyle Kashuv (@KyleKashuv) April 21, 2018

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." pic.twitter.com/mfVRATZ4DT

— Kyle Kashuv (@KyleKashuv) April 21, 2018

My Comment:
Pretty disgusting if this story is true. There is nothing wrong with this young man visiting a gun range. And there is nothing wrong with posting about it on social media Especially since it's pretty obvious that he was being taught gun safety. Kushnuv seems to be following the four rules of gun safety and he is showing very obvious trigger discipline in the top picture. He was being very responsible with his gun use. Nobody should have a problem with what he posted.

There is a small chance that Kashuv is lying about his encounter but I doubt it. Kushnuv doesn't seem like that kind of person and given how high his connections go (he's seen visiting President Donald Trump on his twitter profile) I doubt he would risk everything by making something up. I think that this has less than a 1% chance of being false.

So why would the school security do this? There are a couple of possibilities. The first and most likely is that the security at the Parkland high school are just overreacting. They just got caught with their pants down after the mass shooting so they want to make sure that won't happen again. Because of that they are investigating everything, even things that are obviously not a threat. The hostility obviously isn't called for but in the end they are trying to chase every possible threat down.

That's the charitable interpretation. The uncharitable interpretation is that the liberal administration of the Parkland school district is punishing Kashuv for his political advocacy. He came out as a strong supporter of the 2nd amendment and a critic of not only his fellow activist students but the Democratic Party as well. Kashuv has also been very critical of the School Board and local cops so it's not like he has made friends with these people. They have the motive to try and get him to abandon political advocacy.

Thankfully it looks as though Kashuv isn't going to be in any real trouble because of this. Doing so would be a huge mistake by the Parkland community and a great example of suppressing free speech. Kashuv will likely continue to be an advocate for the 2nd amendment even if this kind of thing keeps happening to him.

10 killed in a vehicle attack in Canada.

10 people have died and 15 more were injured in a van attack in Toronto Canada. ABC News. The attacker has been identified as Alex Minassian and was arrested at the scene. Witnesses say the attacker drove up onto the sidewalk and hit multiple people. The attackers motivations have not been revealed but the attack resembles other major terrorist attacks. 

The Guardian has a live update feed for the attack. 

The rental van used in the attack. CTV/ABC News.

My Comment:

Scary situation in Canada. I was expecting a major terrorist attack there and it looks like it happened. An attack using a van isn't surprising either as the tactic has spread rapidly after the Nice attack in France. 

I am not sure what the motivations for this attack were. The first thing you think is ISIS but given the man's name I am not so sure. The suspect, Alex Minassian, is most likely Armenian, a country not known for a large Muslim population. It's very possible that he converted but as of right now it's way to early to blame this on ISIS as there is a good possibility that this isn't an attack based on Islam. He's obviously using tactics developed by ISIS but other people have adapted this style of attack.

Indeed, it might be the exact opposite of an Islamic attack. From what I understand, the neighborhood struck by this attacker was an area with a lot of Muslims. It is very possible that this attack is one in retribution against Muslims for whatever reason. Armenians have a grudge against Islam and that could be what this about. That being said it could be for any reason at this point. With the suspect in custody, we should learn more about what his actual motive was soon. 

Whatever the motive it just goes to show how easy it is to kill a large amount of people with a vehicle. As much as our media is harping on gun rights, it's very clear that Canada's gun control laws didn't do a thing to stop this attack. Anyone can rent a van and kill double digit numbers of people. And it's not like there aren't many other ways to kill large amount of people without a gun or a vehicle.

This seems like an isolated incident. Canadian authorities say that the suspect has no links to other terror groups and a follow up attack is extremely unlikely. With the motives unclear it is possible that a tit for tat game of terror attacks could happen in response to this attack. With the motive not revealed yet it's unclear if that is possible or not. Generally speaking though, I don't want to get into the blame game until the motive is revealed. It could be that this guy was just a psycho. 

Video has been released of the arrest of the suspect and I have to say that I don't really agree with the way the Canadian cop acted. That's not a criticism of the cop himself as he was going by his training and acted bravely, but I don't agree with the department's policy here. It seems very clear that the suspect was attempting to commit suicide by cop and I am shocked that he wasn't shot and killed. The suspect pointed a gun like object at a cop several times and the cop didn't do anything but yell at him. He would have been entirely justified in shooting him, especially after the attacker killed 10 people. I'd much rather have dead terrorist than a cop put at risk of being shot. That being said, he was pretty close to the suspect and maybe he was able to tell that it wasn't a gun in his hand? 

In three months, Mexico has had 7,667 murders.

A memorial to the dead. AFP. 

During the first three months of 2018, Mexico has recorded 7,667 violent deaths, the worst number in 20 years. AFP. That number is a major increase since 2017 which saw an already high 6,406 deaths. March was the worst month with January and February being slightly lower. The violence is largely due to the Mexican Drug War as gang violence, kidnappings and fuel theft all contributed to the high murder rate. Last year was the worst year for the Mexican murder rate with 25,339 murders in total. 

My Comment:

Not a very long article from AFP, but I think it's important to remind people what is going on in Mexico. Now obviously some of those murders aren't really part of the Mexican Drug War. Included with those deaths there are the normal crimes of passion, opportunity and just plain evil that aren't part of organized crime. 

Even granting that though, it's clear that things are getting much worse in Mexico. The cartels are obviously still fighting it out and it is costing quite a few lives. To the point where it is fair to say that Mexico's murder problem is really more of a war. That much should be obvious but it's pretty rare to see it stated in those terms even among people that want tighter border control in the United States. 

So why are things worse? I think the AFP report is partially on the money. The drug cartels are expanding into other areas in order to generate revenue. Though drug smuggling makes quite a bit of money, greed is also a human vice. As long as there is more to be made, it will be attempted. 

And these cartels are taking a page out of the ISIS playbook. Much like ISIS they have moved on to kidnapping and stealing petroleum products as secondary sources of income. Kidnapping obviously leads to violence as in order to be taken seriously you have to be willing to kill the victim if you aren't paid. Since not everyone is willing or able to pay the kidnappers, a lot of people are getting killed. Taking over fuel businesses and siphoning pipelines also involves a surprising amount of violence. I think this, along with the continued violence between the cartels and government is the reason for the increase. 

I also think that this diversification is due in part to Trump's rhetoric on the wall. A border wall will reduce the amount of drugs and migrants, also a money maker for the cartels, coming across the border. It won't stop drug smuggling but it will have an impact on the cartels bottom lines. They understand that to survive they have to change. Assuming that the thing gets built that is... 

I can't imagine that the drug war and deaths isn't the number one election issue in Mexico, which is coming up fast. Right now a far left candidate Andres Manuel Lopez is in the lead and I don't think he will do much to bring the fight to the cartels. Indeed, I don't think he will do much of anything good and the cartels will probably continue to thrive under a far left government. 

Suspect in the Waffle House shooting had his guns taken away for breaking security at the White House.

Waffle House shooter Travis Reinking. Time.

The suspect in a mass shooting at at Tennessee Waffle House had been arrested and had his gun ownership revoked after breaking security at the White House. Time. The police and FBI removed four guns from Travis Reinking, 29, after he was arrested at the White House in a restricted area after trying to meet with President Trump. Reinking's guns were given back to his father, who apparently gave the guns back to Reinking. Reinking shot six people, killing four of them. Reinking was stopped during his attack by a local who wrestled the gun away from him as he was trying to reload, burning his hand in the process. That man, James Shaw Jr, is being hailed as a hero nationally. Reinking escaped from the scene of the crime and is still at large. Reinking may still be armed with a pistol and a hunting rifle. 

My Comment:

I had initially thought about not reporting on this case as I feel the intense media coverage these cases get is a large reason why they happen. I still think this is true but I think there is enough here to justify the risk. The attack brings up quite a few discussion points that should be talked about. 

First of all, the person we should be making famous is James Shaw. The man decided that he didn't want to die last night and instead fought against his attacker. That's a heroic action and one that Shaw should be praised for. Thankfully he's getting some attention and should be more famous than Reinking ever will be. He is rightly being called a hero. 

This is James Shaw. He's a hero. His hands are burned severely from grabbing the assault rifle used to kill four people inside a Nashville Waffle House. He likely saved dozens of lives pic.twitter.com/WV7KQlzA2R

— Chris Conte (@chrisconte) April 22, 2018

I also have said for a long time that when a mass shooter attacks the best thing you can do is fight back. Obviously if you are one of the first people shot there isn't much you can do. But if you do have a chance it's best to take it. Many of these mass shooters aren't confident and will fold at the first sign of resistance. The second Shaw fought back Reinking fled. Sure Shaw burnt his hand on the rifle, but that sure beats getting shot! 

Obviously someone dropped the ball pretty hard with the suspect in this case. The FBI and local Illinois cops, where he lived at the time, quite correctly concluded that Reinking was unstable and should have guns. The man violated security at the White House and who knows what he could have done if he had gotten close to President Trump?

You would think that after that Reinking would have been at the top of the FBI's watch list but apparently he wasn't. The man was able to move and retrieve his firearms and then was able to plot this attack. It's possible that he didn't show any signs of pulling off a mass shooting but it's very clear that he should have been on everyone's radar. Someone crazy enough to be arrested at the White House is worth keeping an eye on.

If the reports that Reinking's father gave him back his guns after the FBI and local cops revoked his gun rights, then we need to throw the book at him. I have long said we should crack down on straw buyers and though this didn't involve a purchase, it's pretty clear that he was providing guns to someone that wasn't legally allowed to have one. If he actually is guilty of giving his son these guns, he needs to be made an example of. We can't allow someone who is giving guns to a dangerous person to get away with it.

I do have to say that it's pretty clear that the attacker had very little idea of what he was doing. It seems as though he was stopped because he had difficulty reloading and that gave Shaw a chance to fight back. Ironically, this is because he chose to use a rifle in a close range situation. Had he chosen a smaller weapon, Shaw would have had a harder wrestling away a handgun.

It also seems that Shaw was shooting rapidly and not taking aimed shots. I can't prove that but the fact that he was able to shoot 6 people with one full mag shows he wasn't exactly taking his time. The fact that Shaw burned his hand also shows that the rifle was heating up very quickly. It makes me think that Reinking wasn't very familiar with his weapon and isn't an experienced shooter. Plus, he fumbled the reload which shouldn't be something that is very hard.

Reinking is still at large and may be one of the most frightening prospects in crime. Mass shooters very rarely get away with their crimes. Most of those cases were bank robberies gone wrong. The idea that someone can shoot six people and then escape from law enforcement is not a comforting one. Given how dangerous he has proven himself to be, not only with the mass shooting but with the White House security violation as well, I hope that law enforcement catches him as soon as possible. 

Video shows Night Stalker helicopters training extremely low in New York City.

A MH-6 Little Bird. The Drive/Warzone. 

The Drive has a neat article about a recent military exercise in New York City involving multiple helicopters flying extremely low. The helicopters were two MH-60 Black Hawks and two MH-6 Little Birds, with additional MH-6's possible as well. The helicopters were from the Air Force's elite 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment, also known as the Night Stalkers. 

The helicopters were flying low enough that people were filming them from above in their high rise apartments. Though some were concerned by the low flying choppers, the New York Police Department had made people aware of the exercise before it happened.  

What are my thoughts? This was pretty cool and it is a clear demonstration of how skilled the 160th is. It's always impressive to see helicopters flying around a low altitudes. It's also very clear that these pilots got some good real world training in an environment similar to many places they could be deployed too. 

On the other hand, I certainly understand why people would be freaking out a little bit. If they happened to miss the announcements about the training they would have a reasonable fear that there was some kind of major security incident going on. 

All that being said, a lot of people filmed this on twitter and I am going to post a few on here. The Drive article will have a few more but these were the most impressive. 

Two more, better video, same maneuver. Super low. Filming? Practice maneuvers? Anyone know? pic.twitter.com/UEHnhDDB3G

— Willie Morris (@MoreWillie) April 18, 2018

Low flying + unmarked helicopters flying over Lower Manhattan at high speeds. Rattling pretty much everyone in my building. @NY1NYTonight @kidskathmandu pic.twitter.com/1UibTnCxqk

— Sean Vegezzi (@seanvegezzi) April 18, 2018

Black military helicopters flying VERY low by our apartment in lower manhattan. (We are 18th floor.) pic.twitter.com/T1fVLAHVVQ

— Susan Temple (@susan_temple) April 18, 2018

Editor's Note

Just an FYI, I've been fairly busy the last couple of days and I will be busy again tonight. Probably won't have a post up until this Sunday. It's been a fairly slow couple of news days anyways, so I don't feel like I am missing much. Things should return to normal soon.

Iraq launches airstrike targeting ISIS across the border with Syria.

Iraqi Prime Minster Haidar al-Abadi sits in an Iraqi F-16. AFP. 

The Iraqi Air Force launched an airstrike targeting ISIS militants across the border with Syria. AFP. Iraqi Prime Minster Haidar al-Abadi ordered the airstrikes because the threat that ISIS poses to Iraq. The strike was carried out by two F-16's who hit ISIS targets in Dier Ez Zor province.

Reuters is reporting that the airstrike were coordinated with the Syrian government and was allowed to take place by the al-Assad regime. 

My Comment:

This isn't surprising to me at all. Prime Minster al-Abadi had said that he might send forces in to Syria early this month, in a story that flew under the radar. Back then I said that Iraq has an obvious interest in defeating ISIS in Syria and would be willing to commit their forces to stop cross border raids or worse from ISIS. 

I think the facts on the ground influenced the raid as well. ISIS has been making a bit of a comeback in Syria and has taken some territory back. This is due to several reasons. First, the Syrian government is very focused on the Damascus area and are aggressively targeting the last remaining holdouts in that region, to the point that they are neglecting anything else. 

The US led coalition has fallen apart as well, thanks to Turkey. Their invasion of the Afrin area essentially forced the Kurds to abandon the fight against ISIS so they could attempt to keep the Afrin pocket. That effort failed but the Kurds fear that the Turks will threaten Manbij. That is their priority now, not ISIS. 

Finally, the war in Syria has slipped into a new phase. Instead of everyone being united against ISIS, everyone is back to fighting their proxy wars. The US bombed Syria for chemical weapons, the Israelis and Iranians are fighting it out and now the Turks and Kurds are fighting as well. With everyone fighting each other, there is no one left to fight ISIS. 

Nobody except Iraq, apparently. I don't know how far Iraq is going to go against ISIS. I am guessing that as opportunities present themselves Iraq will continue to attack ISIS, with permission of the Syrian government. They may even launch commando raids into Syria or even regular troops. 

It isn't too surprising that Syria and Iraq are working together against ISIS. It makes a lot of sense for both sides. Syria obviously benefits by having their ISIS enemies taken care of for them at no cost to them. Iraq gets to reduce the threat of ISIS raids. It's a win win for both countries and I expect it to continue.  

Are Hezbollah sleeper cells a threat in the United States?

Members of Hezbollah. Washington Free Beacon/Getty. 

Congress is raising concerns about the possible threat that the Iranian backed Shiite militia group Hezbollah could pose a threat in the United States. Washington Free Beacon. Iranian individuals linked to the group have already been caught plotting terror attacks in New York. The threat from Hezbollah has been there for a long time, but as tensions rise between Iran and the United States over the nuclear deal, the fear is that sleeper cells could be activated. Congressman Peter King (R-New York) says that Hezbollah is an extremely dangerous group that can exceed ISIS and al-Qaeda in terms of danger. The vast majority of Hezbollah's forces are in the Middle East but there is evidence of them working closely with drug cartels in the Americas.

My Comment:

It's not often I link to the Washington Free Beacon but I haven't seen this story reported elsewhere. I don't usually like to use them as a source since they are both biased, and biased towards neo-conservatism, and that bias shows a bit in this post. Obviously they are very anti-Iran though in this case it might be justified. 

Are there Hezbollah sleeper cells in America? No doubt in my mind that there are. Are they a huge threat? That I am not so sure about. Given how large and powerful Hezbollah is, and the fact that they are a defacto Iranian militia, I would be shocked if they didn't have operatives in the United States. And we have seen a few cases where their links to the country have been exposed. It would be foolish to argue that the potential threat doesn't exist, it clearly does. 

But I don't think the situation is as dire as the Free Beacon report painted it to be. Sure, Hezbollah is a dangerous group but if they were to go off the reservation they could invite war to Iran. Right now Iran doesn't seem to want that as they got a sweetheart deal with the Obama administration over their nuclear program. Trump keeps threatening to do something about that, but he's distracted by North Korea and domestic issues. Any attack by Hezbollah now would force the issue, and not in Iran's favor to say the least. I can't imagine them just attacking us out of nowhere without approval from Iran. 

I also think that these operatives are probably monitored and known to our intelligence services. Indeed, they might even be infiltrated and should any moves towards a terror attack occur, they could be taken out. There is always a chance that more could slip through the cracks, but I am guessing that any attempt would stand a decent chance at being disrupted or prevented. Then again, our intelligence services, especially the FBI, has dropped the ball so many times with so many preventable tragedies, that we might not want to count on them to get it right this time. 

Finally, Iran is part of Trump's travel ban. That travel ban won't do much to prevent the potential sleeper agents that are already here but it would prevent them from getting any reinforcements. That's not the end all be all solution to the problem but it does reduce the threat quite a bit. 

So if I am not that worried about the threat, why post about it? Because I think that there is a chance that something could happen unrelated to our relationship with Iran. Tensions may be high between the United States and Iran, but it's nothing compared to the tensions between Iran and Israel. They are in a de facto shooting war in Syria right now with Israel regularly bombing Hezbollah and Iranian military units. Iran is moving weapons into place, testing Israel's borders and even vowing revenge for men killed in Syria. 

The situation in Israel is very dangerous and could spiral out of control. If it does that America will likely be dragged into a war with Iran, either by our obligations to Israel or in response to a strike by Iran on our forces in the Middle East or even in the homeland itself. If a war does break out I would not be surprised if there were sleeper units of Hezbollah activated in the United States and they could pull off some terror attacks. This is the worst case scenario and it is one we should prepare for even if it doesn't happen.

Still, all of this is hypothetical. I don't really expect a de jure shooting war between Israel and Iran (or Saudi Arabia and Iran for that matter). Right now most of the Middle East conflicts are proxy cold wars where a lot of people are dying but nobody is actually at war with each other. As long as the fighting remains limited to Syria and Yemen, I don't see the threat of Hezbollah sleeper cells to be that dangerous. 

That being said, I would be a lot more comfortable if I had heard that these cells were being cleaned up. Just because there isn't an immediate threat doesn't mean we have to tolerate members of Hezbollah being in this country. I hope that a crackdown is coming, sooner rather than later. Why take any chances? 

North Korea and South Korea are in talks to formally end the Korean War.

Soldiers at the DMZ stare each other down. CNBC/AFP.

A local news report says that North Korea and South Korea are in talks to formally end the Korean War, in a major diplomatic development. CNBC. The two Koreas are technically still at war as the war between them ended in an armistice, not a peace deal. The leaders of Korea, Kim Jong Un for the North, and Moon Jae-in of the South, are meeting next week and they are expected to make a joint statement that could outline the end of the conflict. They may also discuss a normalization of the demilitarized zone (DMZ) that separates the two countries. If true, the deal would be a welcoming sign ahead of talks between the United States and North Korea regarding denuclearization. 

My Comment:

Though I just got burned by unconfirmed reports, this story is too important to be cautious about. Because if it is true it changes the world. The Korean War has technically continued since 1953 and has lasted far too long. A settlement to end that conflict would be a huge diplomatic victory and the first step towards a nuclear free Korean peninsula. 

It would also ratchet down tensions massively as well. North Korea would no longer be in a position that they could threaten the South and their American allies. South Korea would no longer have to maintain their huge army and defenses. And the US could consider scaling back their involvement there as well. 

All of that is a long way off. We still have much work to be done to ensure that peace is a possibility. The biggest sticking point is, of course, North Korea's nuclear and ballistic missile program. North Korea must be willing to get rid of their nukes in order for any peace deal to have any teeth. Simply ending the war on paper is pointless if the North Koreans still have a sword at the South's throat. 

It looks as though that the North giving up their nukes is a real possibility. These diplomatic overtures are the most significant in my lifetime and it really seems like Kim Jong Un has seen the light. I think he understood that the sanctions and threats of military actions were only going to get worse so he decided to fold and get a better deal via peace. 

And a real peace/denuclearization deal really does work out best for everyone. The North Koreans get a lot out of it as well. Sanctions will likely be reduced or eliminated entirely. They would also have a lot more money that they can funnel from these programs back to the economy of North Korea and they would finally be able to trade internationally. Plus they would no longer have to worry about a US/South Korean invasion/regime change attempt. The deal would probably play well domestically as better conditions from sanctions relief, along with international respect that a deal would give, could help Kim's popularity.

South Korea obviously loses a huge security threat and would have a much lower chance of being involved in any wars anytime soon. They also would benefit from a more secure North Korean regime which, if it were to collapse, would cause a European style refugee crisis that could destroy their economy. 

Even China benifits. A North Korean collapse would be just as damaging for them as it would be for the South Koreans. And they would no longer have to worry about Kim going off half cocked and dragging China into a war. Relations with America would be better as well as this would be considered a major foreign policy concision which might lead to a better trade deal. 

And America wins as well. We obviously won't have as many nukes pointed at us, which is a great deal in any case. Plus we wouldn't have to worry about defending our South Korean (and Japanese) allies in any crazy war. We would also have quite a feather in our hat and will perhaps reverse the global reputation as warmongers. 

I really, really, really hope that this deal with North Korea happens and they give up their nukes. But there are a million and one things that could go wrong and derail the whole effort. Two things pop up at me right away. 

First, North Korea has a robust chemical and biological weapons program. Those two might have to go in order to get a peace deal passed. Though getting rid of nuclear weapons would be a start, it would make little difference if North Korea could load an ICBM filled with Anthrax or VX gas and launch it at California. North Korea might not want to give up this deterrence so it could be a sticking point.  

Second, North Korea has a horrible human rights record. Their treatment of civilians is among the worst ever recorded and everyone is going to have a problem if that continues in the future. Some of that will be mitigated by easing of sanctions, which would do much to improve the conditions of North Koreans, but it would still remain a country where people can be sent to a work camp for life just for saying something negative about Kim Jong Un. The treatment of North Korean civilians could destroy the whole peace deal.

Still, I am cautiously optimistic that peace might break out. If so, I sincerely think that the three major players in this drama, the leaders of North Korea, South Korea and America, should be strongly considered for the Nobel Peace prize. If Barack Obama can get one for simply existing, than those three men should get one for finally fixing one of the world's most dangerous tinderboxes, despite their flaws... 

Yesterdays reported airstrike in Syria was in fact a false alarm.

Russian MP's check for weapons in Douma. ABC News/AP.

Yesterday's reports of an additional airstrike targeting an airbase near Homs turned out to be a false alarm. ABC News. Syria had reported that they had shot down missiles targeting the Shayrat airbase near Homs with a second attack occurring at the Dumayr airbase near Damascus. Shortly afterwards, Syria took back those claims and said the incidents were false alarms. 

My Comment:

Ugh, once again we have all been a victim of the fog of war. I commented on this yesterday and now the whole story has fallen apart. In my defense, my sources got it wrong as well, but even so, it doesn't feel good. I will be updating the previous post with a link to this one so people no longer get confused. 

However, this incident does prove one thing. Syria's air defenses aren't that good. They apparently mistook nothing for a major attack and ended up wasting some of their precious missiles. And they didn't realize that they weren't under attack until several hours later. That doesn't speak well of the state of their air defenses which have clearly seen better days at this point in the war. 

I think this also demonstrates that we should be hesitant to rely on reports that come from the Assad government. In hindsight, their claim was fairly unbelievable in the first place. I don't think there is any way that the Syrian air defenses could shoot down a bunch of missiles without any of those missiles getting through. The recent attacks on Syria by Israel, America, France and the UK show that pretty clearly. We have to remember that the Syrian government has their own agenda and at times they don't seem to understand exactly what is going on in their own country. 

I do have to mention that there is a slim possibility that the Syrians really did come under attack but are lying about it now for some reason. That wouldn't make a whole lot of sense but I guess they could be trying to do some kind of psychological warfare against their enemies. I find that extremely unlikely, but with how stupid this story turned out to be, I wouldn't be surprised...

New missile strike targeting Syrian airbase.

Damage to the Shayrat airbase from the 2017 strikes. The Guardian/EPA.

EDIT: It turns out that this story is false. I regret the error but I am leaving this post up to remind myself how easy it is to get a story wrong. 

The Syrian government is claiming that they have shot down missiles targeting the Shayrat airbase near Homs. The Guardian. It is unknown who is responsible for this attack but the US government has said they have no forces in the area. There are also reports of a 2nd missile strike at a different airbase, this time at the Damascus area airport of Dumair. This strike has not been confirmed by Syria, but Hezbollah allies on the ground. The most likely suspect is Israel who has routinely attacked Syria but often denies these attacks, including the one last week.

My Comment:

Looks like Israel is stepping up it's attack on government targets in Syria. This is the 2nd major strike from them in a couple of weeks and a fairly important one. And one that could have severe consequence for everyone. 

Shayrat airbase has been used by the Russians in the past. It is unclear if they were there at the time but if they were than this was an extremely risky attack for the Israelis. Putting Russian troops on the ground at risk could result in retaliation from the Russians, which is, of course, a dangerous thing. 

I have very little doubt that this was Israel. America didn't do it as Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis made it very clear that last weeks strikes were a one off and wouldn't occur again without a 2nd chemical weapons attack. None of the local governments are good suspects either as some of them don't have the capabilities and the rest don't have a good reason for it. Only Israel does. 

So why are the Israelis doing this? If there were to admit they were the ones responsible, which they won't, they would probably use the chemical weapons attack as the excuse for it. Officially, the Israelis were outraged by that attack and want it to prevent that from happening again. They will say that the US/British/French attacks did not do enough damage. 

Unofficially though? My guess is that the chemical weapons use was just the cover Israel is using to do what they actually want, which is to strike Iranian and Hezbollah targets in Syria. Both groups use these airbases as a staging area and the Iranians may even use these airbases as a drone base to attack Israel directly. 

Striking Hezbollah targets is self explanatory, they have been at war with Israel for as long as I remember. Israel will always target them and attack them when they can get away with it as they view them as a major threat. 

Attacking Iran seems to be a priority as well. It seems very likely that Israel and Iran will be at war soon so it makes sense to target them, even if it means pissing off the Syrians and Russians. Israel knows that Iran is largely in the war in Syria so they can build bases and supply lines to target Israel directly. This is why Iran has sent so many troops to Syria and is also using Hezbollah to prop up the Assad government. 

The whole Syria situation is a mess now. There are so many factions all jockeying for power and all with different goals. None of the factions, the US included, seem to be interested in actual peace.They all want their own special outcome most of which include the status quo continuing...  

Editor's Note: No post tonight, too busy shoveling!

An old shovel killed during a different storm in Wisconsin

As you may or may not know I live in Wisconsin and we just got hit with a massive Spring snowstorm. I spent most of the morning shoveling and plan to go out again soon. Given that we got about two feet of snow where I am, I'm not going to bother with a normal post. Even if I end up having time, I won't have the energy. Instead I will be resting and thinking about moving to a place where getting two feet of snow in Spring is unheard off. 

President Trump launches limited strikes targeting Syria's chemical weapons capabilities.

Syrian surface to air missiles and AAA fire above Damascus. Washington Post/AP.

President Trump launched over 100 missiles at three chemical weapons sites in Syria in response to the chemical attack in Douma. Washington Post. Fears of a wider conflict with Russia have proven to be unfounded as no Russian soldiers or bases were hit in the attacks. Russia has condemned the attacks and has vowed consequences but other then that tensions are easing. Further strikes have been deemed unlikely as Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis called the attack an "one time shot", unless Syria uses chemical weapons again. Syria and Russia claim that many of the missiles used in the attack, which was a combination of air and sea launched missiles, were shot down, but the US is not confirming that. The missiles targeted scientific centers and military bases in Damascus and Homs, with the UK and France participating in strikes. 

My Comment:

Well, Chicken Little, the sky isn't falling. As I suspected this strike was limited in nature and great pains were taken to ensure that it didn't erupt into a wider conflict. Far from a major disaster this was a very limited strike that, amazingly enough, didn't result in any deaths that I have seen reported. 

Though I would have probably preferred no strikes at all, as far as this goes, it was the best case scenario we could have hoped for. Syria probably lost quite a bit of equipment and research at these bases and facilities but they didn't lose any lives and their ability to make war against ISIS and other terrorist groups hasn't been diminished. Only their chemical weapons capability has been damaged, which is a good thing. 

That being said this was a major attack. We used at least two major ships, the USS Donald Cook and an unnamed cruiser to fire Tomahawks while we used at least one B1B bomber to launch additional missiles. Our French allies contributed airplanes and their frigate, Aquitaine. The UK also used their Tornado jets to launch missiles as well. Overall, more than 100 missiles were launched and it appears that they destroyed their targets. 

A perfectly executed strike last night. Thank you to France and the United Kingdom for their wisdom and the power of their fine Military. Could not have had a better result. Mission Accomplished!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 14, 2018

Syria has claimed that they shot down a large amount of these missiles. I kind of doubt that. For one thing their anti-air defenses are antiquated. They do have Russians in Syria with their more advanced weapons, but there is no indication that they engaged in this battle as their bases were not threatened and their anti-air systems did not cover the areas hit. Only the Syrians did and I seriously doubt they came anywhere near the number of missiles they claimed to shoot down. I would be surprised if they shot down any!

As for the Russians, they seem to be taking it as well as can be expected. Their major ally got embarrassed and they haven't taken any retaliatory action.  Even though the Russians basically lost nothing in this attack, they were just embarrassed on the world stage. I expect a lot more diplomatic noise to happen over this attack, but nothing substantial will occur. All the Russians lost was face.

I do have to say that I was disappointed in a small but loud number of Trump supporters that seemed to waiver during the lead up to this attack. Though I agree that I don't want any further involvement in Syria, this strike was extremely limited in scale and is hardly the work of a neo-con like Hillary Clinton. She would have done something stupid like target the Russians or try to gun for Assad himself.

Instead this was a limited strike and one that isn't likely to happen again, unless the Syrians screw up yet again. I doubt that will happen now so fears that a larger commitment to Syria will happen are unfounded. We aren't going after regime change in Syria and we are still likely to pull troops out soon. And we are certainly not going to war with Russia! I tried my best to explain this to some people, but people were more interested in panic-mongering and stupidity.

So what happens in Syria now? Status quo ante. The few remaining rebels will be pushed back, Russia will continue to support Syria and America will continue to back rebels fighting ISIS. The only difference now is that Syria is a lot less likely to use chemical weapons. Syria will still almost certainly win the war and all that is left is the clean up.

Indeed, paradoxically this strike may boost morale among the Syrian military. Being targeted by an outside force may unite various factions in Syria and cause them to fight harder. They are being fed propaganda that they shot down a lot of missiles and apparently didn't lose any troops, which is almost a miracle.

I am guessing that Trump will get one of his rare moments of positive media coverage from this attack. The mainstream media has always been in favor of military action and many of them are praising Trump for this strike, though some in the conservative media are being critical. That praise isn't likely to last long. Indeed, the narrative is already changing to criticize Trump for saying "Mission Accomplished".  But, for a few hours at least, they did have something nice to say about Trump...