Obama’s Ludicrous ‘Barrel Bomb’ Theme

[TaiShang]

Obama’s Ludicrous ‘Barrel Bomb’ Theme

Obama hounds Syria’s Assad for his alleged use of 'barrel bombs,' but the US President himself uses far more powerful ordnance as do Israelis and Saudis - which he supplies

Thu, Oct 1 |


Pentagon used far more powerful stuff over Baghdad - and then Fallujah
The U.S. government has dropped hundreds of thousands of tons of bombs on Iraq alone in the last dozen years – and even hailed the start of the bombing campaign in 2003 as “shock and awe” – but now has coyly and repeatedly decried the Syrian government’s supposed use of crude “barrel bombs.”

This hyper-hypocritical propaganda theme was given voice in President Barack Obama’s Sept. 28 speech to the United Nations General Assembly when he denounced anyone who doesn’t favor “regime change” in Syria as advocating “support [for] tyrants like Bashar al-Assad, who drops barrel bombs to massacre innocent children.”

Yet, Obama offered no criticism of various U.S. administrations and American allies that have leveled whole cities, killing countless men, women and children. That slaughter has included two atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan in 1945 and the devastation of Indochina during the 1960s and 1970s with more bomb tonnage than was dropped in all of World War II. Millions, including countless children, were killed in these bombing campaigns.

More recently, Obama’s predecessor, President George W. Bush ordered the devastation of Fallujah and other Iraqi cities to suppress resistance to the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq. Obama himself has boasted of ordering military strikes in seven countries, mostly aerial bombardments with many confirmed civilian dead.

In 2014, Israel used American warplanes and armaments to blast apart Gaza killing some 2,100 people – the vast majority civilians and many of them children, including four little boys playing on a beach. President Obama not only refrains from criticizing Israel’s indiscriminate use of these devastating weapons but stays silent on Israel’s rogue nuclear stockpile and today ponders which giant “bunker buster” bombs should be added to Israel’s bristling arsenal.

Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia is dropping U.S.-supplied ordnance, reportedly including cluster bombs, on the helpless population of Yemen with Obama’s tacit approval and reportedly with U.S. intelligence assistance.

On Monday, the Saudi air force apparently bombed a wedding party on Yemen’s Red Sea coast killing more than 130 people, including women who had taken refuge in a tent, according to various news reports.

One surviving relative said it was difficult to determine the exact number of dead because the bodies were blasted into so many bloody pieces. “I saw no body intact,” said Ahmed Altabozi, the uncle of one of the victims.

Yet, while President Obama has avoided any direct public rebukes of U.S. or allied militaries for their slaughter of civilians, he singled out Syria’s embattled government for using a homemade weapon in its desperate fight against terrorists of the Islamic State and Al Qaeda’s Nusra Front.

Further, Obama claimed that President Assad dropped the “barrel bombs to massacre innocent children” when there is no evidence that Assad had any such intent. Obama’s comment amounted to crude and deceptive propaganda.

By contrast, when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu launches one of his periodic “lawn mowing” operations against the people of Gaza and many children are cut down in the process, Obama stands mute, apparently judging that the exercise in recurring butchery is just one of those “price is worth it” moments.

Obviously, any killing of civilians in wartime is to be deplored – whoever is dropping the bombs and whatever the weapon’s degree of lethality – but it was still stunning to watch Obama apply such selective outrage. Indeed, much of the UN General Assembly seemed genuinely shocked by Obama’s blatant double standards.

Afermath of a Saudi strike in Yemen

Propaganda Buzz Phrase

But it’s really all par for the course. Whenever propagandists develop their “themes” for a conflict, they look for certain “hot button” phrases that make the behavior of a “black-hatted enemy” appear particularly venal. “Barrel bomb” has become the propaganda buzz phrase of choice associated with the Syrian conflict.

Yet, it seems likely this clumsy, improvised weapon – supposedly dropped from helicopters – would be far less lethal than rocket-propelled bombs delivered from afar by jet planes or drones, the approach favored by the U.S. government and its “allies.”

Civilians would have a much better chance to seek safety in a bomb shelter before some “barrel bomb” is shoved out the door of a helicopter than when a sophisticated U.S.-made bomb arrives with little or no warning, as apparently happened to the victims of that wedding in Yemen.

And that is not to mention the U.S. bombs that involve depleted uranium, napalm, phosphorous and cluster munitions, which present other humanitarian concerns. However, while U.S.-assisted or U.S.-directed slaughters of civilians attract little attention in the mainstream U.S. media, there are endless denunciations of the Syrian government’s “barrel bombs.”

The propaganda drumbeat is such that the American people are told that they must support “regime change” in Syria even if it risks opening the gates of Damascus to a victory by the Islamic State and Al Qaeda terrorists.

This odd “humanitarian” equation, tallied up by the State Department and “human-rights” NGOs, holds that to secure revenge for Syria’s alleged use of “barrel bombs,” the world must accept the possibility of the black flag of Sunni terrorism flying over a major Mideast capital while its streets would run red with the blood of Christians, Alawites, Shiites and other “heretics.”

Then, apparently, the United States would have little choice but to lead a massive expeditionary force into Syria to oust the Islamic State and Al Qaeda, ensuring the deaths of hundreds of thousands more innocents and sending millions more fleeing into a destabilized Europe.

But such is the power of propaganda in managing public perceptions. Use a phrase like “barrel bomb” over and over again as if it is a uniquely evil weapon when, in fact, it is far less lethal and destructive than the ordnance that the United States routinely deploys or hands out to its “allies” like candy on Halloween. Soon the people lose all perspective and are open to manipulation. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “The Power of False Narrative.”]

Once the U.S. public is softened up with the propaganda and psy-ops – also known as“strategic communications” or Stratcom – the only acceptable option is “regime change” in Syria even if that prospect holds the likelihood of a far worse human catastrophe.

By hearing “barrel bomb” enough times, the judgment of American citizens is clouded and any practical suggestion for a realistic political settlement of Syria’s conflict is deemed “appeasement” of a tyrant, which was the clear message of President Obama’s UN tirade.

And, thus, the killing continues; the chaos grows worse.

 

[xperia]

All rules and regulations of the UN exist for those who are not on the right side of the america.For US allies they can do whatever they want to do. For them white house will simply say " we condemn"

 

[TaiShang]

For those who are extremely concerned about Assad's not so smart barrel bombs, there you go to ease your consciousness.

***

The Smart Weapons Russia is Using in Syria

Reports from Syria confirm the Russians are using weapons as technologically sophisticated as anything the US has.

The SU24 and SU34 used in the operation are fully capable of carrying much heavier bombs than the 500 kg bombs so far known to have been used.

There are for example known to be smart bomb versions of 1,500 kg bombs - three times heavier than the 500 kg bombs so far used - which could certainly be carried by the SU24s and SU34s. The maximum weight of any single bomb the SU34 can carry is 4,000 kg.

The Russians have even heavier bombs. The heaviest FAB bomb known to exist weighs up to 9,500 kg (i.e. more than 9 tonnes). It was used by the Iraqis to devastating effect in the so-called “War of the Cities” during the Iran-Iraq War.

Use of such monsters would require deployment of much larger and heavier aircraft than those used so far. The aircraft the Russians would use if they decided to use such bombs would be the TU22M supersonic medium bomber.

The air base in Latakia almost certainly cannot support such large aircraft. However, if the decision were taken to use them their deployment in Latakia would be unnecessary. TU22Ms carrying large bombs have the range with inflight refuelling to carry out strikes on Syrian targets from bases in Russia.

So far there is no sign of such heavy aircraft being used, and it seems the Russians have concluded there is no need for them.

A perhaps more likely possibility is use of fuel/air or thermobaric bombs, first used by the Russians in Afghanistan in the 1980s, and perfected by the Russians since then.

These bombs - sometimes called “vacuum bombs” - are filled with a high-calorie liquid fuel in place of the usual solid explosive. Their fuse fires at a certain level above the ground, causing the bomb casing to burst, atomising the liquid content as a huge aerosol cloud, which is then ignited by a second detonator. The almost instantaneous combustion of the cloud of fuel mist burns up all the oxygen inside the resulting fireball, creating a vacuum into which the surrounding air rushes in.

The blast effect is said to be like that of a nuclear explosion, though much less powerful.

These are devastating area weapons, capable of causing massive destruction.

The Russians use the designation ODAB for these bombs (“obyomnodetoneeruyushchaya aviabomba” - ‘volume detonation air-dropped bomb’). The smallest versions weigh 500 kg and have the designations ODAB-500P and ODAB-500PM. There are known to be much bigger versions, including the colossal AVBPM, which weighs a monstrous 7,000 kg (7 tonnes) and has a blast effect equivalent to 44 tonnes of TNT, making it the most powerful non-nuclear bomb in existence.

Should any of these bombs appear during the air campaign in Syria, it will mark a dramatic escalation of the campaign.

Gravity bombs are not the only types of precision guided weapons the Russians use. The Russians - in contrast to the US - have in fact consistently shown a strong bias towards favouring air to ground missiles over bombs.

Two types of missiles are known to have been used in Syria, both well suited to the campaign underway there.

The first is the Kh-29 guided missile, which is sometimes compared to the US Maverick. Its warhead (320 kg) is however much heavier (depending on the subtype the Maverick’s warhead ranges from 60 kg to 140 kg).

The Kh-29 is designed for use against larger battlefield targets and infrastructure such as industrial buildings, depots and bridges. It has a range of 10-30 km, depending on the variant, and comes with a variety of guidance systems, including laser, infrared, active radar or TV guidance.

The Russians have confirmed use of the laser guided version of this potent missile during the Syrian campaign - launched probably by SU34 or SU24 aircraft. It is likely other forms of this missile will be used as well.

The other missile that has apparently been seen in use in Syria (though reports of its use are less reliable) is the much simpler S-25L.

This is a shorter ranged missile with a range of 3-8 km, which originated as an unguided rocket that was adapted to laser guidance (there is also said to be another version that uses infrared guidance). It carries a potent warhead of 190 kg. Pictures of this missile published some years ago show that it is capable of being carried by the SU25.

The Russians possess many other air to ground missiles they could deploy in Syria if they were minded to do so.

These include any of the very extensive family of Kh-25 missiles, which are smaller but cheaper than the Kh-29, and which have been produced in very large quantities. All the aircraft present in Syria - the SU34, SU24 and SU25 - can carry these missiles.

The Russians are in the process of replacing their Kh-25 missiles with a new family of more advanced missiles designated Kh-38. These too can be launched by any of the aircraft currently stationed in Syria. There are no reports however of the Russians so far having used these missiles.

In summary, the Russians possess the full range of precision guided weapons (smart bombs and missiles) the US and the Western powers have, and reports from Syria confirm they are using them.

Perhaps they have fewer such weapons than the US does (though there is little in the way of hard evidence of this), and the tactics may differ.

However there is no reason to think the Russian weapons are in any way inferior to those of the US, and the Russians undoubtedly have many more of these weapons than any European air force does (including those of Britain and France).

Certainly the Russians have more than enough of these weapons to see them through the present campaign. Indeed, as we have seen, they have immensely powerful and very sophisticated weapons such as fuel/air bombs they have chosen so far not to use, but which they could use if they chose to. No other power possesses such weapons in such numbers, save for the US.

These weapons are of course only as effective as the personnel who use them, and the surveillance and targeting systems that are needed to make them work.

Of the high level of training of the Russian pilots and ground crews there is no doubt, and film of their operations at the base provided by RT TV confirms this.

Of the surveillance and targeting systems the Russians are using we know far less. The Russians are understandably unwilling to disclose information about these systems.

The Russians are especially secretive about the capabilities of their surveillance drones. There are in fact many reports coming out of Syria of the presence of large numbers of Russian drones there. This is logical, and there is no reason to doubt these reports, and that Russian drones are present in Syria in large numbers.

There would in fact be little point in developing technologically advanced precision guided weapons if the surveillance and targeting systems - including drones - to use them effectively did not exist. There is no doubt the Russians do possess such systems, even if we know little about them. The information about the Russian strikes that is coming out of Syria confirms their effectiveness.

The Russians therefore have all the capabilities they need to sustain or even escalate their bombing campaign for as long as they want to. Indeed they are more than capable of sustaining it indefinitely, if that is what they decide to do.

POSTSCRIPT: After the above was written the Russians confirmed use of two more precision guided weapons in the air campaign.

One is - not surprisingly - the laser guided version of the well-known Kh-25 missile.

The other is a previously little known precision guided bomb, the KAB-250S-E, which uses satellite guidance.

This is a new guided bomb developed originally for use on the new SU T50 fifth generation fighter and strike aircraft, that is now in advanced development.

It seems that the Russians - like the US - have concluded that the pinpoint accuracy provided by satellite guidance makes the development of a small satellite guided 250 kg bomb worthwhile.

This development by the Russians of a 250 kg satellite guided smart bomb provides further confirmation of the underlying point: the Russians have the same range and capabilities in precision guided weapons that the US has. Perennial claims of US superiority in this area are wrong.