The American air attack on the Syrian army position at Deir el-Zor of 17 September has caused the death of 80 Syrian soldiers and wounding hundreds more. The aircraft released their load of bombs, including phosphorus bombs and we can only imagine how the flesh of a human being is consumed by the heat of such an explosion.
As a result of the attack, the jihadists, who for years besiege the town and the nearby military airport, have stepped up the attack conquering at least momentarily a hill from which they could easily hit their targets. The aerial bombardment was intense but short: the Russians warned the Americans who withdrew, and the Syrian army has been able to resist and, it seems, just recover the positions lost at the cost of 80 certain dead and who knows how many others in this war of which no end is in sight.
In summary these are the facts. But now we can ask ourselves some questions.
Why this attack? The United States has many spy satellites in orbit, with which definitely they control the battlefield.
Was it a mistake? The satellites are used to avoid errors of this type, that have already been made by the Americans in the past.
Always on Syrian soldiers? It's strange that American bombs hit unerringly only Syrian soldiers and Syrian positions making a massacre, while we never read about dozens of jihadists killed in some US attacks.
Here it is easily remember the columns of tankers carrying in Turkey the oil stolen in Syrian oil fields: snakes long thousands of vehicles, clearly visible from above the heavens and never hit by bomb, rocket or machine gun with stars and stripes. As is known, the Russians destroyed them, causing a serious economic damage to ISIS. Comes to mind also the taking of Palmyra, accomplished by crazed killers, hundreds of them moved across the desert, under the sky patrolled by US Air Force. Let's be honest: come to mind so many things....
Must be the same things that thought Richard Black, US Senator from Virginia who for years is in fact the only American politician to protest openly against the war in Syria and against the support that Washington provides to the Islamist militias that bloody that country proud and brave. Islamist, not Islamic or Muslim, because Islam has nothing to do with their murderous madness.
Richard Black, in one of his acts of courage, in September 19 wrote a letter to the Syrian ambassador at UN, Bashar Ja'fari, and apologized for the tragic death of Syrian soldiers.
Sure: Black does not speak on behalf of Washington. His are the words of who knows the situation on the ground (and other things) and talk with grieving heart for what he sees happening in Syria. And yet not for that his words are not significant. Quite the contrary. Remember that Richard Black knows the war from personal experience because he fought, as a patriot, in Vietnam. There he was seriously injured and the death was near to him, taking the life of some of his fellow soldiers. Senator Black is not a naive idealist who dreams of colorful rainbows and pink unicorns.
Apologizing for his government's attack, writing that in another time he would have to consider it a simple mistake, and continue even apologizing for the rancorous words of Samantha Power, US Ambassador to the UN, well, this is an act of courage, weighted and reasoned. Means testify against a blatant injustice that has continued for too many years and whose principals are to be found, we add, in the deep folds of the neocon madness that has long poisoned America.
Costantino Ceoldo - Pravda.Ru freelance