Breaking: US officials are now blaming Iran for the drone attack on the illegal US military base in al Tanf, Syria
Let's break this story down.
The Associated Press reports that US officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, blame Iran for the attack on al Tanf.
They say "Iran resourced and encouraged the attack" but that the drones were not launched from Iran.
apnews.com/article/middle…
The Associated Press reports that US officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, blame Iran for the attack on al Tanf.
They say "Iran resourced and encouraged the attack" but that the drones were not launched from Iran.
apnews.com/article/middle…
Anonymous US officials: "They were Iranian drones, and Iran appears to have facilitated their use"
What does that mean? Were they transferred from Iran specifically for this use? Did Iran provide coordinates? Fuel? Paint and stickers for drones? What's with the vague language?
What does that mean? Were they transferred from Iran specifically for this use? Did Iran provide coordinates? Fuel? Paint and stickers for drones? What's with the vague language?
Asked about the report, DoD Spokesperson Kirby says: “I’m not in a position to get into attribution”, “I’m not going to talk specifics on this attack”.
So was it, or was it not Iran?
So was it, or was it not Iran?
In direction contradiction with anonymous US officials, Kirby cannot even tell what munitions were used, let alone Iranian ones. He won’t confirm if it's a Shia militia group (which doesn't necessarily mean Iran) nor does he confirm whether it was state sponsored attack either.
Kirby talks about the US 'right to self defense'.
Not sure how that applies when you're an invader/aggressor.
Moreover, the attack on al Tanf was likely a response to Israel bombing Syrian soldiers, flying from the direction of the base. Some would argue that is self defense.
Not sure how that applies when you're an invader/aggressor.
Moreover, the attack on al Tanf was likely a response to Israel bombing Syrian soldiers, flying from the direction of the base. Some would argue that is self defense.
When you invade other people's countries and illegally occupy them, you’re going to piss a lot of people off. So this could've been Syrians, Iraqis, who knows. Given the sophistication of the attack, and the timing, that narrows it down of course, but something seems off here.
Iran certainly supports resistance efforts in the region, and proudly so, but this report, conveniently issued by anonymous US officials, sounds a lot just like just randomly assigning blame to Iran without any proof.
Regardless, it's pretty insane how you can invade someone else's country, occupy it, steal resources, and then start playing the victim. In what dimension does that make any sense except in the imperialist mindset of Western media?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
