http://mil.news.sina.com.cn/jssd/2018-04-19/doc-ifzihneq0644283.shtml
美军导弹打击叙利亚为何多数无效 CIA前高官揭内幕
美军导弹打击叙利亚为何多数无效 CIA前高官揭内幕
0
4月13日，美国及英国、法国对叙利亚境内的多个目标发动了巡航导弹打击。根据美国军方之后的声明，三国军方通过不同的作战平台一共发射105枚导弹，这些导弹都精确地击中了预定目标。军事打击行动获得了非常大的成功。
美军公布的打击前后的对比
但是，在此之前俄罗斯总参谋部发布的数据显示，在这100多枚巡航导弹攻击中，有71枚导弹被叙利亚政府军的防空导弹系统成功拦截。那么，美国人和俄罗斯人的不同说法，哪一种更可信？如果美英法发射的巡航导弹没能实现精确打击，问题出在哪？
美国中央情报局前高官菲利普·吉尔迪在接受俄罗斯媒体采访时表示，美英法的巡航导弹袭击似乎击中或摧毁了一些目标，但是并非化学武器地点，这种问题的出现似乎是因为错误的目标选择和情报导致。
“如今，一些媒体公布的信息倾向于可能被击中的设施并没有化学武器，或者能够被用来制造化学武器的材料。因此，如果美英法的动机是为了消除化学武器能力，很可能是基于有缺陷的情报，或者还有一种可能性是在一开始就没有任何东西是需要被摧毁的。” 菲利普·吉尔迪说。
这些攻击是在国际禁止化学武器组织到达叙利亚杜马镇之前就发动的，而禁化武组织深入叙利亚调查的目的，就是寻求所谓的“化学武器”袭击的证据。而叙利亚阿萨德政府方面否认了美英法关于“政府军发动化学武器袭击”的指控。
“军事打击的时间是确定好的，这样核查人员难以有时间在此之前进行他们的调查工作，当然最后的调查报告可能表示，没有证据表明化学毒气的使用。所以，这将使得美英法难以继续对叙利亚政府进行惩罚”。吉尔迪曾担任中情局官员和美国陆军情报官员。
吉尔迪说，特朗普上周五下达军事打击叙利亚的决定似乎是出于政治考虑，而不是出于军事或战略考虑。他说：“惩罚比任何事情都更有政治意义，必须采取措施来满足华盛顿、巴黎和伦敦的指控。”
然而，吉尔迪预计，在袭击目标地点没有发现任何化学武器或弹药的证据后，可能会使美国政府不愿在近期内批准类似的袭击。“由于上周五的袭击事件引起的外界指责和质疑，在不久的将来不会再有袭击事件发生。”
吉尔迪指出，不确定性还围绕着美国、英国和法国的巡航导弹在袭击中被拦截的问题，这些巡航导弹，到底有多少被叙利亚防空系统击落。
他说：“评估空袭的有效性是非常困难的，但更令人恼火的是，有多少巡航导弹被叙利亚S-200防空导弹击落，因为这很可能会导致进一步袭击的可能性。”
吉尔迪指出，美国政府表示，没有一枚导弹被拦截并击落，但叙利亚和俄罗斯声称其中四分之三被拦截。他说：“我怀疑真相介于两者之间，但这意味着美国基本上是在撒谎，用巡航导弹制造战争，让美国公众更容易接受。”
吉拉尔迪表示，他认为特朗普总统仍想把美国所有军事力量撤出叙利亚，但特朗普政府面临着来自国会、美国军方的巨大反对，以及美国在该地区的盟友的反对。“如果按照特朗普自己的方式，美国地面部队可能很快就会离开，但他遭到了以色列和许多国会议员的反对，这意味着它可能会采取另一种方式，他们将留下来干扰伊朗的活动。”（作者署名：石江月）
Why the U.S. Missiles Attack Syria Most Are Ineffective
Why the U.S. Missiles Attack Syria Most Are Ineffective
0
On April 13, the United States, Britain, and France launched a cruise missile strike against multiple targets in Syria. According to a statement made by the U.S. military, the three military forces launched a total of 105 missiles through different combat platforms. These missiles have accurately hit the target. The military strike operation has achieved great success.
Before and after the U.S. military’s announcement of the comparison
However, according to data released by the Russian General Staff, 71 of these 100 missiles were successfully intercepted by the Syrian government's air defense missile system. So, which of the different arguments of Americans and Russians is more credible? If the cruise missiles launched by the United States, the United Kingdom, and France fail to achieve a precise strike, where is the problem?
In an interview with Russian media, former US High Commissioner Philip Gildi said that the cruise missile strikes of the United States, Britain, and France seem to have hit or destroyed some targets, but not chemical weapons sites. This problem appears to be due to wrong goals. Choice and intelligence led.
“Today, some media have published information that favors facilities that may be hit without chemical weapons or materials that can be used to make chemical weapons. Therefore, if the motives of the United States, Britain, and France are to eliminate chemical weapons capabilities, it is likely to be based on Defective intelligence, or another possibility, is that at the beginning there is nothing that needs to be destroyed,” said Philip Gildi.
These attacks were launched before the International Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons arrived in the town of Duma, Syria. The purpose of the OPCW's investigation into Syria was to seek evidence of so-called "chemical weapons" attacks. On the other hand, the Assad government in Syria denies allegations of "the government forces launching chemical weapons attacks."
"The timing of the military strike is well established, so that the inspectors have little time to conduct their investigation before this time. Of course, the final investigation report may indicate that there is no evidence that chemical gas is used. Therefore, this will make it difficult for the United States and Britain to continue. Punishment against the Syrian government." Gildi served as the CIA officer and the U.S. Army intelligence officer.
Gildi said that Trump’s decision to issue a military strike against Syria on Friday appeared to be due to political considerations rather than military or strategic considerations. He said: "Penalty is more political than anything else. We must take measures to meet the accusations of Washington, Paris, and London."
However, Gildi expects that no evidence of any chemical weapons or ammunition will be found at the target location, which may deter the U.S. government from approving similar attacks in the near future. "As a result of external criticisms and doubts caused by the attacks on Friday, there will be no more attacks in the near future."
Gildi pointed out that uncertainty also surrounds the issue of the interception of cruise missiles by the United States, Britain, and France. How many of these cruise missiles were shot down by the Syrian air defense system.
He said: "Assessing the effectiveness of air strikes is very difficult, but even more annoying is how many cruise missiles were shot down by Syrian S-200 air defense missiles, because this is likely to lead to the possibility of further attacks."
Gildi pointed out that the U.S. government stated that no missile was intercepted and shot down, but Syria and Russia claimed that three-quarters of them were intercepted. He said: "I suspect that the truth lies somewhere in between, but this means that the United States is basically lying. Making war with cruise missiles makes the American public more receptive."
Gilardi said he believes that President Trump still wants to withdraw all U.S. military forces from Syria, but the Trump administration is facing huge opposition from Congress and the U.S. military, as well as opposition from U.S. allies in the region. "If according to Trump's own methods, the U.S. ground forces may soon leave, but he has been opposed by Israel and many lawmakers, which means it may take another approach. They will stay and interfere with Iran. Activities." (Author's signature: Shi Jiangyue)
美军导弹打击叙利亚为何多数无效 CIA前高官揭内幕
美军导弹打击叙利亚为何多数无效 CIA前高官揭内幕
0
4月13日，美国及英国、法国对叙利亚境内的多个目标发动了巡航导弹打击。根据美国军方之后的声明，三国军方通过不同的作战平台一共发射105枚导弹，这些导弹都精确地击中了预定目标。军事打击行动获得了非常大的成功。
但是，在此之前俄罗斯总参谋部发布的数据显示，在这100多枚巡航导弹攻击中，有71枚导弹被叙利亚政府军的防空导弹系统成功拦截。那么，美国人和俄罗斯人的不同说法，哪一种更可信？如果美英法发射的巡航导弹没能实现精确打击，问题出在哪？
美国中央情报局前高官菲利普·吉尔迪在接受俄罗斯媒体采访时表示，美英法的巡航导弹袭击似乎击中或摧毁了一些目标，但是并非化学武器地点，这种问题的出现似乎是因为错误的目标选择和情报导致。
“如今，一些媒体公布的信息倾向于可能被击中的设施并没有化学武器，或者能够被用来制造化学武器的材料。因此，如果美英法的动机是为了消除化学武器能力，很可能是基于有缺陷的情报，或者还有一种可能性是在一开始就没有任何东西是需要被摧毁的。” 菲利普·吉尔迪说。
这些攻击是在国际禁止化学武器组织到达叙利亚杜马镇之前就发动的，而禁化武组织深入叙利亚调查的目的，就是寻求所谓的“化学武器”袭击的证据。而叙利亚阿萨德政府方面否认了美英法关于“政府军发动化学武器袭击”的指控。
“军事打击的时间是确定好的，这样核查人员难以有时间在此之前进行他们的调查工作，当然最后的调查报告可能表示，没有证据表明化学毒气的使用。所以，这将使得美英法难以继续对叙利亚政府进行惩罚”。吉尔迪曾担任中情局官员和美国陆军情报官员。
吉尔迪说，特朗普上周五下达军事打击叙利亚的决定似乎是出于政治考虑，而不是出于军事或战略考虑。他说：“惩罚比任何事情都更有政治意义，必须采取措施来满足华盛顿、巴黎和伦敦的指控。”
然而，吉尔迪预计，在袭击目标地点没有发现任何化学武器或弹药的证据后，可能会使美国政府不愿在近期内批准类似的袭击。“由于上周五的袭击事件引起的外界指责和质疑，在不久的将来不会再有袭击事件发生。”
吉尔迪指出，不确定性还围绕着美国、英国和法国的巡航导弹在袭击中被拦截的问题，这些巡航导弹，到底有多少被叙利亚防空系统击落。
他说：“评估空袭的有效性是非常困难的，但更令人恼火的是，有多少巡航导弹被叙利亚S-200防空导弹击落，因为这很可能会导致进一步袭击的可能性。”
吉尔迪指出，美国政府表示，没有一枚导弹被拦截并击落，但叙利亚和俄罗斯声称其中四分之三被拦截。他说：“我怀疑真相介于两者之间，但这意味着美国基本上是在撒谎，用巡航导弹制造战争，让美国公众更容易接受。”
吉拉尔迪表示，他认为特朗普总统仍想把美国所有军事力量撤出叙利亚，但特朗普政府面临着来自国会、美国军方的巨大反对，以及美国在该地区的盟友的反对。“如果按照特朗普自己的方式，美国地面部队可能很快就会离开，但他遭到了以色列和许多国会议员的反对，这意味着它可能会采取另一种方式，他们将留下来干扰伊朗的活动。”（作者署名：石江月）
Why the U.S. Missiles Attack Syria Most Are Ineffective
Why the U.S. Missiles Attack Syria Most Are Ineffective
0
On April 13, the United States, Britain, and France launched a cruise missile strike against multiple targets in Syria. According to a statement made by the U.S. military, the three military forces launched a total of 105 missiles through different combat platforms. These missiles have accurately hit the target. The military strike operation has achieved great success.
Before and after the U.S. military’s announcement of the comparison
However, according to data released by the Russian General Staff, 71 of these 100 missiles were successfully intercepted by the Syrian government's air defense missile system. So, which of the different arguments of Americans and Russians is more credible? If the cruise missiles launched by the United States, the United Kingdom, and France fail to achieve a precise strike, where is the problem?
In an interview with Russian media, former US High Commissioner Philip Gildi said that the cruise missile strikes of the United States, Britain, and France seem to have hit or destroyed some targets, but not chemical weapons sites. This problem appears to be due to wrong goals. Choice and intelligence led.
“Today, some media have published information that favors facilities that may be hit without chemical weapons or materials that can be used to make chemical weapons. Therefore, if the motives of the United States, Britain, and France are to eliminate chemical weapons capabilities, it is likely to be based on Defective intelligence, or another possibility, is that at the beginning there is nothing that needs to be destroyed,” said Philip Gildi.
These attacks were launched before the International Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons arrived in the town of Duma, Syria. The purpose of the OPCW's investigation into Syria was to seek evidence of so-called "chemical weapons" attacks. On the other hand, the Assad government in Syria denies allegations of "the government forces launching chemical weapons attacks."
"The timing of the military strike is well established, so that the inspectors have little time to conduct their investigation before this time. Of course, the final investigation report may indicate that there is no evidence that chemical gas is used. Therefore, this will make it difficult for the United States and Britain to continue. Punishment against the Syrian government." Gildi served as the CIA officer and the U.S. Army intelligence officer.
Gildi said that Trump’s decision to issue a military strike against Syria on Friday appeared to be due to political considerations rather than military or strategic considerations. He said: "Penalty is more political than anything else. We must take measures to meet the accusations of Washington, Paris, and London."
However, Gildi expects that no evidence of any chemical weapons or ammunition will be found at the target location, which may deter the U.S. government from approving similar attacks in the near future. "As a result of external criticisms and doubts caused by the attacks on Friday, there will be no more attacks in the near future."
Gildi pointed out that uncertainty also surrounds the issue of the interception of cruise missiles by the United States, Britain, and France. How many of these cruise missiles were shot down by the Syrian air defense system.
He said: "Assessing the effectiveness of air strikes is very difficult, but even more annoying is how many cruise missiles were shot down by Syrian S-200 air defense missiles, because this is likely to lead to the possibility of further attacks."
Gildi pointed out that the U.S. government stated that no missile was intercepted and shot down, but Syria and Russia claimed that three-quarters of them were intercepted. He said: "I suspect that the truth lies somewhere in between, but this means that the United States is basically lying. Making war with cruise missiles makes the American public more receptive."
Gilardi said he believes that President Trump still wants to withdraw all U.S. military forces from Syria, but the Trump administration is facing huge opposition from Congress and the U.S. military, as well as opposition from U.S. allies in the region. "If according to Trump's own methods, the U.S. ground forces may soon leave, but he has been opposed by Israel and many lawmakers, which means it may take another approach. They will stay and interfere with Iran. Activities." (Author's signature: Shi Jiangyue)
