Tuesday, March 7, 2023

Syria Says An Israeli Air Strike Has Put Aleppo Airport Out Of Service

 

US News and World Report/Reuters: Syria Says Israeli Strike Puts Aleppo Airport Out of Service 

BEIRUT (Reuters) -An Israeli air strike knocked Aleppo airport out of service on Tuesday and forced the Syrian authorities to reroute flights carrying aid for people affected by last month's earthquake, Syrian state media reported. 

The Israeli military declined to comment. Israel has for years been carrying out attacks against what it has described as Iran-linked targets in Syria, where Tehran's influence has grown since it began supporting President Bashar al-Assad in the civil war that began in 2011. 

In the second attack on Aleppo airport in six months, Syrian air defences intercepted missiles launched from the Mediterranean, west of the coastal city of Latakia, at 2:07 a.m. (2307 GMT), state news agency SANA reported, citing a military source. 

Read more ....

WNU editor: It looks like this will be hindering earthquake aid .... Israel cripples Aleppo airport, hindering aid deliveries for Syria (The Cradle). 

Syria Says An Israeli Air Strike Has Put Aleppo Airport Out Of Service  

Syrian state media says Israeli strike damaged Aleppo airport -- -- France 24  

Syria says Israeli jets strike Aleppo airport, shutting it down -- Times of Israel  

Syrian State Media Reports Israeli Strike on Aleppo Airport -- VOA 

Reported Israeli strikes on Aleppo airport leave it out of service -- Middle East Eye

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

Israel would not hinder aid by choice. You know that airport was used by Iran to bring in soldiers and weapons. Now that is hindered for awhile.

Anonymous said...

So Russia must keep its hands off Ukraine despite its security concerns, but Israel gets to bomb whatever sovereign country it wants in the name of its own national security? Can one of NATO cheerleaders here elaborate on that one please

Anonymous said...

^^^ False analogy by Russian cyber warrior

Anonymous said...

I agree with 2:05
what threat to Russia is Ukraine other than the fact that it wants to be a democracy and free of Putin's wet dreams

Anonymous said...

Umm it wants to be a part of NATO, an organization that exists to counter Russia. And Zelensky wanted to kick the Russian navy out of Crimea which is completely unreasonable, hence the reunification by Russia. Why did we attempt to invade Cuba again? We forgetting all the precedents that were made already? Amazing how short sighted liberals and progressives are.

Anonymous said...

Heaven forbid a country move troops through its airport when half of it’s territory is currently being occupied by the USA and a mishmash of fanatical jihadi throat cutters. What possible reason could they have to request security assistance from their allies I wonder?

Utter hypocrisy from the usual flag wavers.

Anonymous said...

" wanted to kick the Russian navy out of Crimea which is completely unreasonable, hence the reunification by Russia."

Kicking the Russian Navy out of Ukraine is not unreasonable. For starters, Crybully Russia has other ports on the Black Sea.

What it comes down to is contract and international law. Putin was educated as a lawyer. Did his profs merely hand him his degree, because he threatened to kill them?

the contract was for set period of time. However contracts can be broken for cause. If you disagree with the cause, you go to court. You don't start invading and threaten to nuke everyone and the grandmother.

If the Russians were running agents out of the base at Sevastopol that would be just cause to break the contract.

Just love dickhead russian cyber warriors. It is like they all went to the PhreD school of rhetoric.

Anonymous said...

Gawd DAMN Fracking Russians!

After the dissolution of the Soviet Union at the end of 1991, the former Soviet Navy came under jurisdiction of United Armed Forces of the Commonwealth of Independent States and later regulated by the separate treaty between the Russian Federation and Ukraine. After a failed attempt to annex Crimea in 1990s, in 1997 the Russian Federation signed the Partition Treaty on the Status and Conditions of the Black Sea Fleet with Ukraine which allowed the Russian-allocated ships to remain on Ukrainian territory until 2017 sharing the Sevastopol Bay along with ships of Ukrainian Navy. From then on, Russia paid an annual lease to Ukraine for the use of the base until 2014, as regulated by the Partition Treaty on the Black Sea Fleet and the Kharkiv Pact.[3][4] Since the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation in 2014, the naval base is again under Russian control.

Anonymous said...

The US wouldn’t have done anything different in their situation and you damned well know it.

Anonymous said...

5:25

Very true.

Look at Guantanamo. The lease was up in 1999. And the cubans wanted us out and still want us out. Have we left yet?

Anonymous said...

The US would do something different and you damn well know it.

The US gave up the Panama Canal. The Canal is way more important than any naval base or prime anchorage spot.

The US freed the Phillipines. The US should never have gone into The Phillipines. Admiral Dewey argued against it/ So did Mark Twain. President McKinley(R) made the wrong decision. There was a rebellion and we beat the Filipinos to a pulp. In a generation or less we had plans to free the Phillipines and a time table. Manila is a much better Naval Achage than the as crack that is Sevastopol.

Anonymous said...

That was a different part of the world and you damn well know it.

Subic is not Gitmo , or Pearl.

Sevastopol would be the better equivalent to the both of them .

If you cannot see the linkage between the strategic maneuvering of the USA and the linkage between the 2014 ukies coup and the West's desire to weaken Russian capability in the black sea, and therefore the Mediterranean sea, and therefore the Atlantic Ocean, Then you are blind or being willfully obstinate about US intentions.