The highest decision-making body of the WTO, the Ministerial Conferenceusually meets every two years. The Ministerial Conference can take decisions on all matters under any of the multilateral trade agreements.
I will try to do this today with the hope to be able to shed some light on a rather bizarre attack which will nevertheless have profound consequences.
To believe that it would require you to find the following sequence logical: Then, the US declares that overthrowing Assad is not a priority anymore up to here this is all factual and true.
Then, Assad decides to use weapons he does not have. He decides to bomb a location with no military value, but with lots of kids and cameras. Then, when the Russians demand a full investigation, the Americans strike as fast as they can before this idea gets any support.
And now the Americans are probing a possible Russian role in this so-called attack. Frankly, if you believe any of that, you should immediately stop reading and go back to watching TV. For the rest of us, there are three options: This option requires you to believe in coincidences.
Unless, the US fed bad intelligence to the Syrians and got them to bomb a location where the US knew that toxic gas was stored. What is evident is that the Syrians did not drop chemical weapons from their aircraft and that no chemical gas was ever stored at the al-Shayrat airbase.
There is no footage showing any munitions or containers which would have delivered the toxic gas. As for US and other radar recordings, all they can show is that an aircraft was in the sky, its heading, altitude and speed. There is no way to distinguish a chemical munition or a chemical attack by means of radar.
Whatever option you chose, the Syrian government is obviously and self-evidently innocent of the accusation of having used chemical weapons.
This is most likely a false flag attack. Also, and just for the record, the US had been considering exactly such a false flag attack in the past. You can read everything about this plan here and here. American and Russian sources both agree on the following facts: The US did not consult with the Russians on a political level, but through military channels the US gave Russia 2 hours advance warning.
At this point the accounts begin to differ. The Americans say that all missiles hit their targets. The Russians say that only 23 cruise missiles hit the airfield.
Here I think that it is indisputable that the Americans are lying and the Russians are saying the truth: Furthermore, the Syrian Air Force resumed its operations within 24 hours.
That is a fact. It is also indisputable that there were no chemical munitions at this base as nobody, neither the Syrians nor the Russian reporters, had to wear any protective gear. The missiles used in the attack, the Tomahawk, can use any combination of three guidance systems: GPS, inertial navigation and terrain mapping.
There is no evidence and even no reports that the Russians shot even a single air-defense missile.
While the Tomahawk cruise missile was developed in the s, there is no reason to believe that the missiles used had exceeded their shelf live and there is even evidence that they were built in The Tomahawk is known to be accurate and reliable.
There is absolutely no basis to suspect that over half of the missiles fired simply spontaneously malfunctioned. I therefore see only two possible explanations for what happened to the 36 missing cruise missiles: That would make it possible for Trump to appear tough while not inflicting the kind of damage which would truly wreck his plans to collaborate with Russia.
The Russians could not legally shoot down the US missiles. Furthermore, it is incorrect to assume that these cruise missiles flew a direct course from the Mediterranean to their target thereby almost overflying the Russian radar positions.
Tomahawk were specifically built to be able to fly tangential courses around some radar types and they also have a very low RCS radar visibilityespecially in the frontal sector. I do believe that this is the correct explanation.The Philippines a Century Hence: Summary and Analysis “The Philippines a Century Hence” is an essay written by Philippine national hero Jose Rizal to forecast the future of the country within a hundred years.
The table below presents an abbreviated geologic time scale, with times and events germane to this essay. Please refer to a complete geologic time scale when this one seems inadequate. The Philippines a Century Hence: Summary.
and Analysis “The Philippines a Century Hence” is an essay written by Philippine national hero Jose. The Italian media system entered the new century with a combination of continued reliance on the traditional printed press and participation in the global shift to new delivery systems, including online journalism, the spread of personal computers, and digital television.
Envisioning the United Nations in the Twenty-first Century Proceedings of the Inaugural Symposium on the United Nations System in the Twenty-first Century. A toolbox for analysing political texts.
Discourse analysis is a useful tool for studying the political meanings that inform written and spoken text. In other posts, I have provided a quick video introduction to the topic, and have discussed the ideas behind discourse theory, the main questions that students and researchers will likely ask as they set up their discourse analysis project, and.