Syria - What should we do if anything?

[Dwarden 1124]

what back with proof ? since when historically known facts need any proof ... find it yourself ...

considering the forces ASM faced it's interesting the NC lasted so long w/o external support

(it would innevibly lost wholecounry anyway if AlQ atack not change USA policy broadwise)

[katipo66 94]

The US has not been close to those levels for over a century.

maybe because they and everyone else out-source now :)

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

what back with proof ? since when historically known facts need any proof ... find it yourself ...

considering the forces ASM faced it's interesting the NC lasted so long w/o external support

(it would innevibly lost wholecounry anyway if AlQ atack not change USA policy broadwise)

Just provided you with conclusive evidence that it was Pakistan that provided the external support......the Taliban were formed in 1994 by Mullah Omar, supported and funded by Pakistan with the provision of over 100,000 Pakistani youths from Madrassas. By 1998 the USA had fired 75 cruise missiles into Afghanistan at OBL/Taliban camps in retaliation for the embassy bombings in East Africa. How, is that support for the Taliban by the USA? They simply did not meddle in what were Pakistan's affairs, a view promoted by an undersecretary at the State Dept. who was fired for it 1997.

If you think the USA gave the Taliban direct support - PROVE it.

Being against war is admirable, telling lies to promote your beliefs isn't.

(I withdraw that if you have condensed the timeline and are confusing the Mujahideen with the Taliban as many ill-informed often do?)

Edited September 3, 2013 by Mattar_Tharkari

[maturin 12]

In February 2009 Assad had been the same 'bloody dictator' as now. Now he is named guilty in all deadly sins and, as they say, must be toppled no matter of anything. Where's the difference? Why now US govt wants nothing but to crush Assad's regime and 4 years ago had an easy talk with him? Assad hadn't been changed. US DoS had been cured from blindness? How they could afford a talk with such a culprit and why the can not have the same peace talks instead of arming the jihadists and threaten Syria with war? Why there's no diplomacy now but only support of one side of the conflict and threats to another? Assad lost the title of 'our SOB'?

Are you suggesting that U.S. interests have suddenly changed, and now require Assad's ouster? I don't think you do. And yet to you fail to arrive at the really quite obvious conclusion.

This changed since 2009: Assad now actually might fall, might be punished for his sins (which were always on a list somewhere, if you ask any objective or moral person not working for the Russian Foreign Ministry), and at the hands of popular forces, no less.

Assad hasn't changed, the U.S. hasn't changed. The balance of forces has. Facts on the ground changed.

The U.S. can do very little against dictators (here I refer to the portion of dictators we do not support, as opposed to the dictators we do support), most of the time. Assad was never 'our SOB.' He was always Russia's SOB, and Israel's enemy. But the U.S. could do nothing against him, and had no prospects for any improvement or alternative in the country. 'Better the devil you know' was the situation, which is different from 'our SOB.' Saddam and Noriega were two of 'our SOBs' that lost their goodwill and became the enemy. Assad started in the latter position.

So the U.S. was never blind. It has removed a gag. And their position is not that Assad " must be toppled no matter of anything." Rather, the U.S. has restrained from providing a single tank and will never deploy a single one of their own to the country. They are severely restrained by the circumstances; you know that. It's a crucial factor in Russia's aim to keep Assad in power.

I make a distinction between the U.S.' interests and actions and my own opinions as an American, by the way. You seem to support every murderous action of your own government (like most Russians on the English-speaking internet but thankfully few I meet in real life), and expect everyone else to do the same.

Why there's no diplomacy now but only support of one side of the conflict and threats to another?

Surely this question could be directed to all parties in this proxy conflict. The Gulf States, Iran, Russia, Turkey. Not just the U.S.

It's mostly out of their hands in any case. The chaos and acrimony is too great for outside powers to step in and neatly arrange an end to fighting. No sane or moral person should be able to stomach the outrage of Assad remaining a legitimate ruler, living a life of power and luxury after the countless crimes against humanity committed by him. Reconciliation in such a case is impossible. He can only remain in power after such butchery by main force, as Saddam did after his own adventure with poison gas. And Assad lacks the forces to rule the country by marital law now. This dynamic might be difficult for the Russian government to perceive. After all, your history is replete with crimes against humanity and wholesale slaughter of the population, and the perpetrators went on to rule for generations, without the slightest need for reconciliation or recompense. Such an outcome cannot be reproduced in a conflict where the balance of forces are so even.

Edited September 3, 2013 by maturin

[scrim 1]

By 1998 the USA had fired 75 cruise missiles into Afghanistan at OBL/Taliban camps in retaliation for the embassy bombings in East Africa. How, is that support for the Taliban by the USA?

The Navy misunderstood the order to deliver the gift Tomahawks to the Talibans via air?

But yeah seriously, the only reason we have the mess in Afghanistan today is because of Pakistan. Not once, but twice where the Talibans defeated by what became the Northern Alliance after their defeat, and both times Pakistan helped them get back on their feet, and paid key elements of the opposition to leave, and thus enabled the Talibans to finally win, with the government withdrawing to the North East of the country and forming the Northern Alliance.

[Dwarden 1124]

sigh MT, please go check with who US administrative cooperated when Taliban took control over Kabul for period of several years

even sending them money other support ... ASM clearly wrote to US if he money were reaching his side he could at least keep stalemate

nvm, you fail to even read that ASM was the true M. fighting for theirs country, not foreigner spreading own variant of islam by sword

Edited September 3, 2013 by Dwarden

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

Are you talking about the $75 million and $43 million in food aid distributed via the World Food Program/UN to alleviate famine? Conspiritards such as infowars turned sacks of grain distributed by the UN into active US support which has become a widely believed myth.

Colin Powel 2001:

"We distribute our assistance in Afghanistan through international agencies of the United Nations and non-governmental organizations,"

"We provide our relief to the people of Afghanistan, not to Afghanistan's ruling factions.

Our aid bypasses the Taliban, who have done little to alleviate the suffering of the Afghan people, and indeed have done much to exacerbate it."

There is a declassified document with his initials on it 27/4/2001 where the humanitarian and refugee crisis caused by the Taliban is discussed (Keep me informed CP):

http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/IMG/20010427-afgh.pdf

The Taliban were funded, armed and given 100,000 troops by Pakistan.

The Northern Alliance were funded and armed mainly by India, they lacked adequate forces to defeat the Taliban and lost ground.

The USA/EU couldn't and wouldn't provide support for either as it would mean becoming involved in a Pakistani/Indian proxy war. ASM might have been the best option, I agree but the issue of Pakistan's involvement complicated things. Unless you have anything else to add, I think you got the whole US support for Taliban wrong. They did have limited diplomatic relations, but that's it. The US even shut the Taliban offices in the US down in the late 1990's.

The USA and UN did not recognise the Taliban government, hence:

The State Department ordered the Afghan embassy in Washington, DC, closed in August 1997.

No blind eye to discrimination - the USA voted on this:

U.N. Security Council Resolution 1193 (August 28, 1998) and 1214 (December 8, 1998) urged the Taliban to end discrimination against women.

In 1998 the US was pressuring the Taliban with sanctions to extradite OBL for the embassy bombings.

Edited September 3, 2013 by Mattar_Tharkari

[ProfTournesol 956]

It's fun to discuss US vs Taliban, but this isn't the topic purpose IMHO.

On topic, French government has declassified a document (analysed in English here) which tends to show that Assad's troops were responsible of the chemical attack, without any real evidence though.

Russia's position is slighlty evolving though : http://en.rian.ru/russia/20130904/183157113/Russia-Does-Not-Rule-Out-Backing-Military-Action-in-Syria--Putin.html, and the delivery of S300 missiles to Syria seems to have been stopped.

One good thing out of this is a growing diplomatic activity between UNO security council members (including China).

Edited September 4, 2013 by ProfTournesol

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

Watched this last night:

FULL TRANSCRIPT: Kerry, Hagel and Dempsey testify at Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Syria

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/running-transcript-senate-foreign-services-committee-hearing-on-syria/2013/09/03/35ae1048-14ca-11e3-b182-1b3bb2eb474c_story_4.html

Important part of Kerrys testimony:

But first, it is important to explain to the American people why we're here. It's important for people who may not have caught every component of the news over the course of the Labor Day weekend to join us, all of us, in focusing in on what is at stake here. That's why the president of the United States made the decision, as he did, contrary to what many people thought he would do, of asking the Congress to join in this decision. We are stronger as a nation when we do that.

So we're here because against multiple warnings from the president of the United States, from the Congress, from our friends and allies around the world and even from Russia and Iran, the Assad regime, and only, undeniably, the Assad regime, unleashed an outrageous chemical attack against its own citizens.

We're here because a dictator and his family's personal enterprise, in their lust to hold on to power, were willing to infect the air of Damascus with a poison that killed innocent mothers and fathers and hundreds of their children, their lives all snuffed out by gas in the early morning of August 21st.

Now, some people here and there, amazingly, have questioned the evidence of this assault on conscience. I repeat here again today that only the most willful desire to avoid reality can assert that this did not occur as described or that the regime did not do it. It did happen, and the Assad regime did it.

Now, I remember Iraq. Secretary Hagel remembers Iraq. General Dempsey especially remembers Iraq. But Secretary Hagel and I and many of you sitting on the dais remember Iraq in a special way because we were here for that vote. We voted. And so we are especially sensitive, Chuck and I, to never again asking any member of Congress to take a vote on faulty intelligence.

And that is why our intelligence community has scrubbed and rescrubbed the evidence. We have declassified unprecedented amounts of information, and we ask the American people and the rest of the world to judge that information.

We can tell you beyond any reasonable doubt that our evidence proves the Assad regime prepared for this attack, issued instructions to prepare for this attack, warned its own forces to use gas masks; that we have physical evidence of where the rockets came from and when.

Not one rocket landed in regime-controlled territory -- not one. All of them landed in opposition-controlled or contested territory. We have a map -- physical evidence -- showing every geographical point of impact. And that is concrete.

Within minutes of the attack -- 90, I think, to be precise, maybe slightly shorter -- the social media exploded with horrific images of the damage that had been caused -- men and women, the elderly and children sprawled on a hospital floor with no wounds, no blood, but all dead. Those scenes of human chaos and desperation were not contrived. They were real. No one could contrive such a scene.

We are certain that none of the opposition has the weapons or capacity to effect a strike of this scale, particularly from the heart of regime territory. Just think about it in logical terms, common sense. With high confidence, our intelligence community tells us that after the strike the regime issued orders to stop and then fretted openly, we know, about the possibility of U.N. inspectors discovering evidence.

So then they began to systematically try to destroy it, contrary to my discussion with their foreign minister who said we have nothing to hide. I said, if you have nothing to hide then let the inspectors in today and let it be unrestricted. It wasn't. They didn't. It took four days of shelling before they finally allowed them in under a constrained pre-arranged structure. And we now have learned that the hair and blood samples from first responders in east Damascus has tested positive for signatures of sarin.

So my colleagues, we know what happened. For all the lawyers, for all the former prosecutors, for all those who have sat on a jury, I can tell you that we know these things beyond the reasonable doubt that is the standard by which we send people to jail for the rest of their lives.

[mrcash2009 0]

John Kerry, bonesman kerry? Ah yes him :)

We're here because a dictator and his family's personal enterprise

No you are there becuase of the crusade of the middle-east & sovereign states thats been on going since 13 years (or more) or so outwardly and have surrounding bases so your there all the time, lets be honest. And you have been funding and arming the enemy of 2001 to try to kick ass but it hasn't worked for 2 years so you have had some time to sort it out.

in their lust to hold on to power,

Pot/Kettle?

were willing to infect the air of Damascus with a poison that killed innocent mothers and fathers and hundreds of their children, their lives all snuffed out by gas in the early morning of August 21st.

Yes and by whom? We still ask.

Now, some people here and there, amazingly,

Lots of people around the globe of countries and questioning that isnt amazing what so ever.

have questioned the evidence of this assault on conscience.

Have questioned the entire situation as they should with no assault on any conscience other than the the one pushed by media with repeating images of what we have already learned and established the day it happened.

I repeat here again today that only the most wilful desire to avoid reality

Or those that see things for what they truly are and to be ignored & a reality spun and fogged as it has been over the last few days and time since it happened.

can assert that this did not occur as described or that the regime did not do it. It did happen, and the Assad regime did it.

Thanks mate, I will take your word for that, but anyway ... moving on to balanced information source and unbiased contractually compromised folk. I dont think it matters what's posted here, it will go forth and continue regardless, happy days, enjoy the side you take & make it a good one :) Sorry but its like listening to Colin Powell in 2003.

Edited September 4, 2013 by mrcash2009

[walker 0]

Hi all

The story that the Chemical weapon use was as a result of weapons supplied by Saudi Arabia and destined for a group linked to Al Qaeda seems to be gaining traction with numbers of other news sources now reporting the story and questioning the story comming out of some western government sources.

http://www.policymic.com/articles/61705/syrian-rebels-in-ghouta-report-chemical-attack-was-a-rebel-mistake

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/02/syria-crisis-questions-answered

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2013/09/02/conflicting-claims-syrian-chemical-weapons

More seriously evidential is film from the Assad government of Chemical weapons captured from the Saudi suported group

http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/video-shows-rebels-launching-gas-attack-in-syria/

Other sources have confirmed Prince Bandar bin Sultan has been supplying the Al Qaeda group with weapons.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/syria-the-saudi-connection-the-prince-with-close-ties-to-washington-at-the-heart-of-the-push-for-war-8785049.html

Prince Bandar bin Sultan's links to Al Qaeda as well as his part in the Iraq dossier are very disturbing there also links to him and the Wahhabi/Al Qaeda movement that moved into Iraq after the invasion and is linked to the continuing insurgent terrorist bombings that have plagued Iraq since the invasion and killed so many civialians as well as US and UK personel.

Kind Regards walker

Edited September 4, 2013 by walker

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

Best to read your own links there Walker:

So far, however, neither the Syrian government nor Russia have publicly provided any evidence that the rebels were responsible for the incident. Delay in allowing the UN inspectors access to the scene of the attacks, and heavy shelling before they were able to get there, appeared designed to destroy evidence.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/02/syria-crisis-questions-answered

That nonsense from the Syrian regime was debunked a few pages back, wrong chemical (Sodium Hydroxide), a bag of chemicals doesn't equal a chemical weapon, You will notice someone has even included a fire extinguisher lol. The mortar the rebels are using doesn't have the correct range and uses the wrong fuse. Also to blow open that type of LPG cylinder, the explosives would destroy the chemical contents, volume is too small.

You also appear to still be trying to convince others that Al-Qaeda/Jabhat al-Nusra have female fighters - all a story from a journalist who isn't in Syria? Same story you posted on September 1st?

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?135597-Syria-What-should-we-do-if-anything&p=2486306&viewfull=1#post2486306

The Swedish PM appeared in a press conference with Obama today, the head of the UN investigating team is Swedish and he seemed to know something. He wasn't explicit, but he didn't disagree with Obama at any time.

Putin wobbled today - anyone notice? lol. Gave himself an out because it looks more likely further proof of Assad's guilt is likely to emerge.

Edited September 4, 2013 by Mattar_Tharkari

[sasha013 225]

If there is an air strike from US and French warplanes, it's going to be an interesting one. Iraq & Afghanistan were a walk in the park in comparison, as here they will be dealing with SA missiles in frequence.

From the US they will be delivering F-15/16 as well as carrier fighters, I wonder however if the F-22 will see any action? Pity the F-35 isn't in service, would've been good timing to test it's stealth technology.

'No boots on the ground' they say, but everyone knows modern warplanes are almost blind without the help of SF forces on the ground.

[scrim 1]

Nope, the F-22 won't be used, due to small malfunctions like its desire to suffocate the pilot. And no, really no, modern planes aren't blind without eyes on the ground, where do people get that nonsense from?

And nope, it won't really be that hard. No more than in Libya, and the neutralization of their AA assets was over in a jiffy, after which it was pretty much unhindered bombing. And has been established a number of times, it's a question of Tomahawk missiles regardless, so no planes.

[maturin 12]

The Syrian air defense network is miles above Libya. No comparison.

I hear it compares favorably to Iraq's as well. Only the Iraqis actually lacked the equipment, doctrine and training to actually make theirs work, so what they have in inventory is not the decisive factor.

But yeah, it'll be billions of dollars of Tomahawks hitting empty buildings and having no serious effect on the war. One of the Tomahawks will kill half a dozen civilians, at which point the regime will gather every body from every morgue in the city and dump them into the crater, then invite the press. That's what Ghadaffi did.

[ProfTournesol 956]

Interesting read about Iran here. Particularly the quote from Iran new foreign minister : “We believe that the government in Syria has made grave mistakes that have, unfortunately, paved the way for the situation in the country to be abused†.

Which mistakes ?

Despite being a strong Assad Ally, Iran still remembers Irak chemical attacks during Iran/Irak war in the eighties.

Another interesting article from Der Spiegel about Assad responsability in the chemical attack : http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/german-intelligence-contributes-to-fact-finding-on-syria-gas-attack-a-920123.html

Edited September 5, 2013 by ProfTournesol

[maturin 12]

So, my darling lilliputian chorus. Crawl out from your holes and explain Germany's interest in taking part in a massive American-led international intelligence fraud to support a symbolic military strike they don't support.

[JdB 151]

Interesting read about Iran here. Particularly the quote from Iran new foreign minister : “We believe that the government in Syria has made grave mistakes that have, unfortunately, paved the way for the situation in the country to be abused†.

Which mistakes ?

Despite being a strong Assad Ally, Iran still remembers Irak chemical attacks during Iran/Irak war in the eighties.

Another interesting article from Der Spiegel about Assad responsability in the chemical attack : http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/german-intelligence-contributes-to-fact-finding-on-syria-gas-attack-a-920123.html

Former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani of Iran has said the same about Syria's use of chemical weapons. He's an advisor to both the current president Hassan Rowhani and ayatollah Khameini so I assume his information is even more accurate than that of the foreign minister.

[ProfTournesol 956]

Former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani of Iran has said the same about Syria's use of chemical weapons. He's an advisor to both the current president Hassan Rowhani and ayatollah Khameini so I assume his information is even more accurate than that of the foreign minister.

Yes, you're right. Moreover the way Russian position has subtly evolved those last days could be related to G20 meeting of course, but it could also be related to some information about what really happened.

[scrim 1]

But yeah, it'll be billions of dollars of Tomahawks hitting empty buildings and having no serious effect on the war. One of the Tomahawks will kill half a dozen civilians, at which point the regime will gather every body from every morgue in the city and dump them into the crater, then invite the press. That's what Ghadaffi did.

Too much, mmmggh, logic for this, aargh, thread! Needs moar conspiracy nonsense, be gone you vile logic!

And of course a dead infant member of the ruling family, who'll turn out to be very much alive a few decades later in the next, presumably larger bombing campaign.

[icewindo 29]

So, my darling lilliputian chorus. Crawl out from your holes and explain Germany's interest in taking part in a massive American-led international intelligence fraud to support a symbolic military strike they don't support.

Just giving a little insight on "Der Spiegel" as a reader of the online magazine during the years.

The Spiegel has been supportive of the war/strikes right from the start, even when the US didn't mention their "evidence" yet.

When GB backed down you could literally read the disappointment in the articles. Just have a look at those head lines:

Military Action against Assad: Countdown for Obamas Operation Atonement

http://s1.directupload.net/images/130905/d6otlqkh.jpg

Penal Mission in Syria: Everyone is waiting for Obamas Orders

http://s14.directupload.net/images/130905/6ltdarpx.jpg

In the course of several years, Spiegel went from a leftist magazine to one more alike of Fox News. I wouldn't exactly call them objective.

--------------

As for the facts:

What I'm missing is hard evidence. If the evidence is as distinct, why is not presented to the general public? Why don't we atleast wait for the UNO to release their findings? Is that 3 paged "Intelligence report" all we'll see? It contained alot of "ifs" and assumptions.

And say, Assad really was the culprit. What would airstrikes accomplish? The weapons would still be in syria. There would still be a war in syria. Just not Assad vs. Rebels but a new combination:

Rebels vs. Islamists vs. Kurds.

Look at this for a small preview:

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/afp/130526/11-killed-syria-rebels-kurds-clash

We saw how well airstrikes played out for the Lybians in the end. It's not like once the regime is gone all the groups will lay down their weapons and they'll start a new shiny democratic process.

And with Assad gone there's even more chance of Al Nusra or other islamists to pick up some weapons, maybe also some nerve gas.

If there was truly an interest in securing the gas, the US would need to send in ground troops.

Edited September 5, 2013 by Icewindo

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

You need to listen to what various leaders are saying, the action is not 100% about the war in Syria, it's to:

Make a stand against someone who has broken international law and long standing treaties against the use of chemical weapons.

Other countries have WMD and will be watching the response.

Prevent further use of chemical weapons in Syria by sending a message that it will not be tolerated, message written on/delivered by bomb for emphasis.....

Hopefully destroy some/most of the weapons (probably not possible now they have had so much time to move them).

Possibly level choice structures such as Presidential Palace for punishment (it's isolated).

I'm sure the targets will be chosen carefully but expect tricks like you saw from Gadaffi - bodies removed from morgues to be placed in rubble, toys and children's clothes placed on rubble, nearby houses damaged and blown up afterwards, much Photoshop editing.

The best evidence is the large volume of chemicals required for the effect, no one else but the Assad Regime:

a. Had the quantity.

b. Had the delivery system.

c. Tried to cover it up afterwards and delayed and interfered with inspection.

There are various conspiracy theories about outside supply/ rebels being responsible but they don't add up and there is little evidence for it. If it were possible, how would the rebels manage to move and set up several tons of weapons from within Regime territory and successfully fire them with no one noticing? It's not at all likely.

Edited September 6, 2013 by Mattar_Tharkari

[walker 0]

Hi all

As I pointed out there is as much evidense that it was Anti Assad forces who miss handled and set off their own chemical munitions as there is evidense that it was Assad's forces. The chemical used is sarin which is a second world war chemical that was even successfuly created by a Japanese religeous cult never mind a third party state such as Saudi Arabia.

As to motivation I refer you to a video by Glen Beck on The Blaze, hardly a left wing anti war source, of an Anti Assad leader eating the heart and liver of an Assad soldier, which makes clear the motivation and mindset of some in the Anti Assad forces.

Let me make this clear. I am not pro Assad, he is a leader of a corrupt regime, but we have been down this road before, with Iraq and I warned at that time that incomplete stories and a history of faking up evidense of chemical weapons would spend the wests capital in moral outrage, and it has, the public just does not believe the evidense is conclusive and do not trust our own Inteligence community.

Our western Inteligence community is long overdue a serious enema to root out the pathological elements within it, so that perhaps it may once again become trustworthy.

Kind Regards walker

Edited September 6, 2013 by walker
grammar

[mrcash2009 0]

You need to listen to what various leaders are saying

No, people need to listen to what most of the world is saying from all sides otherwise they will end up saying a carbon copy of what's already known and being said on a loop.

Make a stand against someone who has broken international law and long standing treaties against the use of chemical weapons.

Depleted Uranium? International law has never been broken one jot in 13 years by anyone or back to the early world wars? Moral high ground of the moment that's all. "Make a stand" ... they tried that for 2 years, the rebels and al-Qaeda arent obviously worth the funding surely.

Prevent further use of chemical weapons in Syria by sending a message that it will not be tolerated, message written on/delivered by bomb for emphasis.....

And then open another can of worms that makes it look like Disney land. Whether that be on the ground or geo-political moves.

I'm sure the targets will be chosen carefully but expect tricks like you saw from Gadaffi - bodies removed from morgues to be placed in rubble, toys and children's clothes placed on rubble, nearby houses damaged and blown up afterwards, much Photoshop editing.

Well thats all "pre emptive" bases covered to never question anything that does go wrong, or may in fact be true, perfect, always best to get it in early. I guess people on the ground in most of what's happened in 13 years who dies with families ruined are just "fake!" if it doesn't come from favourite controlled sources. "If we do get a bomb dropped on us make sure you get in front of x media cameras chaps".

The best evidence is the large volume of chemicals required for the effect, no one else but the Assad Regime:

a. Had the quantity.

b. Had the delivery system.

c. Tried to cover it up afterwards and delayed and interfered with inspection.

But not undeniable 100 percent proof.

There are various conspiracy theories about outside supply/ rebels being responsible but they don't add up and there is little evidence for it.

Thats becuase no one will look into it any further than fringe sites so it stays in the label box as it doesn't fit the mantra.

If it were possible, how would the rebels manage to move and set up several tons of weapons from within Regime territory and successfully fire them with no one noticing? It's not at all likely.

Hardly a cold hard case, you do remember when we speak of rebels your talking US 2001 enemy number one's (you know the band of badboys war on terror was built on) mixed with other not wholly trustworthy background types and supplied by the very peoples who are going to target that place, in fact how can you trust the rebels? They are hardly saints with their background and just guns for hire effectively, but no worries, just focus on the badman of current time only.

In fact never questioning rebels possible underhanded tactics is in some ways supporting them, and that's supporting al-Qaeda ... what a wonderful paradox. And guess who flocks in with a power vacuum when this kicks off or the can of worms opens. It cant be them becuase we support them but they are partly our worst enemy = brain malfunction.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/05/us-syria-crisis-usa-rebels-idUSBRE98405L20130905

What you actually have is a play on persuasion and side taking, nothing more. Lets be honest, does taking a side help anyone or any Syrians? Did it help the Iraqis? The answer lies in history and that's only 13 prior years, unless everyone has selective memory.

Let me make this clear. I am not pro Assad,

Walker you dont have to state this, becuase having questions meaning you need to make that clear should tell you all you need to know about those even entertaining that train of thought. Its very "With us or against us" and borderline moronic to jump to that assumption by anyone.

Edited September 6, 2013 by mrcash2009
225

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

@Walker we already discussed the Aum Shinrikyo thing and how difficult it is to make and use Sarin many pages back - after many years of trying, much money spent, special lab built, they only managed to make a few liters of Sarin and only killed 8 people in an enclosed space. The affects in Damascus were much greater and being open air would have required 1 metric ton or more of Sarin. People have stated all sorts of conspiracy theories but no evidence. I would wait for the UN evidence and what it may hint about the delivery system - there are videos in this thread of a certain type of IRAM used by Assad's forces and the inspectors seemed very interested in those and took many samples from around the impact sites.

Rocket remains, UN inspector:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?135597-Syria-What-should-we-do-if-anything&p=2483988&viewfull=1#post2483988

Link to video of Assad forces launching same type of rocket, note the large size of the canister on the rocket - that's the volume you need for an effective weapon:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?135597-Syria-What-should-we-do-if-anything&p=2483746&viewfull=1#post2483746

video (I don't think this is actual footage of the attack - wrong time of day obviously):

Making sarin:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?135597-Syria-What-should-we-do-if-anything/page85

@mrCash

John Kerry: I repeat here again today that only the most willful desire to avoid reality can assert that this did not occur as described

6 different governments now say the same thing, even Iran isn't denying it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/running-transcript-senate-foreign-services-committee-hearing-on-syria/2013/09/03/35ae1048-14ca-11e3-b182-1b3bb2eb474c_story_4.html

Edited September 6, 2013 by Mattar_Tharkari