Apparent chemical weapon attacks in Syria

[Batman]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2398691/Syria-Nerve-gas-attack-near-Damascus-kills-1-300-including-women-children.html

 

is there a point where we should step in and stop this?

when I say 'we'. I mean anyone

[Window Cleaner]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2398691/Syria-Nerve-gas-attack-near-Damascus-kills-1-300-including-women-children.html

 

is there a point where we should step in and stop this?

when I say 'we'. I mean anyone

 

 

let their neighbours sort it out for once. The Arab spring has gone tits up all round mainly because it was an "artificial" event.

[Seaford Saint]

Ahh the Daily Mail that fails to mention 2 indepedent credible sources who said the opposition had possession of chemical weopons, one source worked for the UN the other was Someone in Turkey.

[Batman]

Ahh the Daily Mail that fails to mention 2 indepedent credible sources who said the opposition had possession of chemical weopons, one source worked for the UN the other was Someone in Turkey.

 

either way, when is the point that others put a stop to it?

[Window Cleaner]

either way, when is the point that others put a stop to it?

 

when they feel inclined to do so, just needs to come too close to Israel, then it will be stopped....permanently. Can't see what it is to do with us anyway. It's an inter-arab problem and they need to learn to settle their differences in their own way. I mean we could go down there, lob a few cruise missiles at them and the "others" would be in control. Then they'd start again as has happened in Egypt because it's a violent and unsettled part of the globe. Only an inter-arab solution will be of any use and as they don't have much idea on democracy as yet it's going to take a while. I'd not know if I was right but I'd think the daily death toll in Iraq can't be far off that of Syria.

Edited 21 August, 2013 by Window Cleaner

[pap]

Ahh the Daily Mail that fails to mention 2 indepedent credible sources who said the opposition had possession of chemical weopons, one source worked for the UN the other was Someone in Turkey.

 

As always, there's an agenda going on here. The Arab spring is not an accident, neither is the trouble in Syria. Many sensible people have pulled back, taken a look at the wider area, considered Netanyahu's trip to the UN so he could explain to everyone what a bomb was (with a helpful diagram) and demanding so-called "red lines" from the US on a possible invasion of Iran. That's really the endgame. Subjugate Iran, and you have no-one left to oppose Western influence in the region, especially if Syria is effectively destroyed first.

 

Every report I've heard today starts with the point of truth that Assad's forces are responsible. They certainly deny it, and the only evidence is the grave accounts of the victims lying in the streets. They assert that the claims have been fabricated to deflect attention from the huge losses the opposition has suffered. I have no idea if that's true, but chemical weapons are a "red line" that have been employed before. If those independent sources are as credible as you suggest, then its entirely possible this was an attack that was orchestrated by opposition forces with the express intent of associating the outrage of chemical weapons with the Assad regime.

Edited 21 August, 2013 by pap

[Seaford Saint]

either way, when is the point that others put a stop to it?

 

when they feel inclined to do so, just needs to come too close to Israel, then it will be stopped....permanently. Can't see what it is to do with us anyway. It's an inter-arab problem and they need to learn to settle their differences in their own way.

 

 

We have violence in Egypt, we have sectarian violence in Iraq after our efforts there. Then there is Afghanistan.....after the deaths of UK and US soldiers amongst others it appears we want to engage with the Taliban.

 

Then we have Israel and Palestine. I understand things aint normal in Libya either?

 

And you suggest we go into Syria?

 

I would be very interested in your views on our use of depleted uranium, the Israeli use of white Phosphorus on civilians....hypocracy is the word that comes to mind...not sure of the spelling.

[Seaford Saint]

either way, when is the point that others put a stop to it?

 

when they feel inclined to do so, just needs to come too close to Israel, then it will be stopped....permanently. Can't see what it is to do with us anyway. It's an inter-arab problem and they need to learn to settle their differences in their own way.

 

 

We have violence in Egypt, we have sectarian violence in Iraq after our efforts there. Then there is Afghanistan.....after the deaths of UK and US soldiers amongst others it appears we want to engage with the Taliban.

 

Then we have Israel and Palestine. I understand things aint normal in Libya either?

 

And you suggest we go into Syria?

 

I would be very interested in your views on our use of depleted uranium, the Israeli use of white Phosphorus on civilians....hypocracy is the word that comes to mind...not sure of the spelling.

[Window Cleaner]

We have violence in Egypt, we have sectarian violence in Iraq after our efforts there. Then there is Afghanistan.....after the deaths of UK and US soldiers amongst others it appears we want to engage with the Taliban.

 

Then we have Israel and Palestine. I understand things aint normal in Libya either?

 

And you suggest we go into Syria?

 

I would be very interested in your views on our use of depleted uranium, the Israeli use of white Phosphorus on civilians....hypocracy is the word that comes to mind...not sure of the spelling.

 

 

I certainly am not, I"m saying the arab community has to sort out it's own problems.Then again as they're divided into numerous sub types of religion it won't happen any time soon.

[pap]

I certainly am not, I"m saying the arab community has to sort out it's own problems.Then again as they're divided into numerous sub types of religion it won't happen any time soon.

 

There is no such thing as the Arab community's "own problems". There can't be with the amount of meddling we've done in the region. The post 2001 landscape has changed immeasurably in terms of stability for countries in the region, but we were sticking our noses in long, long before that.

 

The creation of the state of Israel would be one example, the 1953 Iranian coup which replaced the oil-nationalisin' Mosaddegh with the Western-corporate-friendly Shah, egging Saddam on to start the Iran-Iraq War, arming Mujaheddin through our ISI counterparts in Pakistan, bombing Libya with F1-11s, getting involved in Kuwait (interestingly - an entirely false story about Iraqi's killing babies in incubators was the emotional trigger there), the invasion of Afghanistan, the illegal invasion of Iraq and unflagging support for Israel, an actual rogue state that is effectively permitted to ignore UN resolutions while merrily sh!tting on its own doorstep.

 

Apart from all that, yep, Arab problems. Sort it out, eh?

Edited 21 August, 2013 by pap

[View From The Top]

It's a cluster***** of mammoth proportions but as someone said to me, as long as Sunni have somewhere to kill Sh'ia they ain't looking to kill us.

[dubai_phil]

It's a cluster***** of mammoth proportions but as someone said to me, as long as Sunni have somewhere to kill Sh'ia they ain't looking to kill us.

 

Totally. The West has to stay totally away from Syria. ll that would happen is to create even MORE places for raving nutters to gain combat experience before heading to mainland Europe.

 

Oh and in war ravaged Syria, The internet still works, mobile network still works, there are no power outages and the shops are still full. In Central Damascus. Inflation is a b1tch thanks to the Dollar exchange rate which can fluctuate from 100 to 500 pounds = dollar on a daily basis

The freedom fighters have ensured that the basic law abiding majority of Syrians have been shafted in the cause of splintering the country into a hundred factions who are now fighting each other in many places

[dubai_phil]

And anyway we go charging into Syria who's gonna be left to help the 90 million people in Egypt when THAT goes up in smoke?

 

Sometimes Democracy is not the answer. It just elects more imbeciles to ru(i)n a country (bit like the EU really)

[aintforever]

It's a cluster***** of mammoth proportions but as someone said to me, as long as Sunni have somewhere to kill Sh'ia they ain't looking to kill us.

 

Was it an Israeli?

 

Without wanting to sound like Pap, it's a bit suspicious that every country surrounding that place you have complete chaos and muslims killing each other.

 

As long as Syria is backed by Russia there is not a thing we can do about it. The problem is after the way we f*cked up Iraq you can't blame Russia for opposing the West's intervention. You get the impression they are staying behind Syria just to prove a point.

Edited 21 August, 2013 by aintforever

[Verbal]

Ahh the Daily Mail that fails to mention 2 indepedent credible sources who said the opposition had possession of chemical weopons, one source worked for the UN the other was Someone in Turkey.

 

Who are these "independent credible sources" exactly? And what is their evidence that the opposition have the necessary infrastructure and possession of sarin or other toxic gas capable of being delivered in such a way? Links please.

 

If the Assad regime has nothing to hide, they will let the UN inspectors in immediately. It's only a 30-minute drive from their base in Damascus to the suburbs where the attacks took place.

 

If the inspectors are obstructed, as they usually are, then it's reasonable to assume that the regime committed this appalling act. In any case, evidence is already being collected, so the truth will eventually come out.

[Viking Warrior]

Verbal Im with you on this . There is no concrete evidence to say who is using these weapons . What is evident is someone is using them . Not totally convinced its sarin . Could be anything from sarin soman tabun , Cycloserine insecticides or some other organophosphate . Atropine and pralidoxime mesealates and diazepam ( used as anti convulsant ) may help if administered quicky enough but not guaranteed . Whether its a v type agent or g type agent . They should not be used

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Utterly sickening scenes.

[Seaford Saint]

either way, when is the point that others put a stop to it?

 

Who are these "independent credible sources" exactly? And what is their evidence that the opposition have the necessary infrastructure and possession of sarin or other toxic gas capable of being delivered in such a way? Links please.

 

If the Assad regime has nothing to hide, they will let the UN inspectors in immediately. It's only a 30-minute drive from their base in Damascus to the suburbs where the attacks took place.

 

If the inspectors are obstructed, as they usually are, then it's reasonable to assume that the regime committed this appalling act. In any case, evidence is already being collected, so the truth will eventually come out.

 

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=%20sarin%20syria%20may%202013&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CDoQtwIwBQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Frt.com%2Fnews%2Fsarin-gas-turkey-al-nusra-021%2F&ei=3q8VUsuGIsru0gXI-4CADQ&usg=AFQjCNE_fSq8TM09CcdOce4fRau3AKs7rQ&sig2=Iyf6CPayJRlDW4kWldVUgA&bvm=bv.51156542,d.d2k

 

http://touch.govexec.com/govexec/#!/entry/un-sources-say-syrian-rebels-not-assad-used-sarin-gas,5187c28694f4be71694d7dc9

Edited 22 August, 2013 by Seaford Saint

[pap]

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=%20sarin%20syria%20may%202013&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CDoQtwIwBQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Frt.com%2Fnews%2Fsarin-gas-turkey-al-nusra-021%2F&ei=3q8VUsuGIsru0gXI-4CADQ&usg=AFQjCNE_fSq8TM09CcdOce4fRau3AKs7rQ&sig2=Iyf6CPayJRlDW4kWldVUgA&bvm=bv.51156542,d.d2k

 

 

Interesting. Cheers for this.

[dubai_phil]

Are the Russians being Israel's best friend here?

 

The Arab Spring has so far been shown to be on the verge of plunging The Levant into the dark ages. Democracy has strengthened the Legitimacy of what were once outlawed Islamic Militants - in Egypt, around 20% of the Rural Population supported the Islamic Brotherhood and yet with multi-million dollar backing from Qatar they went from Terrorist Organisation to a fully structured & funded Political Party in a matter of months. That would have been fine IF they were competent in running a nation. They weren't.

Egypt now risks being split, that poses grave issues for you in Europe from the Trade Links perspective and Israel from a security perspective.

 

Equally in Syria, the original "Popular Uprising" has been totally hijacked by Extremists and external influences. Again, what was a Secular Society is being destroyed and pockets of nutters have erupted to fragment the original opposition. Instead of a "Civil War" the country now risks being mired into Ethnic Conflict & conclaves for years to come. Nobody will find a solution Politically while the likes of Al Qaeda are there.

The attacks on Government Military Sites may well have allowed Chemical Weapons to fall into the hands of "The Rebels", as the link implies above.

 

But. In the Border lands with Lebanon, some of the rebels greatest successes have come from being bolstered by troops from Hezbollah.

 

Now, accuse Bashar of many things, BUT his Chemical Weapons had stayed under lock and key.

 

Hezbollah get their hands on Sarin? In southern Lebanon? In Missile Range of Israel?

 

The US is run by Israel in terms of ME Foreign Policy. It all seemed so simple to them 2 years ago before 100's of thousands of innocent people were killed.

 

Now it is an almighty snafu and it will get worse.

 

Qatar is backing the Islamists in Egypt. UAE & Saudi are backing the "Majority Anti-Morsi"

 

THAT is a growing problem (and not just for the World Cup) The Oil Producing states taking sides?

 

Better speed up your Fracking Projects

 

It IS a Clusterf\/ck of monumental proportions. The Russians MAY have been right to TRY and hold Syria together

[Badger]

either way, when is the point that others put a stop to it?

 

Trouble is though, if we should learn one thing from history of getting involved, is that it is all too easy to send troops in with the intention of being saviours but difficult if not impossible to then extract yourself from the problem, not to mention loss of our own troops in the process ( Iraq, Afghanistan in recent times, and Northern Ireland closer to home).

 

I think GB has done its share of "policing" the world's hotspots. Keep well away from this mess.

 

It's a cluster***** of mammoth proportions but as someone said to me, as long as Sunni have somewhere to kill Sh'ia they ain't looking to kill us.

 

If we put our troops in that might unify them for a while... both attacking the forces sent to protect them.

[JackFrost]

either way, when is the point that others put a stop to it?

 

There are innocent women and children being blown up in Iraq on an almost daily basis, should someone invade and put a stop to that? . . .

 

The Western world has this delusion that by invading a country and removing a dictator it means its people are 'liberated' and the people will live happily ever after just before the sun goes down and the ending credits roll to the patriotic music. In reality when a dictator is removed or is in danger of being removed, people want different things. It CAUSES conflict and violence.

 

As others have stated Syria is a complete cluster**** of problems and whilst it is genuinely heartbreaking to see the innocent civilians suffering and being killed we or others cannot just simply invade and "stop it". It's a virtual impossibility. Even if we did invade the suffering and the death would continue and our presence would actually fuel the already raging fire.

 

There are times when outside intervention/military action has been the right option and should have happened like with Srebrenica, Rwanda and the Khmer Rouge etc (Apparently the Vietnamese army only discovered the notorious Tuol Sleng prison in 1979 by chance when they smelt the rotting corpses 5 miles away) but Syria has WAY too many complications, both militarily and sadly commercially.

[pap]

There are innocent women and children being blown up in Iraq on an almost daily basis, should someone invade and put a stop to that? . . .

 

The Western world has this delusion that by invading a country and removing a dictator it means its people are 'liberated' and the people will live happily ever after just before the sun goes down and the ending credits roll to the patriotic music. In reality when a dictator is removed or is in danger of being removed, people want different things. It CAUSES conflict and violence.

 

As others have stated Syria is a complete cluster**** of problems and whilst it is genuinely heartbreaking to see the innocent civilians suffering and being killed we or others cannot just simply invade and "stop it". It's a virtual impossibility. Even if we did invade the suffering and the death would continue and our presence would actually fuel the already raging fire.

 

There are times when outside intervention/military action has been the right option and should have happened like with Srebrenica, Rwanda and the Khmer Rouge etc (Apparently the Vietnamese army only discovered the notorious Tuol Sleng prison in 1979 by chance when they smelt the rotting corpses 5 miles away) but Syria has WAY too many complications, both militarily and sadly commercially.

 

And yet all the signs are that the US will be going in.

 

Red lines. Escalations. Essentially what has been on rolling news.

 

Fair play to the Beeb though. Was watching BBC News 24 a while ago; their anchor asked a very good question. Why would Assad use chemical weapons when he knows he has UN weapon inspectors on the ground?

[Verbal]

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=%20sarin%20syria%20may%202013&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CDoQtwIwBQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Frt.com%2Fnews%2Fsarin-gas-turkey-al-nusra-021%2F&ei=3q8VUsuGIsru0gXI-4CADQ&usg=AFQjCNE_fSq8TM09CcdOce4fRau3AKs7rQ&sig2=Iyf6CPayJRlDW4kWldVUgA&bvm=bv.51156542,d.d2k

 

http://touch.govexec.com/govexec/#!/entry/un-sources-say-syrian-rebels-not-assad-used-sarin-gas,5187c28694f4be71694d7dc9

 

I think you need to be very circumspect with these sources.

 

The first one is actually Russia Today (RT), a news organization funded by the Putin’s Russian foreign service.

 

For such a direct claim – of “finding sarin gas in the homes of Syrian Islamists – it quotes no sources in Turkey whatsoever. The only direct quote comes – hardly surprisingly – from the Russian foreign ministry, who declare themselves “concerned” about media reports they themselves have paid for.

 

They do quote the American Marxist historian Gerard Horne to support their case – although he, of course, has no more direct knowledge of what happened than you or I.

 

This is the report that empty-headed conspiracy theorists will call “interesting”. Worse than those irrelevances, though, RT’s stuff is frequently picked up by the American far-right, who have long taken the position that the Assad regime should be preserved at all costs. These include the “anti-Zionist” Lyndon LaRouche – and just to get a measure of the man, he gave a speech last week in which claims that 9/11 was an “Anglo-Saudi” plot, and among the true authors of the attack was the Queen.

 

So the RT report is hardly, by any definition, an “independent credible source”, and is all part of the “noise” from vested interests that invariably surround attacks like this.

 

The other source for the attack being the responsibility of the rebels is obviously much more credible. Carla Del Ponte is a member of a UN commission of inquiry, and she has indeed stated that she has found “suspicions, but not incontrovertible proof” of a sarin attack by rebel (presumably AQ) forces.

 

However, she remains in a minority, and was, in any case, referring to a much smaller gas attack in May. She has made no comment at all yet about the multiple-rocket attack into rebel-held areas on the outskirts of Damascus that occurred this week.

 

Ultimately, you have to be very careful with all this. The alternative is to jump with both bozo feet and declare, as DP, does, that:

 

“Now, accuse Bashar of many things, BUT his Chemical Weapons had stayed under lock and key.”

 

He has no way of knowing that – nor do any of us. It’s a laughable claim.

 

It may indeed turn out that the rebels, or some faction of them, were able to commandeer the rockets and the toxic gas canisters and then launch them at their own people in order to discredit the regime. But in the clamour to blame anyone but the Assad regime, don’t let it out of your sight that this regime has a long, long history of brutal massacres and bloody revenge. (I’m sorry to say I’ve inadvertently stood on top of one of the mass graves dug for his father’s victims in Hama in 1982).

 

Provided the UN inspectors are allowed into the affected areas quickly to collect evidence, the truth will come out, just as it did at Halabja. If there is a delay of more than a few days, the toxins dissipate and evidence becomes harder to find.

 

We’ll see…

[pap]

I think you need to be very circumspect with these sources.

 

The first one is actually Russia Today (RT), a news organization funded by the Putin’s Russian foreign service.

 

And jolly glad we are to have it.

 

Of course, any stories which come from the Western media are entirely truthful. The state-run BBC isn't at all compromised and is completely independent Same for all those rolling news channels that are owned by corporate interests, presumably.

 

I feel it's important to have a range of propaganda to choose from, don't you?

 

For such a direct claim – of “finding sarin gas in the homes of Syrian Islamists – it quotes no sources in Turkey whatsoever. The only direct quote comes – hardly surprisingly – from the Russian foreign ministry, who declare themselves “concerned” about media reports they themselves have paid for.

 

They do quote the American Marxist historian Gerard Horne to support their case – although he, of course, has no more direct knowledge of what happened than you or I.

 

This is the report that empty-headed conspiracy theorists will call “interesting”.

 

Slight on me noted

 

Worse than those irrelevances, though, RT’s stuff is frequently picked up by the American far-right, who have long taken the position that the Assad regime should be preserved at all costs. These include the “anti-Zionist” Lyndon LaRouche – and just to get a measure of the man, he gave a speech last week in which claims that 9/11 was an “Anglo-Saudi” plot, and among the true authors of the attack was the Queen.

 

Here's your anti-semitism and references to people with far right tendencies.

 

So the RT report is hardly, by any definition, an “independent credible source”, and is all part of the “noise” from vested interests that invariably surround attacks like this.

 

The other source for the attack being the responsibility of the rebels is obviously much more credible. Carla Del Ponte is a member of a UN commission of inquiry, and she has indeed stated that she has found “suspicions, but not incontrovertible proof” of a sarin attack by rebel (presumably AQ) forces.

 

However, she remains in a minority, and was, in any case, referring to a much smaller gas attack in May. She has made no comment at all yet about the multiple-rocket attack into rebel-held areas on the outskirts of Damascus that occurred this week.

 

She was the victim of a couple of hit pieces, just as she was when she suggested she might prosecute NATO over war crimes in former Yugoslavia.

 

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/05/06/the_clarifying_of_the_uns_carla_del_ponte

 

Oddly enough, the US state department backs up DP's claims that Assad's weapons remain securely in his hands.

 

A piece on the hit-piece. Good this, isn't it?

 

http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2013/05/07/carla-del-pontes-faux-pas/

 

Ultimately, you have to be very careful with all this. The alternative is to jump with both bozo feet and declare, as DP, does, that:

 

“Now, accuse Bashar of many things, BUT his Chemical Weapons had stayed under lock and key.”

 

He has no way of knowing that – nor do any of us. It’s a laughable claim.

 

Perpetual apologist for Israel takes a swing at DP, who actually lives in the region.

 

Classic.

 

Anyone else you'd like to call a bozo? The US state department that says the same things as DP?

 

 

 

 

It may indeed turn out that the rebels, or some faction of them, were able to commandeer the rockets and the toxic gas canisters and then launch them at their own people in order to discredit the regime. But in the clamour to blame anyone but the Assad regime, don’t let it out of your sight that this regime has a long, long history of brutal massacres and bloody revenge. (I’m sorry to say I’ve inadvertently stood on top of one of the mass graves dug for his father’s victims in Hama in 1982).

 

Provided the UN inspectors are allowed into the affected areas quickly to collect evidence, the truth will come out, just as it did at Halabja. If there is a delay of more than a few days, the toxins dissipate and evidence becomes harder to find.

 

We’ll see…

 

Please? The clamour to blame anyone but Assad? Have you watched the news today?

 

I just hope you get paid for writing this nonsense. I certainly wish I got paid for reading it.

[derry]

The UN inspectors are already staying 15 mins drive from the area. The Assad regime would have nothing to gain by an attack such as this at this point. The opposition who could be losing momentum on the other hand would have everything to gain regarding international intervention by staging an attack and pinning it on the government.

[pap]

The UN inspectors are already staying 15 mins drive from the area. The Assad regime would have nothing to gain by an attack such as this at this point. The opposition who could be losing momentum on the other hand would have everything to gain regarding international intervention by staging an attack and pinning it on the government.

 

Precisely. Assad's forces have been in the ascendancy for some time. It makes zero sense for him to willingly bring down further international condemnation by using these weapons, particularly as it has been made clear that this is a so-called "red line", and because he doesn't need to. What is in it for the Assad regime, who probably have self-preservation at the forefront of their minds? Nowt.

[dubai_phil]

I

 

Ultimately, you have to be very careful with all this. The alternative is to jump with both bozo feet and declare, as DP, does, that:

 

“Now, accuse Bashar of many things, BUT his Chemical Weapons had stayed under lock and key.”

 

He has no way of knowing that – nor do any of us. It’s a laughable claim.

 

…

 

No, my comment was accurate.

I was comparing Bashar to Sadam & Iran who both used Chemical Weapons during their war.

 

There is NO evidence or allegations anywhere that PRIOR to the disintegration of Syria that Bashar had EVER used Chemical Weapons. (Although there is possible allegations that his father had used them in the Hama massacre in 1982)

 

{Interestingly, THAT uprising - (reports suggest as many as 40,000 could have died) was started by?

 

The Muslim Brotherhood.

 

While not in ANYWAY condoning the Ba'ath Party & it's principles, this anti-Nationalist divide had been causing problems since 1940 and the Assads had at least kept a lid on it.

Many of the complaints about the Secret Police and Persecution of normal citizens in the Country came from the Sunni's who IN GENERAL supported the aims of the Brotherhood to take Syria to a non-nationalistic Muslim State (ie what they TRIED to do to Egypt)

The only ever references to them previously came with regard to them being his only deterrent against a possible Nuclear Attack by Israel. }

 

Nobody has a clue who has used the weapons both in May or this week.

 

You don't need to be a Pap level conspiracy theorist to see how BOTH sides could manouver the use to force an issue.

 

As for the reports from Turkey, Sky News have run some excellent reports of the silent war waging in the Kurdistan region of Syria and the hundreds of thousands of Kurds who crossed the new Pontoon Bridge this week into Iraq to escape it and who have told pretty brutal tales of what had happened to them.

[pap]

You don't need to be a Pap level conspiracy theorist to see how BOTH sides could manouver the use to force an issue.

 

That's where we differ. I don't see what is in it for Assad. Only one side benefits from this.

[dubai_phil]

That's where we differ. I don't see what is in it for Assad. Only one side benefits from this.

 

Assad benefits from it IF he uses the weapons BUT stage manages it so that it appears the Rebels did it.

 

That one ain't rocket science

 

But that is a far more high risk strategy.

 

Damascus Saint returned to Dubai this week having spent Ramadan & Eid back in Damascus. His close family are now out and living here and safe (for which I give thanks everyday that he actually listened to me and got them Visas while he could)

The fact is that apart from the Roadblocks & Snipers on Buildings every 200 metres, life in GENERAL for the Population of Damascus IS business as usual. To the general Population there they feel safer than they would IF they were in Cairo at the moment. The feeling was that the rebels have fragmented and that there is now little chance of an outright "Libya Style" win.

One internal Political Issue that MAY have some bearing is that elections were due at the end of this year - (Yes, they HAVE had elections in Syria for many years, guess BBC never mention that and Yes, nobody got on the Electoral Candidate Roll unless they were saying the right things) - anyway, Assad announced that he would be standing and expected to continue in charge.

That caused a slight tightening of sphincters as many felt that could have been a way for him to migrate power without complete turmoil.

Obviously the status in Damascus is a complete difference from beautiful Alleppo where another buddy of mine lived in his Cellar for 4 months until he and his mates could get out to a safe small village. He's safe now, living and working in Turkey, I do take the p1ss by saying "Told You So" every time we talk, he didn't believe it would happen so he stayed when I could have got him out.

[Verbal]

The UN inspectors are already staying 15 mins drive from the area. The Assad regime would have nothing to gain by an attack such as this at this point. The opposition who could be losing momentum on the other hand would have everything to gain regarding international intervention by staging an attack and pinning it on the government.

 

This is what’s known as a teleological fallacy.

 

You’re abstractly weighing up the “interests" of either antagonists and suggesting that, therefore, the one with the supposed interest in committing the atrocity is more likely to be guilty.

 

Real events – especially those in war – don’t work like that. There's the small matter of historical contingency (ie things not fitting our neat little deductive, single-variable patterns).

 

First of all, although the regime is rightly characterised as a dictatorship, it is a highly devolved one, where decisions by a central authority can be overturned by zealous local officials with impunity. It was not the decision by the interior ministry, for example, to murder children in Dera’a – the incident that sparked the revolt in Syria. Those who pulled the trigger were under local command, nonetheless “defending” the central regime.

 

You’re also not factoring in the actual balance of forces around Damascus, which may determine how desperate the central regime becomes.

 

The regime has no fear of the UN inspectors being a short drive away from the sites of the gas and missile attack so long as it denies them permission to visit and collect evidence in a timely way. The inspectors can go nowhere without the regime’s say-so.

 

Also, no one knows the status of the chemical weapons held by the regime. DP’s claim that they’re all “under lock and key” suggests either that it MUST be the regime that committed the atrocity, or that the rebels are being supplied chemical weapons by outsiders, presumably the West. (I notice DP has now drastically modified his claim to there being “no evidence or allegations that PRIOR to the disintegration of Syria had ever used chemical weapons.” There is, I repeat, no way of knowing whether or not those weapons remain unused and “under lock and key”.)

 

Whichever you think is more likely, a most urgent issue is that the UN inspectors be granted immediate access to the sites of the attack. Then the truth will have a chance of coming out amid the blizzards of misinformation perpetrated by Assad apologists, Russian propagandists, right-wing zealots and conspiracy-dimwits who've already declared the saintly Assad innocent.

 

But an even bigger priority is surely to treat the badly injured survivors. The regime – of course – continues to prevent the Red Crescent to enter the neighbourhoods to do just this. This in itself is an outrage.

 

Ultimately, to address Brett’s original question, I personally advocate the kind of intervention in Syria that would make the most difference – the demand for the unfettered movement of medics and medicines to the victims of war. The regime has throughout the revolt denied this to the extent of murdering medics whenever and wherever it can find them.

[pap]

Assad benefits from it IF he uses the weapons BUT stage manages it so that it appears the Rebels did it.

 

That one ain't rocket science

 

But that is a far more high risk strategy.

 

I like this, but if you're winning anyway, doesn't make a great deal of sense,

[pap]

This is what’s known as a teleological fallacy.

 

You’re abstractly weighing up the “interests" of either antagonists and suggesting that, therefore, the one with the supposed interest in committing the atrocity is more likely to be guilty.

 

a.k.a. "motive", traditionally quite important in investigations.

[aintforever]

I like this, but if you're winning anyway, doesn't make a great deal of sense,

 

He knows no one is going to intervene so probably just wants to finish them off. You cant say it doesn't make sense unless you know what's going on on the ground.

[Window Cleaner]

I like this, but if you're winning anyway, doesn't make a great deal of sense,

 

but if you're losing and are desperate to get outside help...there that makes some sort of sense.

[View From The Top]

The fact that the Red Crescent are still not able to get into help is in itself a crime against the people of Syria.

[pap]

but if you're losing and are desperate to get outside help...there that makes some sort of sense.

 

Completely agree, which is why I place more stock in the rebels having more to gain.

[derry]

Completely agree, which is why I place more stock in the rebels having more to gain.

 

It's not as if Islamic militants value non combatant lives, 9/11, 7/7 etc.

[pap]

Daily Mail ran a story back in January that might have some bearing on this. Since deleted from their site, but the Wayback machine preserves

 

http://web.archive.org/web/20130129213824/http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2270219/U-S-planned-launch-chemical-weapon-attack-Syria-blame-Assad.html

http://www.globalresearch.ca/deleted-daily-mail-online-article-us-backed-plan-for-chemical-weapon-attack-in-syria-to-be-blamed-on-assad/5339178

 

Contains text of email:-

 

http://boards.dailymail.co.uk/news-board-moderated/10253799-syrian-wmd-false-flag-false-flags-way-life-now.html

[Seaford Saint]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-08-22/american-israeli-and-jordanian-troops-and-cia-agents-have-entered-syria-le-figaro-re

 

Not sure I have cut and paste the whole link but the article is worth seeking out.

[pap]

Good piece in the Guardian comment is free section, which raises all the same questions about why it makes no sense for Assad to launch these attacks. Well worth a read.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/22/assad-toxic-gas-claims-syria

[Verbal]

From today's Guardian:

 

There is next to no doubt that chemical weapons were used in Ghouta in eastern Damascus, and that, unlike previous alleged attacks, they produced mass casualties. Whether the death toll is in the hundreds or over a thousand, as the rebels claim, this is one of the most significant chemical weapons attacks since Saddam Hussein's on the Kurds in Halabja 25 years ago, and an unmistakable challenge to the vow Barack Obama made a year ago that, if proved, the use of chemical or biological weapons would "change my calculus".

 

Nor is there much doubt about who committed the atrocity. The Syrian government acknowledged it had launched a major offensive in the area and they are the only combatant with the capability to use chemical weapons on this scale. Western intelligence officials have calculated it would need an invasion force of 60,000 troops to secure the 12 chemical weapons depots at Bashar al-Assad's disposal. A lot of sarin, if indeed that was the agent used, is needed to kill that number of people. The sarin gas attack on the Tokyo subway killed 13 people.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/22/syria-chemical-weapons

 

Sending in the UN inspectors is urgent - but so is changing their terms of reference, which are limited in two ways as a consequence of gaining Russian acquiescence:

 

1. The inspectors at the moment cane only consider "historic" attacks, and have only this week been given permission to investigate a chemical attack that took place in MARCH; and

 

2. incredibly, they are not permitted to adjudicate on who is responsible.

 

Even with that limited brief, the inspectors have still, as of today, not been allowed into the affected areas. And still the Red Crescent ambulances and medical supplies are held up...

 

This is the sixth reported chemical attack in Syria - all in rebel-held areas - this year alone. After years of denial, the Syrian government finally admitted in had stocks of chemical weapons in July 2012.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

Is it feasible that revolutionary forces were responsible for the suspected WMD attack on the Ghouta area of Damascus last Wednesday in a (deeply cynical) attempt to manipulate the outside world into intervening in this conflict? Well maybe I suppose. Is there any apparent hard evidence to support that conclusion? I have yet to see any.

 

What we can say with a degree of confidence is that the Assad regime is currently refusing to allow UN monitoring teams access to the scene of the crime - this is surely suggestive. There is also video evidence* of military helicopters dropping unidentified smoke/gas emitting canister like objects on the town of Saraqeb on the 29th of April this year - subsequently victims were hospitalized with symptoms that look to me consistent with exposure to a Mustard Gas attack. As the rebels don't have a air force ... well lets just say that too looks pretty suggestive does it not?

 

It is a matter of record that the Syrian government has admitted it does indeed posses a chemical capability. It is also beyond all doubt that this government is quite prepared to attack its own people with conventional explosive based munitions, inflicting mass casualties on both rebel fighters and innocent civilians alike. So who on here could really claim the Syrian government is so very scrupulous and moral a organization that it would not be prepared to go further in a attempt to cling onto power?

 

So the Assad regime would therefore appear to possess the means, the motive, and the opportunity to commit this warcrime then. In a court of law those elements very often lead to a guilty verdict do they not?

 

*

[dubai_phil]

All very true CEC.

 

Problem is, even IF he is guilty, what is anyone going to do about it? The ONLY option is (like Libya) Airstrikes.

 

The PROBLEM is that the Rebel Forces are split into Somali War Lord type groups now and in some areas are fighting themselves or innocent civilians.

 

The Russians & Chinese won't let a vote through in the Security Council, so while Hague is right to milk the "This is Dreadful" line, there is sod all that The West could do as America is not about to risk having China & Russia step up help to Assad to knock American planes out of the sky.

 

The only regimes with the appetite to go in at the moment are the UK & France.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

You raise a perfectly fair point Phil, what indeed do we do about this problem? There don't appear to be any good options even on the table at the moment. So pity the poor suffering people of Syria then, because it looks like they are to be left to their fate just like the men and boys of Srebrenica were back in 1995.

 

The utterly deadlocked (and thus impotent UN) is starting to resemble the equally useless League of Nations I'm sorry to say.

[pap]

Is it feasible that revolutionary forces were responsible for the suspected WMD attack on the Ghouta area of Damascus last Wednesday in a (deeply cynical) attempt to manipulate the outside world into intervening in this conflict? Well maybe I suppose. Is there any apparent hard evidence to support that conclusion? I have yet to see any.

 

What we can say with a degree of confidence is that the Assad regime is currently refusing to allow UN monitoring teams access to the scene of the crime - this is surely suggestive. There is also video evidence* of military helicopters dropping unidentified smoke/gas emitting canister like objects on the town of Saraqeb on the 29th of April this year - subsequently victims were hospitalized with symptoms that look to me consistent with exposure to a Mustard Gas attack. As the rebels don't have a air force ... well lets just say that too looks pretty suggestive does it not?

 

It is a matter of record that the Syrian government has admitted it does indeed posses a chemical capability. It is also beyond all doubt that this government is quite prepared to attack its own people with conventional explosive based munitions, inflicting mass casualties on both rebel fighters and innocent civilians alike. So who on here could really claim the Syrian government is so very scrupulous and moral a organization that it would not be prepared to go further in a attempt to cling onto power?

 

So the Assad regime would therefore appear to possess the means, the motive, and the opportunity to commit this warcrime then. In a court of law those elements very often lead to a guilty verdict do they not?

 

*

 

I do wonder precisely what degree of certainty we can place on Assad refusing access. The area in question is under rebel control, is it not? That being the case, can the regime guarantee safety? Also, even if the inspectors do discover evidence of chemical weapons, how likely are they to be able ascribe guilt as to who deployed them? The simplest and easiest answer is the one we're getting now. The agent used is one that Assad is known to have. That's it. There is no hard evidence to support the notion that the Assad regime was responsible either, and common sense, inasmuch as any of us can put ourselves in the shoes of an autocrat, suggests that this is the one cause of action that would bring about international intervention, and ultimately the end of the regime.

 

If this attack was conducted by the Assad regime, it's suicidal quality is matched only by its gratuitousness. I ask you, in all seriousness, what the regime has to gain from this outrage. This is where we differ most. I don't see the motive. In fact, this is the last thing the regime needs.

 

You're a student of history, Charlie. You'll be aware that most conflicts that involve democracies begin with some kind of outrage that inflames public opinion. Sarajevo, Gleiwitz, Pearl Harbor, Tomkin, false accounts of babies being turfed out of incubators by Iraqi soldiers prior to Desert Storm and 9/11.

 

I don't see a great deal of public appetite for further conflict in the Middle East. The problem is that the plan is far from complete. I've said before that Iran is the endgame. Syria is not only in the way; it also happens to be Iran's biggest ally in the region. In many ways, I'm reminded of the island hopping Pacific Campaign of the Second World War. Though we don't have troops on the ground in this instance, the strategy, to take down a country by taking out the logistical and strategic stepping stones along the way, seems very similar. Keep an eye on that "red line" term. I suspect we'll be hearing it in the next few years, only with a nuclear qualifier.

[dubai_phil]

Nice to see that the UN Inspectors are slumming it at The Four Seasons Hotel in Damascus.

 

Interesting with the embargo that both it, Le Meridien & The Sheraton are still open & serving their usual full range of International Beverages including draft beers

 

#whatsanctions

 

And Pap, again what I Worry about for Syria is the Exit Strategy. The West go in gung ho, Wootton Bassett gets on the news for a while (not these days of course) and then you get all the Pull Out Politics.

 

Meanwhile the ONLY intention is get rid of one bloke and who gives a sh1t who comes in next as long as it wasn't the last bad guy *****il they work out the new guy is a bad guy aka Morsi)

 

Outside of Damascus most of Syria is a wasteland, it will take Billions upon Billions to simply restore basic services let alone rebuild the housing stock.

 

Go in blow up some more and then leave the new guy surrounded by rubble and say "We gave you Democracy get on with it"

 

It's bullsh1t $100 million of bombs dropped & Jet Fuel spent when the country really needs that cash to rebuild AFTER Bashar goes.

 

Stop the Rhetoric and push the Russians into forcing through a proper negotiated exit strategy & handover of Power, even IF it takes 3 or 5 years, it would likely be more stable than Egypt & Libya faster. Leave the Free Syrian Army & the main Army in a condition where they are CAPABLE of kicking out the loonies.

 

Failing that, then do what the West should have done decades ago. Eradicate the real SOURCE of the problem.

 

Nuke Saudi.

 

"Big Oil" won't allow that of course.

 

Like I said before Get Fracking everyone.

 

Oh and FFS The Iranians may be mad as a box of Frogs but "It's BEHIND you" as you all shout at Pantomimes

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

Pap, you may be surprised to see that I actually agree with you to a degree - history does indeed show that wars are very often started on some manufactured pretext that masks the true motivations behind the conflict. For instance falsified Nazi accounts of Polish troops attacking their border during August 1939 that were in fact prisioners dressed up in Polish Army uniforms. Pearl Harbor on the other hand was a genuine assault on democracy - although even here there are (unproven) claims that there may be more to the matter than is at first apparent. Be that as it may, we need not look back too far into history to remember the sorry tale of the WMD claims that played such a important part in justifying the US/UK invasion of Iraq. A huge lie (or error of judgement if we are to be charitable) that must obviously never be forgotten.

 

In this specific case however I believe the evidence points to the Syrian Government being probably responsible for these appalling incidents. Why would they do so? Well there may be a growing perception in the outside world that the Assad regime is staring to prevail in this vicious civil war and that it is only a matter of time before the opposition collapses. However it may not seem that like that from the 'other side of the hill' as it were.

 

This terrible war has been ongoing for some time now and from the internal regime perspective growing political, military, and financial pressures may mean he is becoming increasingly desperate to end this rebellion quickly - causing him to employ his acknowledged chemical warfare capability. History also shows that civil war polarizes a national like nothing else, therefore something as simple as pure hatred for the opposition may be leading him down this apparently self-destructive WMD path - assuming he is even in control of his own military.

 

Now you are doubtless about to reply that the above is mere speculation - and you'd be right - but as I'm not alone in engaging in that old pastime methinks that my doing the same is in order.

[pap]

No, it's fair enough Charlie. I appreciate that people are going to have different takes. It's good to see them listed out.

 

I'm not suggesting that every outrage is manufactured, btw - but an exceptional event is always the catalyst for shifting democracies onto a war footing.

[dubai_phil]

 

Now you are doubtless about to reply that the above is mere speculation - and you'd be right - but as I'm not alone in engaging in that old pastime methinks that my doing the same is in order.

 

Again, totally agree CEC.

 

Luckily for us THIS time round, the Russians are not about to let their one real ally in the ME be bombed by NATO.

 

We CANNOT go to war on Speculation. Been there done that and how many hundreds of thousands have died and are STILL dying in Iraq because of it. We did not bring Peace to Iraq or to Libya we brought Death (and FAR more Death than the Evil nutters who ran those countries)

 

G W Bush invaded the WRONG damned country when he kicked Saddam out. IF he had kept out then he had a proxy who hated Iran and could (again) have done something about it. HE changed the balance of Power down here, the Saudis & Iranians have sowed destruction ever since.

 

Western Policy has created a mess from Libya all the way across to Afghanistan it is a breeding and training ground for more Armies of nutters who will be turning up on a train or in a shopping Mall in the West before long

 

Nice work guys