Rebels are to blame for gas attacks? (Syria)

[ksu_aviator]

Turkey finds Sarin Gas in Homes of suspected Syrian Islamists

Turkish security forces found a 2kg cylinder with sarin gas after searching the homes of Syrian militants from the Al-Qaeda linked Al-Nusra Front who were previously detained, Turkish media reports. The gas was reportedly going to be used in a bomb.



The sarin gas was found in the homes of suspected Syrian Islamists detained in the southern provinces of Adana and Mersia following a search by Turkish police on Wednesday, reports say. The gas was allegedly going to be used to carry out an attack in the southern Turkish city of Adana.

Did the White House Help Plan the Syrian Chemical Attack? | Global Research

Turkish security forces found a 2kg cylinder with sarin gas after searching the homes of Syrian militants from the Al-Qaeda linked Al-Nusra Front who were previously detained, Turkish media reports. The gas was reportedly going to be used in a bomb.The sarin gas was found in the homes of suspected Syrian Islamists detained in the southern provinces of Adana and Mersia following a search by Turkish police on Wednesday, reports say. The gas was allegedly going to be used to carry out an attack in the southern Turkish city of Adana.

I'm not saying that's what happened. But the Syrian government was winning the war and attacking only civilians only galvanized the world against them. That seems like an awfully boneheaded move. I wondered why the UN wasn't acting, it may be because this isn't as clear cut as Obama is making it out to be.

 

[Montecresto]

It isn't.

 

[austrianecon]

I'm not saying that's what happened. But the Syrian government was winning the war and attacking only civilians only galvanized the world against them. That seems like an awfully boneheaded move. I wondered why the UN wasn't acting, it may be because this isn't as clear cut as Obama is making it out to be.

It never is. Obama says he doesn't want an attack to cause regime change, but sec. of state Kerry is calling Assad the next Hitler and this is the worlds next Munich moment, so what is it? It's two sides calling each others bluff. US who drew a line and whoever who did this.. saying you can't touch us.

I heavily lean towards rebels (Al-Qaeda, is my thinking) doing this. Forcing the US into this corner knowing they can draw US into another **** storm.

 

[Beaudreaux]

It's possible that Al Qaeda is responsible, but unlikely. As for the Obama Administration planning or helping to plan the chemical attacks? That's just aluminum foil hat type thinking.

 

[Montecresto]

It never is. Obama says he doesn't want an attack to cause regime change, but sec. of state Kerry is calling Assad the next Hitler and this is the worlds next Munich moment, so what is it? It's two sides calling each others bluff. US who drew a line and whoever who did this.. saying you can't touch us.

I heavily lean towards rebels (Al-Qaeda, is my thinking) doing this. Forcing the US into this corner knowing they can draw US into another **** storm.

Obama is on record early on in the syrian conflict that Assad has to go.

 

[Montecresto]

Syrian Rebels Claim Saudi Prince Bandar Responsible For Chemical Weapons Attack
By: Dennis Trainor Jr Sunday September 1, 2013 9:14 am


http://my.firedoglake.com/dennistra...ndar-responsible-for-chemical-weapons-attack/

http://www.globalresearch.ca/did-the-white-house-help-plan-the-syrian-chemical-attack/5347542

 

[austrianecon]

Obama is on record early on in the syrian conflict that Assad has to go.

There is a difference between saying what Obama said almost 2 years ago and now. Obama has threaten war and now Kerry is saying Assad is Hitler. 2 years ago there was ZERO chance in hell we were gonna get involved. Today it's almost 100% we will be involved.

 

[Montecresto]

There is a difference between saying what Obama said almost 2 years ago and now. Obama has threaten war and now Kerry is saying Assad is Hitler. 2 years ago there was ZERO chance in hell we were gonna get involved. Today it's almost 100% we will be involved.

Oh I'm not disagreeing with you on that. I'm just saying regime change has been a very long standing goal for Syria, and it has been Obama's as well, what he's saying presently notwithstanding.

 

[lizzie]

I wouldn't be at all surprised. I hate to see us going into Syria half-cocked, without knowing 100% for sure what has really happened there. Our government appears to be trusting those whom we have been fighting against, and imo, our going into Syria is a huge mistake.

 

[apdst]

I don't buy it. The small quanity and lack of a delivery system doesn't add up.

 

[joko104]

This is win-at-any-costs for all of the almost uncountable organizations and factions that have injected themselves into the Syrian conflict - which exists because so many other countries - USA included - are using Syria and Syrian civilians as pawns for their goals having nothing to do with Syria or Syrians whatsoever.

 

[AngryOldGuy]

oh course it was a rebel attack, what better way to win than to have U.S. roll in like we did in Libya
and blow the government forces to smithereens for you and then you can have a chaotic war between
the warring factions to settle who finally gets to run the place? Thing is Oh-bammer never intended to
do anything there, it's just a distraction while he achieves a far more important political goal...

 

[specklebang]

I'm not saying that's what happened. But the Syrian government was winning the war and attacking only civilians only galvanized the world against them. That seems like an awfully boneheaded move. I wondered why the UN wasn't acting, it may be because this isn't as clear cut as Obama is making it out to be.

Boneheaded is actually a generous term. It seems about as likely as the last WMD scare we had in Iraq.

So, you think Assad is THAT dumb? What a preposterous thing to do. Nothing to gain and everything to lose.

Why is this sounding familiar?

 

[Montecresto]

This is win-at-any-costs for all of the almost uncountable organizations and factions that have injected themselves into the Syrian conflict - which exists because so many other countries - USA included - are using Syria and Syrian civilians as pawns for their goals having nothing to do with Syria or Syrians whatsoever.

I totally agree with that assessment!!

 

[apdst]

I wouldn't be at all surprised. I hate to see us going into Syria half-cocked, without knowing 100% for sure what has really happened there. Our government appears to be trusting those whom we have been fighting against, and imo, our going into Syria is a huge mistake.

The only mistake is how the whole show will be handle and I think we already know that Obama is going to screw the pooch on this one, nine ways from sunday.

 

[Beaudreaux]

I don't buy it. The small quanity and lack of a delivery system doesn't add up.

The Saudi's are financing and arming the Al Qaeda forces in Syria. That part has been proven by a multitude of reliable sources, and is no different than when I was in Somalia and the Saudi's did the exact same there.

A delivery system for Sarin is not that difficult. A Qassam rocket (see picture below) is widely used in the region and can easily have a Sarin canister placed in the tip.

 

[apdst]

The Saudi's are financing and arming the Al Qaeda forces in Syria. That part has been proven by a multitude of reliable sources, and is no different than when I was in Somalia and the Saudi's did the exact same there.

A delivery system for Sarin is not that difficult. A Qassam rocket (see picture below) is widely used in the region and can easily have a Sarin canister placed in the tip.

A 2 kilo canister isn't evidence that the rebs have delivery system, nor is 2 kilos enough to kill 1400 people.

 

[Beaudreaux]

A 2 kilo canister isn't evidence that the rebs have delivery system, nor is 2 kilos enough to kill 1400 people.

We have no idea how many rockets were fired, or how much Sarin was deployed. Also there are environmental elements; wind distribution, concentration of the agent between buildings and disbursement patterns due to both.

My only reason to show the picture, was to prove that multiple and simplistic delivery systems exist, and to believe what the Administration is saying (that it does not) is just incorrect.

There are also higher capacity delivery systems available for use in the region by non-government elements.

Not arguing with you, just pointing out that the possibility exists, and it is not a far fetched possibility.

On another subject, I cannot believe that the US government is stating that they "so not want to go to War" in Syria, but are stating in the same breath that they do want to fire missiles at Syria. The last time I checked, firing upon another sovereign nation is an Act of War. They would have every right declaring war against the US, and having their allies do the same, if we do attack them.

 

[AngryOldGuy]

So who has the lowdown, the straight skinny, the real deal info on exactly how this attack was carried out?
Did they just stuff a dude in a MOP suit load him up with pralidoxime & atropine have him jump on a car outfitted with canisters
and have him drive down the street? Where's the definitive report on what actually happened? Oh you say we don't really know?
OK Let's go with that?

 

[apdst]

We have no idea how many rockets were fired, or how much Sarin was deployed. Also there are environmental elements; wind distribution, concentration of the agent between buildings and disbursement patterns due to both.

My only reason to show the picture, was to prove that multiple and simplistic delivery systems exist, and to believe what the Administration is saying (that it does not) is just incorrect.

There are also higher capacity delivery systems available for use in the region by non-government elements.

Not arguing with you, just pointing out that the possibility exists, and it is not a far fetched possibility.

On another subject, I cannot believe that the US government is stating that they "so not want to go to War" in Syria, but are stating in the same breath that they do want to fire missiles at Syria. The last time I checked, firing upon another sovereign nation is an Act of War. They would have every right declaring war against the US, and having their allies do the same, if we do attack them.

We don't have any idea that any were fired...by the rebs...loaded with chemical agents.

 

[Beaudreaux]

So who has the lowdown, the straight skinny, the real deal info on exactly how this attack was carried out?
Did they just stuff a dude in a MOP suit load him up with pralidoxime & atropine have him jump on a car outfitted with canisters
and have him drive down the street? Where's the definitive report on what actually happened? Oh you say we don't really know?
OK Let's go with that?

Sarin is an Organophosphate, or basically a Pesticide. It could be deployed with one of these:

Or more easily from one of these if the driver had a simple Tyvek suit and mask on:

But more than likely, it was launched by rocket, or mortar. Mortar's are more dangerous if the canister breaks when fired. But the deployment of Sarin is as easy as putting it in a CS gas canister, driving through a neighborhood, pulling the pin and throwing the canister as you haul butt out of the area.

There are other chemicals that are more dangerous to the people deploying it, and cannot be as easily deployed; Phosgene for instance, which is what Saddam Hussein used against the Kurds in northern Iraq.

 

[apdst]

Sarin is an Organophosphate, or basically a Pesticide. It could be deployed with one of these:

Or more easily from one of these if the driver had a simple Tyvek suit and mask on:

But more than likely, it was launched by rocket, or mortar. Mortar's are more dangerous if the canister breaks when fired. But the deployment of Sarin is as easy as putting it in a CS gas canister, driving through a neighborhood, pulling the pin and throwing the canister as you haul butt out of the area.

There are other chemicals that are more dangerous to the people deploying it, and cannot be as easily deployed; Phosgene for instance, which is what Saddam Hussein used against the Kurds in northern Iraq.

Except, with that delivery system, there would be reb casualties. So far, we haven't seen any.

 

[Beaudreaux]

We don't have any idea that any were fired...by the rebs...loaded with chemical agents.

Very, very true. And nor do we know that it was the Syrian government, or that it was not the rebels (Al Qaeda, FSA or whoever).

My two biggest problem with all of this debate about firing upon Syria are as follows (the second is summarized by cartoon):

1) We don't know exactly who did what, and we will be committing and Act of War on a nation that has one of the closest relationships with Russia than any other country in the world, and China than any other country in the region. We are moving headlong into the unknown that can be devastating to our country if not managed correctly.

And, 2)

I fought Al Qaeda in three different theaters of operation. I don't like the prospect of helping them at all.

Did you see the interview today that Anderson Cooper had with the Leader of the FSA? If not, you need to find it online and listen closely to what he had to say about the potential of an attack by the US.

 

[Beaudreaux]

Except, with that delivery system, there would be reb casualties. So far, we haven't seen any.

With the first example, yes. With the second, potentially not. With the other examples, probably not.

And think about what you said just a minute. When I realized the same thing you said, is when I starting thinking differently; that we haven't seen rebel casualties. I asked myself, "Why would anyone deploy such a weapon and not attack the 'enemy'?" Why were there not any FSA, or Al Qaeda casualties? Only nonbelligerent civilians? That's where I started asking questions.

I do have a theory though. And it's too convoluted to type in this post.

 

[Fisher]

We have no idea how many rockets were fired, or how much Sarin was deployed. Also there are environmental elements; wind distribution, concentration of the agent between buildings and disbursement patterns due to both.

My only reason to show the picture, was to prove that multiple and simplistic delivery systems exist, and to believe what the Administration is saying (that it does not) is just incorrect.

There are also higher capacity delivery systems available for use in the region by non-government elements.

Not arguing with you, just pointing out that the possibility exists, and it is not a far fetched possibility.

On another subject, I cannot believe that the US government is stating that they "so not want to go to War" in Syria, but are stating in the same breath that they do want to fire missiles at Syria. The last time I checked, firing upon another sovereign nation is an Act of War. They would have every right declaring war against the US, and having their allies do the same, if we do attack them.

The delivery system isn't complex--the issue is the instability of sarin. I think the assumption is that it would have to have been done by binary shells created in a laboratory because of the storage and stability issues of the actual sarin, and that would indicate government involvement. From what I have read it only takes a single droplet to kill someone and can persist for up to 8 hours depending on weather. I am not convinced the deaths couldn't have been the result of rebels, but even if it were the government, I still do not see this as being our fight to fight. There is no upside for the US.