'War crime': U.N. finds sarin used in Syria chemical weapons attack - CNN.comThe team did identify two types or [of, that's a typo] rockets it said were used to deliver the gas and their trajectories, and international observers have said those weapons are not known to be in the hands of rebels battling the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/17/world/europe/syria-united-nations.htmlWhile the report’s authors did not assign blame for the attack on the outskirts of Damascus, the details it documented included the large size and particular shape of the munitions and the precise direction from which two of them had been fired. Taken together, that information appeared to undercut arguments by President Bashar al-Assad of Syria that rebel forces, who are not known to possess such weapons or the training or ability to use them, had been responsible.
So the UN is on the side of the terrorists now?
Who woulda thought??
This is not the Conspiracy Theory subforum.
Nor did I think it was.
I just have a huge problem believing anything from the UN.
Because we shouldn't go to war because evidence "points strongly" at Assad. Before launching bombs and killing people we should be certain. Why is this too much to ask?I guess i'm really struggling to see why so many are just shrugging off evidence that points strongly in the direction of Syrian government culpability.
I'd also like to remind everyone that there was "certain evidence" that Saddam had WMD's. How'd that turn out?
How about just thinking about the situation rationally and logically?
You have a Assad, a brutal Dictator whose regime has already committed unspeakable crimes against his own people. That is indisputable.
You have Assad with an enormous stockpile of chemical weapons at his disposal. Again, that is indisputable.
You have International Observers stating the rockets it said were used to deliver the gas and their trajectories are not known to be in the hands of rebels.
I guess i'm really struggling to see why so many are just shrugging off evidence that points strongly in the direction of Syrian government culpability.
It is indeed highly probable that Assad used his chemical weapons. At first, my reaction was that he couldn't possibly be that stupid. But as more comes to light, I'll bet it was him. I forgot we were in the ME, where rationality is considered an unspeakable offense against Allah.
So, what happens next? It seems we sort of gave up pursuing this. Assad probably won't use CWs again, not enough "bang for the buck" so to speak. We'll arm the rebels with light weight stuff. Russia will arm Assad with heavier stuff and we can have a little arms race. Eventually, maybe years from now, somebody will win. Then we'll find out the name of the new Dictator and the old Dictator's followers can rebel against the New Dictator.
if only there was a new saladin.
It turned out that Saddam was faking a WMD program. Do you think Assad faked using chems?
How about just thinking about the situation rationally and logically?
You have a Assad, a brutal Dictator whose regime has already committed unspeakable crimes against his own people. That is indisputable.
You have Assad with an enormous stockpile of chemical weapons at his disposal. Again, that is indisputable.
You have International Observers stating the rockets it said were used to deliver the gas and their trajectories are not known to be in the hands of rebels.
I guess i'm really struggling to see why so many are just shrugging off evidence that points strongly in the direction of Syrian government culpability.
FOX is reporting UN considering sending weapons inspectors back into Syria.
Why? I thought it was a done deal?
Did it occur to you that this could be a false flag operation to get Assad out of power?
The terrorists get more powerful every day that Assad remains in power and brutalizes his people. During such they provide protection and recruit heavily into their ranks. Assad being removed from power would not be good for the terrorists.
Then let them fight it out. No US troops for Terrorist blood.
So you agree that it is irrational for the terrorists to conduct such a false flag, right?
Yes but, not for a third party.
If they gassed their own people, they're terrorists. What third party... the US?
And France, Britain, maybe Israel, NATO in general...as a pretext to war with Iran.
False Flag Chemical Weapons Attack on Syria. Pretext for All Out War? | Global Research
I'll remind you again, this is not the Conspiracy Theory subforum.
3 Neither of these groups are at fault and it was a false flag operation by some or all the parties I listed.
Just because you don't agree with a possibility doesn't mean you can fluff it off as a conspiracy theory.
Yes, it's a conspiracy by the US, Britain, France, Israel and NATO! There are thousands of people involved in this conspiracy and not a single whistle-blower.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?