Who dunnit?

[sawyerloggingon]

When I first heard people say the rebels in Syria were responsible for the recent gas attack I was skeptical but I am hearing and reading more and more about this and I am changing my mind. They may have done it on purpose to get the US to be their air force or it may have been accidental but either way I think there is a good chance they are the culprits here.

[LEFT"]Syrian rebels in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta have admitted to Associated Press correspondent Dale Gavlak that they were responsible for last week’s chemical weapons incident which western powers have blamed on Bashar Al-Assad’s forces, revealing that the casualties were the result of an accident caused by rebels mishandling chemical weapons provided to them by Saudi Arabia.[/LEFT]

Image: YouTube

“From numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families….many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the (deadly) gas attack,” writes Gavlak. (back up version here).Rebels told Gavlak that they were not properly trained on how to handle the chemical weapons or even told what they were. It appears as though the weapons were initially supposed to be given to the Al-Qaeda offshoot Jabhat al-Nusra.“We were very curious about these arms. And unfortunately, some of the fighters handled the weapons improperly and set off the explosions,” one militant named ‘J’ told Gavlak.His claims are echoed by another female fighter named ‘K’, who told Gavlak, “They didn’t tell us what these arms were or how to use them. We didn’t know they were chemical weapons. We never imagined they were chemical weapons.”

» Rebels Admit Responsibility for Chemical Weapons Attack Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!​

EDIT: If mods want to remove the pic feel free, I tried but couldn't. Don't ding me! :lol:

 

[lizzie]

I don't know who did it. I am leaning toward believing the rebels did, and the possibility that SA would be behind it makes perfect sense to me. Assad may have his faults, but I have trouble believing that he is responsible for many of the things he has been accused of, one, because he is a medical doctor by previous profession. I have just never seen evidence that the man has gone mad.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

When I first heard people say the rebels in Syria were responsible for the recent gas attack I was skeptical but I am hearing and reading more and more about this and I am changing my mind. They may have done it on purpose to get the US to be their air force or it may have been accidental but either way I think there is a good chance they are the culprits here.

[LEFT"]Syrian rebels in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta have admitted to Associated Press correspondent Dale Gavlak that they were responsible for last week’s chemical weapons incident which western powers have blamed on Bashar Al-Assad’s forces, revealing that the casualties were the result of an accident caused by rebels mishandling chemical weapons provided to them by Saudi Arabia.[/LEFT]

Image: YouTube

“From numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families….many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the (deadly) gas attack,” writes Gavlak. (back up version here).Rebels told Gavlak that they were not properly trained on how to handle the chemical weapons or even told what they were. It appears as though the weapons were initially supposed to be given to the Al-Qaeda offshoot Jabhat al-Nusra.“We were very curious about these arms. And unfortunately, some of the fighters handled the weapons improperly and set off the explosions,” one militant named ‘J’ told Gavlak.His claims are echoed by another female fighter named ‘K’, who told Gavlak, “They didn’t tell us what these arms were or how to use them. We didn’t know they were chemical weapons. We never imagined they were chemical weapons.”

» Rebels Admit Responsibility for Chemical Weapons Attack Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!​

EDIT: If mods want to remove the pic feel free, I tried but couldn't. Don't ding me! :lol:

It's sounding like the rebels did more and more. We know they had access to the weapons.

 

[cpwill]

The idea of Saudi Arabia giving Chemical Weapons to Al Qaeda is.......



..... I find it.... how to put this.... "not credible". Yeah, that pretty much covers it.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

The idea of Saudi Arabia giving Chemical Weapons to Al Qaeda is.......



..... I find it.... how to put this.... "not credible". Yeah, that pretty much covers it.

There are other theories that the rebels got the weapons when they over ran some gov installations earlier in this war.

 

[cpwill]

There are other theories that the rebels got the weapons when they over ran some gov installations earlier in this war.

That is... more credible than the notion that the Saudi government is behind any CW capability that finds its' way into rebel hands.


And also why I said two years ago that we should take action to prevent such from occurring.

 

[Boo Radley]

That is... more credible than the notion that the Saudi government is behind any CW capability that finds its' way into rebel hands.


And also why I said two years ago that we should take action to prevent such from occurring.

When you're a hammer, everything else is a nail.

I can't say I know who did the attack or how the rebels might have gotten the gas if it was them. This is the a reason why action is difficult to support.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

That is... more credible than the notion that the Saudi government is behind any CW capability that finds its' way into rebel hands.


And also why I said two years ago that we should take action to prevent such from occurring.

I'm 100% with you on the 2 years ago thing.

 

[cpwill]

When you're a hammer, everything else is a nail.

I can't say I know who did the attack or how the rebels might have gotten the gas if it was them. This is the a reason why action is difficult to support.

:shrug: I wouldn't know about a hammer/nail bit. I advocated different policies in Iraq, Libya, and Syria. In Syria I said at the beginning and continue to say now that we should take action to degrade their IADS C2, secure their CW stockpiles, and provide cover to fleeing civilians. In Libya I was in favor of regime change, and in Iraq I thought (and still think) that winning the post-fight to demonstrate an Arab-Democracy model was a strategic necessity. I supported the Presidents' policy towards Libya, and were I in Congress now, would be voting in favor of granting him the measures he has asked for.

As for how the rebels would get ahold of gas - stealing from the Syrian regime is (I would suspect) far more plausible than a Saudi regime so blind to its' own self-interest as to give them that capability.

 

[polisciguy]

There does, in fact, need to be more information on the subject. However, all current intelligence that has been revealed accuses the Assad Regime. However, the sources are France, Great Britain, and of course, the United States. The UN report would, in theory, reveal more if there is anything to be revealed. Conflicting reports of alleged Syrian citizens (which, I would argue, have very little knowledge of the culprits in the chaos) blame both sides. An individual that was drafted into Assad's regime revealed he was ordered to kill civilians. Again, this is all assuming this information received by media outlets is reliable, and from my time as an officer in the field, most likely it isn't.

 

[ttwtt78640]

The idea of Saudi Arabia giving Chemical Weapons to Al Qaeda is.......



..... I find it.... how to put this.... "not credible". Yeah, that pretty much covers it.

Why? The terrorists responsible for 9/11/2001 were from Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Yemen; not one of them was from Afghanistan, Iraq or Pakistan - yet where is the U.S. "war on terror" being waged?. The beauty of supplying or supporting "international terrorists" is that no linkage is likely to be made to any particular "state sponsor" even if it is obvious by the massive cheering in the streets that occurs after a terrorist attack. Who would be blamed for the actions a rebel or "freedom fighter" in Syria that happened to be using a weapon "stolen" from whatever source? Pakistan proudly housed UBL for years yet is said to be a "friendly" (or at least neutral) nation, later locking up the doctor that helped us to kill him and yet still gets our foreign aid. Egypts elected president is ousted by the military yet that was not "officially" a coup. The only given in our foreign policy is its inconsistancy.

 

[DaveFagan]

:shrug: I wouldn't know about a hammer/nail bit. I advocated different policies in Iraq, Libya, and Syria. In Syria I said at the beginning and continue to say now that we should take action to degrade their IADS C2, secure their CW stockpiles, and provide cover to fleeing civilians. In Libya I was in favor of regime change, and in Iraq I thought (and still think) that winning the post-fight to demonstrate an Arab-Democracy model was a strategic necessity. I supported the Presidents' policy towards Libya, and were I in Congress now, would be voting in favor of granting him the measures he has asked for.

As for how the rebels would get ahold of gas - stealing from the Syrian regime is (I would suspect) far more plausible than a Saudi regime so blind to its' own self-interest as to give them that capability.

I disagree. Saudi scumbaggery is manifest. They are the big financiers for this fiasco. Their deep CIA associations would get them access to gas. They are active players in this scenario and it absolutely minimizes the chances that the CW came from Syrian gov't stockpiles. You are wrong on all counts, including suggesting that we should have invaded and secured those CW stockpiles two years ago. On the other hand, you are consistent, consistently wrong, like a military person persistently propagandized to only see the gov't perspective.

 

[justabubba]

from the thread title, thought this was about the ariel castro 'suicide'
nevermind

 

[humbolt]

from the thread title, thought this was about the ariel castro 'suicide'
nevermind

It's okay. It's highly likely that Castro gassed himself before he participated in the hanging. Either way, he's culpable and I think a small missile attack on his dead body is appropriate just to send a message.

 

[Boo Radley]

:shrug: I wouldn't know about a hammer/nail bit. I advocated different policies in Iraq, Libya, and Syria. In Syria I said at the beginning and continue to say now that we should take action to degrade their IADS C2, secure their CW stockpiles, and provide cover to fleeing civilians. In Libya I was in favor of regime change, and in Iraq I thought (and still think) that winning the post-fight to demonstrate an Arab-Democracy model was a strategic necessity. I supported the Presidents' policy towards Libya, and were I in Congress now, would be voting in favor of granting him the measures he has asked for.

As for how the rebels would get ahold of gas - stealing from the Syrian regime is (I would suspect) far more plausible than a Saudi regime so blind to its' own self-interest as to give them that capability.

I disagree with most of your positions, but not that those were your positions.

You're right about most likely between the two, but still we can't be sure of which or any third or forth options, whatever those might be.

 

[justabubba]

doesn't this boil down to a war between the shiite leaning alawite's who support assad versus the sunni supported alliance of al qaeda/nusra and the muslim brotherhood

the alawite's tend toward a secular governance whereas the sunni's expect government to be driven by islamic ideologies

which causes me to wonder why our nation's support is directed toward those who perpetrated 9/11 ... or have we forgotten that event already

yes, the house of saud wants its fellow sunnis to prevail, and the israelis are aligned against hezbolla, but is that good reason for US involvement in this civil/islamic war?


listen to what the russians had to say after seeing the 'proof' provided to them from the US/UK

... "That which our American partners have shown us both in the past and recently…absolutely has not convinced us," Mr. Lavrov said.

"There are no facts, there is just dialogue about 'what we know for sure,'" Mr. Lavrov said. "And when we ask for more detailed confirmation, they say, 'You know, it's all secret, so we can't show you.' That means such facts aren't there." ...

Russia Dismisses U.S. Evidence of Chemical-Weapons Use by Assad Regime - WSJ.com

"I think the evidence is going to be overwhelming. If the president of Russia chooses yet again to ignore it, that's his choice," Mr. Kerry said.

yea, kerry so convinces me with this argument - about evidence he is yet to be able to reveal

unlike the absent WMDs used to justify another misguided military adventure, let's make sure this time around

was this a ruse by the rebels to insert the USA into a war it cannot hope to win without America's participation

let's examine our administration's "logic": the enemy of my enemy is my friend, even if it is al qaeda

 

[specklebang]

This looks more like the puppet-masters at work.

Iraq is done. Afghanistan is coming to an end. Without a war, we won't need more extremely expensive weapons. The "job creators" will lose revenue. So, isn't this convenient?

I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist but there seems to be some odd consistencies between each and every Administration. No matter the party, we always have to have a little warfare going on so....the "job creators" won't suffer.

What a bunch of tools (and fools) we elect.

 

[ttwtt78640]

This looks more like the puppet-masters at work.

Iraq is done. Afghanistan is coming to an end. Without a war, we won't need more extremely expensive weapons. The "job creators" will lose revenue. So, isn't this convenient?

I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist but there seems to be some odd consistencies between each and every Administration. No matter the party, we always have to have a little warfare going on so....the "job creators" won't suffer.

What a bunch of tools (and fools) we elect.

Harder to push for any defense spending cuts in these "times of war". Harder to push for social safety net program cuts in these "economic hard times". In "times like these" we cannot reduce gov't spending.

 

[Hard Truth]

I don´t know, but It seems that the Syrian government had much to lose and little to gain with a chemical attack and the opposite is true of the rebels.

 

[ecofarm]

Our classified assessments have been shared with the U.S. Congress and key international partners. To protect sources and methods, we cannot publicly release all available intelligence – but what follows is an unclassified summary of the U.S. Intelligence Community’s analysis of what took place...

We have intelligence that leads us to assess that Syrian chemical weapons personnel – including personnel assessed to be associated with the SSRC – were preparing chemical munitions prior to the attack. In the three days prior to the attack, we collected streams of human, signals and geospatial intelligence that reveal regime activities that we assess were associated with preparations for a chemical weapons attack.

Syrian chemical weapons personnel were operating in the Damascus suburb of ‘Adra from Sunday, August 18 until early in the morning on Wednesday, August 21 near an area that the regime uses to mix chemical weapons, including sarin. On August 21, a Syrian regime element prepared for a chemical weapons attack in the Damascus area, including through the utilization of gas masks. Our intelligence sources in the Damascus area did not detect any indications in the days prior to the attack that opposition affiliates were planning to use chemical weapons...

Multiple streams of intelligence indicate that the regime executed a rocket and artillery attack against the Damascus suburbs in the early hours of August 21. Satellite detections corroborate that attacks from a regime-controlled area struck neighborhoods where the chemical attacks reportedly occurred – including Kafr Batna, Jawbar, ‘Ayn Tarma, Darayya, and Mu’addamiyah. This includes the detection of rocket launches from regime controlled territory early in the morning, approximately 90 minutes before the first report of a chemical attack appeared in social media. The lack of flight activity or missile launches also leads us to conclude that the regime used rockets in the attack...

To conclude, there is a substantial body of information that implicates the Syrian government’s responsibility in the chemical weapons attack that took place on August 21.As indicated, there is additional intelligence that remains classified because of sources and methods concerns that is being provided to Congress and international partners.

Government Assessment of the Syrian Government


Bring out the Truthers.

 

[Medusa]

The idea of Saudi Arabia giving Chemical Weapons to Al Qaeda is.......



..... I find it.... how to put this.... "not credible". Yeah, that pretty much covers it.

yes like a fairy tale ,it is never possible

 

[cpwill]

Why? The terrorists responsible for 9/11/2001 were from Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Yemen; not one of them was from Afghanistan, Iraq or Pakistan - yet where is the U.S. "war on terror" being waged?. The beauty of supplying or supporting "international terrorists" is that no linkage is likely to be made to any particular "state sponsor" even if it is obvious by the massive cheering in the streets that occurs after a terrorist attack. Who would be blamed for the actions a rebel or "freedom fighter" in Syria that happened to be using a weapon "stolen" from whatever source? Pakistan proudly housed UBL for years yet is said to be a "friendly" (or at least neutral) nation, later locking up the doctor that helped us to kill him and yet still gets our foreign aid. Egypts elected president is ousted by the military yet that was not "officially" a coup. The only given in our foreign policy is its inconsistancy.

Those kinds of weapons are not so non-attributable as you might imagine. Furthermore, Saudi Arabia is probably more concerned about the Al-Qaeda elements in Syria than we are. When those guys go home after the war is over, they aren't coming home to Newark, after all. Remember that Al-Qaeda hates the Saudi Government more than it hates us (or, at least, did so under UBL). I'm not saying that there aren't duplicitous bastards in their royal family (though at least a couple of them of them have.... disappeared in the last few years), only that it is extremely unlikely that the Saudis would give them chemical weapons - even if they wanted to support the AQ elements, you can't control them, which means you can't control what happens to the weapons, afterwards.

 

[cpwill]

This looks more like the puppet-masters at work.

Iraq is done. Afghanistan is coming to an end. Without a war, we won't need more extremely expensive weapons. The "job creators" will lose revenue. So, isn't this convenient?

I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist but there seems to be some odd consistencies between each and every Administration. No matter the party, we always have to have a little warfare going on

Yeah.... it's almost as if the world wasn't populated by Locke-reading Liberals who were eagerly advancing free trade and Kants' Perpetual Peace... but was instead also largely populated by a bunch of illiberal ideologies, bloody dictators, and cold geopolitical national interests, all often coinciding in mutually incompatible ways.....

no.... that' couldn't be it....

 

[Opteron]

Government Assessment of the Syrian Government


Bring out the Truthers.

Yeah, a lot of the info I've heard corroborates what you're saying. Such as experienced forces launching the chemicals at night to increase the staying power, while novices would launch during the daytime, and also the attacks were all in contested territory.

 

[APACHERAT]

Those kinds of weapons are not so non-attributable as you might imagine. Furthermore, Saudi Arabia is probably more concerned about the Al-Qaeda elements in Syria than we are. When those guys go home after the war is over, they aren't coming home to Newark, after all.

With the current administration's State Department I wouldn't be to sure about that. Anyone who's not white, educated and have a skilled profession seems not to have a problem being issued a visa.