Yesterday’s report of a chemical weapons strike in Syria included both rebels and government accusing the other side of launch the strike, and international groups doubting that anything happened at all.
Reluctant to let the truth get in the way of a good story, Britain and France have latched onto the claim however, and are insisting that the unconfirmed report is justification to start throwing weapons at the Syrian rebels en masse.
Of course, Britain and France have been pledging to arm the Syrian rebels for weeks before this news even broke, so it falls into the category of convenient excuse. The question is whether the rest of the EU, which was averse to the idea, will be swayed.
In the US the divide appears to be squarely along war-with-Syria lines, with hawks suggesting the report obliged the US to attack Syria, even though there is still no consensus on what, if anything, actually happened.
9 thoughts on “Chemical Weapons Report a Ticket to Intervention?”
Fair is fair,and if it truly is the Syrian rebels who fired the chemical weapons, then all their wepons must be taken away — right?
As explained yesterday, this is more crap Ditz (see comments section):
This is not "news", it is fantasy…
To briefly recap:
The overwhelming evidence–including (even particularly) the cockamamie, perpetually changing, contradictory 'stories' of the so-called "rebels" themselves–clearly indicates the so-called "rebels" fired a rocket armed with some sort of chemical agent(s) into Syrian government controlled territory resulting in several deaths and injuries–the bulk of which were civilians.
The Syrian government initially reported the incident. The Syrian government has even "requested that the UN Secretary-General form a specialized, independent and neutral technical mission to investigate" the chemical attack by the mercenary terrorist "rebels"…
Adding even more "credibility" to the Syrian government's already well substantiated claims…
Ditz…not only do you seem to deny the so-called "rebels'" responsibly for all this, you seem to go further and (still) deny "chemical weapons" were even used solely based on the 'word' of Barack Obama and a politicized organization no one has ever heard of…
Ditz…denying chemical weapons were used at all–even now, even after your personal 'supreme source' Israel even 'confirmed' this–is illogical and absurd….absurd because it would imply the Syrian government and the so-called "rebels" are "conspiring" in some way to push a 'false' story of a chemical weapons 'incident'–a "conspiracy theory" which is ludicrous and insane.
The so-called "Rebels" using chemical weapons and blaming it on the Syrian government is a BIG DEAL…an even bigger deal is Obama denying chemical weapons were even used in the face of overwhelming "evidence" they were…even going so far as to imply that: in the off chance chemical weapons were used, it must have been at the hands of the Syrian government…according to Obama, that is…
Thanks for taking this seriously AW.C (eyes rolling)…. Your alleged function is what now???
international groups doubting that anything happened”
“The overwhelming evidence…
rebels” themselves… fired a rocket armed with some
sort of chemical agent”
The root cause of the problem, gentlemen, you have both failed
to give readers the root cause — the only way to discover the
For an American from the oil-rich state of Texas has just been
made the future President of Syria, and now like it was with the
Shah of Iran, a recycled repeat of bad history it shall surely be.
For Empire USA, is it not a Western democracy, a dictatorship
ruled by the 51% most wealthy? For the solution can only be
to organize the lower half of society, a nationwide strike where
all of the laboring class refuses to fight wars of plunder nor to
work in the war materials industry.
“The logic being that planet earth is a wasteland of meaningless
fiction, and though the Creator is in submission, not by choice.
For he does it so that through his subjection, during that time,
full trust in him be established.” Romans 8:20
"For Empire USA, is it not a Western democracy, a dictatorship ruled by the 51% most wealthy?"
No, it isn't, your fetish for saying so 50-60 times a day notwithstanding. More like a dictatorship ruled by 0.01%, among them a few of the very wealthiest.
It would be foolhardy for Assad's regime to use chemical weapons. The west is biting at the bit to attack Syria, especially if chemical weapons are used. Why give them an excuse?
The rebels, on the other hand, have been trying to get the west involved in the fight since the beginning. I wouldn't put it past them to stage an incident involving chemical weapons even if it meant killing some of their own. They'd have much to gain and nothing to lose.
Is it possible that someone (in the area) who really, really wants the US to get physically involved in Syria, might have secretly delivered to the rebels a single item of a certain type of weapon for the purpose of forcing the US President's hand – on the eve of his visit to the area? That could never happen, I guess…
They wouldn't really have to have any type of chemical smuggled to them. They could make a simple choking agent by mixing bleach and ammonia. Use some colored smoke to give the impression of something unusual being used and many will believe it was a chemical weapon.
This is the second time I've heard of chemicals being used. Last time it seemed to be a hoax. I suspect this is either a hoax or somebody faked one so they could blame it on Assad. As I wrote above, the rebels have nothing to lose by doing something like that. Assad has much to lose should he use chemicals.
As I've been predicting here all along, the US and NATO are pushing for war with Syria. One way or the other they will bypass Russia and China and the UNSC and even the NATO Charter won't stop them.
They HAVE to attack Syria. They HAVE to enable Israel to attack Lebanon in the Bekaa Valley and that requires pinning down Syrian forces. They HAVE to do this in order to get an Iran war that doesn't cost Israel a lot of economic damage.
The US and NATO WILL be attacking Syria by end of this year.
After seeing Mike Rogers and the line-up of all the other pro- Syrian rebels on the Charlie Rose show of 20 March..I remembered once again why I no long send any money to support PBS. I think one of the guest actually implied that "we" need to bring "democracy" to Syria..like "we" did in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. I wondered what planet Charlie Rose and his guest came from.
Comments are closed.