Chemical experts to inspect attack site

[GlitterRose]

1 minute ago, Clockwork_Spirit said:

Seems like you are trying to paint anyone who challenge the MSM narrative on Syria under the name of ''conspirationist''. That's dishonest IMO. Especially when it can be proven with facts that the West have intervened and invaded countries in the Middle-East based on false motives.

It can be proven with facts that Assad's using chemical weapons on civilians. 

That's a bad thing. 

Why aren't you against it? 

Why is the "word" of a dictator better than that of any number of humanitarian orgs that are reporting this has taken place? 

Instead, I've seen people here sucking up the Assad kool-aid and even blaming the victims. 

It's evil. And spreading the propaganda is also evil. 

[Only_]

12 minutes ago, ChaosRose said:

It can be proven with facts that Assad's using chemical weapons on civilians. 

 

I haven't seen any conclusive evidence that Assad is responsible. Care to show it? While there is no doubt that chemical weapons have been used in this conflict, reports cannot establish beyond doubt if it was Assad or Islamic militants. That's because you get contradicting claims.

There is serious indications that Syrian rebels have access to chemical weapons. That alone, should raise some red flags.

Syrian rebels used Sarin nerve gas, not Assad’s regime: U.N. official

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/6/syrian-rebels-used-sarin-nerve-gas-not-assads-regi/

Syrian rebels admit chemical use against Kurds

http://www.kurdistan24.net/en/opinion/7a0f6294-ab7f-4d15-b5af-3ff4b444ab3f/syrian-rebels-admit-chemical-use-against-kurds

 

 

Edited May 5, 2018 by Clockwork_Spirit

[GlitterRose]

The free world already knows that Assad is responsible.

It's the dictators who are the holdouts on this one. 

And for some reason, you think they're truthful. 

I don't understand why you think that.

I'll give you that no government is completely blameless when it comes to honesty, but dictators have rather a more tarnished track record...don'tchathink?

[DarkHunter]

1 hour ago, Clockwork_Spirit said:

I haven't seen any conclusive evidence that Assad is responsible. Care to show it? While there is no doubt that chemical weapons have been used in this conflict, reports cannot establish beyond doubt if it was Assad or Islamic militants. That's because you get contradicting claims.

There is serious indications that Syrian rebels have access to chemical weapons. That alone, should raise some red flags.

Syrian rebels used Sarin nerve gas, not Assad’s regime: U.N. official

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/6/syrian-rebels-used-sarin-nerve-gas-not-assads-regi/

Syrian rebels admit chemical use against Kurds

http://www.kurdistan24.net/en/opinion/7a0f6294-ab7f-4d15-b5af-3ff4b444ab3f/syrian-rebels-admit-chemical-use-against-kurds

 

 

For the first link del Ponte has a history of saying controversial things, normally before anything investigation is done, but it seems that del Ponte has changed her mind on Assad using chemical weapons.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1BT29Q

"Leaving the council, del Ponte told Syria's ambassador that she had been right to quickly reach the conclusion that Assad's government had used chemical weapons during an attack on the town of Khan Sheikhoun in April."

and

""I said that in my opinion and based on the elements we already had, the Syrian government was responsible. Today we have the confirmation after an official commission’s inquiry. So now, we ask for justice, we ask justice for those victims.""

Could of posted links to the UN investigation committee that del Ponte was a part of refuting her initial statement, saying how it was too early and beyond the scope of the committee to assign blame but her directly saying Assad used chemical weapons seems far more fitting.

As for the second link no one denies chemical weapons were used against the Kurds in Syria, ISIS and their affiliated groups used mustard gas against the Kurds.  Mustard gas and sarin are very different chemical weapons, probably 99% of the people on this site have the ingredients to make mustard gas in their house and can make it very quickly.  Sarin on the other hand is insanely difficult to create and store, even requiring special training and equipment to effectively use.

It has been proven beyond doubt that sarin was used, Assad has sarin plus the means to produce sarin along with military units trained and equipped to use it yet you want to believe rebels were somehow magically able to create or transport sarin along with the needed equipment while under siege.  

[Only_]

Quote

For the first link del Ponte has a history of saying controversial things, normally before anything investigation is done, but it seems that del Ponte has changed her mind on Assad using chemical weapons.

Everyone is bad in Syria according to Del Ponte. Seems like she runned into a wall and eventually resigned. She couldn't prove Assad used chemical weapons, in fact the evidence suggested otherwise as she himself admitted.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/07/everyone-syria-bad-now-says-un-war-crimes-prosecutor-quits-post/

15 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

As for the second link no one denies chemical weapons were used against the Kurds in Syria, ISIS and their affiliated groups used mustard gas against the Kurds.  Mustard gas and sarin are very different chemical weapons, probably 99% of the people on this site have the ingredients to make mustard gas in their house and can make it very quickly.  Sarin on the other hand is insanely difficult to create and store, even requiring special training and equipment to effectively use.

“Those affected by the assault demonstrated difficulty breathing which made it possible to affirm that they were poisoned as a result of the use of banned toxic gases such as chlorine or other agents.

That's not mustard gas. Also, the groups are Jaysh al-Islam and al-Qaeda affiliated al-Nusra. The same Islamic militants fighting in Douma.

Did you even read the link?

Edited May 5, 2018 by Clockwork_Spirit

[DarkHunter]

12 minutes ago, Clockwork_Spirit said:

Everyone is bad in Syria according to Del Ponte. Seems like she runned into a wall and eventually resigned. She couldn't prove Assad used chemical weapons, in fact the evidence suggested otherwise as she himself admitted.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/07/everyone-syria-bad-now-says-un-war-crimes-prosecutor-quits-post/

“Those affected by the assault demonstrated difficulty breathing which made it possible to affirm that they were poisoned as a result of the use of banned toxic gases such as chlorine or other agents.

That's not mustard gas. Also, the groups are Jaysh al-Islam and al-Qaeda affiliated al-Nusra. The same Islamic militants fighting in Douma.

Did you even read the link?

Where in that link does it say she couldn't prove Assad used chemical weapons, quote the exact line where she says it.  

I did read the link, was focused more on the confirmed cases of mustard gas being used, which weren't talked about in that link, instead of chlorine gas, which is just as easy to acquire as chlorine is used in so much stuff anyone spending an hour looking for it should be able to get enough to weaponize it.

Ultimately it still wasnt sarin that was used on the Kurds but it was sarin that was used beyond doubt on Syrian civilians and you have never been able to actually answer where the sarin came from and how the rebels got it.  If I remember correctly you suggested Turkey, which doesnt even have a known chemical weapon program, but never did explain how besieged rebels managed to smuggle not only large amount of sarin but also the needed equipment to southern Syria through territory controlled by Assad.

[Only_]

14 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

Ultimately it still wasnt sarin that was used on the Kurds but it was sarin that was used beyond doubt on Syrian civilians and you have never been able to actually answer where the sarin came from and how the rebels got it.  If I remember correctly you suggested Turkey, which doesnt even have a known chemical weapon program, but never did explain how besieged rebels managed to smuggle not only large amount of sarin but also the needed equipment to southern Syria through territory controlled by Assad.

There are 3 ways the rebels could have acquired Sarin gas:

1. By making it themselves

2. By getting it from a foreign supplier

3. By stealing it from the Syrian government

All 3 options are not out of the table. In fact, the evidence points in all 3 directions.

Edited May 5, 2018 by Clockwork_Spirit

[bee]

2 hours ago, Clockwork_Spirit said:

Seems like you are trying to paint anyone who challenge the MSM narrative on Syria under the name of ''conspirationist''. That's dishonest IMO. Especially when it can be proven with facts that the West have intervened/invaded countries in the Middle-East based on lies and fabrication.

 

and it turns out that - the Conspiracy Theory etc term is a verbal / psychological device invented by, used by and promoted by the CIA and other such
groups for discouraging opposition to the Official Narrative...  even when (especially when?) the official narrative is a pack of lies...

I know you know this.....just saying...  

https://new.euro-med.dk/20170506-the-cia-launched-the-term-conspiracy-theory-in-1967-to-conceal-its-own-and-politicianscrimes.php

Specifically, in April 1967, the CIA wrote a dispatch which coined the term “conspiracy theories” … and recommended methods for discrediting such theories. The dispatch was marked “psych” – short for “psychological operations” or disinformation

[DarkHunter]

1 minute ago, Clockwork_Spirit said:

There are 3 ways the rebels could have acquired Sarin gas:

1. By making it themselves

2. By getting it from a foreign supplier

3. By stealing it from the Syrian government

All 3 options are not out of the table. In fact, the evidence points in all 3 directions.

How would the rebels make it themselves, do you honestly have an idea of how difficult it is to make mass amounts of sarin.  That death cult in Japan spent years and millions of dollars built a two story chemistry lab manned by teams of chemist and chemical engineers.  Under ideal conditions, not being bombed and being able to purchase anything and everything they needed, they were able to produce a few liters of 50% pure sarin.  I would love to know how you rationalize a group of rebels under siege and being under near constant bombardment being able to produce sarin in high enough quantities to be responsible for the chemical weapon attacks.  There is a reason why only a handful of countries are known to be able to produce sarin.

As for getting it from a foreign supplier, how did the rebels manage to get sarin to areas under siege let alone the equipment needed to actually spread the sarin.  Sarin is very difficult to store and requires a lot of specialed equipment to store and transport it as anything done wrong can cause the sarin to be rendered inert in a matter of hours.  Would love to hear how in your mind you justify a group of brave, or crazy, rebels managed to smuggle not just large quantities of highly dangerous and delicate chemicals through hundreds of miles of Assad controlled territory but also the equipment to use and store it.

That leaves the third option of stealing it which is problematic.  Syria was supposed to of completely destroyed their chemical weapon stockpiles so how are the rebels stealing sarin years after it was supposedly destroyed or are you also suggesting the rebels somehow also have the ability to store sarin long term, storing sarin is extremely expensive and difficult.  If the rebels did steal sarin why hasnt Assad openly declared sarin was stolen and say the amount.  Even then you still have the issue of the rebels also needing to also steal the equipment to use the sarin and apparently the equipment needed to store it long term.

Yet to you all of these fantasies are equal or more probable then a dictator with a shattered military using chemical weapons on those who have rebelled against him.

Also noticed how you havent quoted yet in that article where it says del Ponte cant prove Assad used chemical weapons.

[bee]

13 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

Yet to you all of these fantasies are equal or more probable then a dictator with a shattered military using chemical weapons on those who have rebelled against him.

 

just a reminder..... that Assad is the elected leader of Syria...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_presidential_election,_2014

strange as it may seem .... Syrian People prefer him to lead their secular nation than be taken over by terrorists, Islamic extremists,
mercenaries etc....

  

 

[Unusual Tournament]

3 hours ago, ChaosRose said:

Except it's not. 

It's believing the propaganda machine of dictators over what people from your own democratic government are telling you.

And most people are doing this because they're addicted to propaganda and conspiracy porn. 

It validates every ugliness that they carry. 

It's a sickness. 

thats your opinion. and i have mine. U.S. involvement and that of its allies like Saudi Arabia and Turkey speak volumes on how "peaceful demonstrations" quickly became well funded and organised armed insurrections.

removing a dictator and replacing authoritarian rule with intolerable theocracy is not democratic.

a democratic government is only democratic if it can be held accountable. 

[Unusual Tournament]

6 minutes ago, bee said:

 

just a reminder..... that Assad is the elected leader of Syria...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_presidential_election,_2014

strange as it may seem .... Syrian People prefer him to lead their secular nation than be taken over by terrorists, Islamic extremists,
mercenaries etc....

  

 

they certainly do now after the excesses of militant Islam. 

[DarkHunter]

4 minutes ago, bee said:

 

just a reminder..... that Assad is the elected leader of Syria...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_presidential_election,_2014

strange as it may seem .... Syrian People prefer him to lead their secular nation than be taken over by terrorists, Islamic extremists,
mercenaries etc....

  

 

Only problem with that is that the Syrian civil war started in 2011 and that election, if you could call it that, took place in 2014.  

The issue with that election is that the only Syrians to vote in that election in general were the Syrians living in territory controlled by Assad, some refugees were able to vote but some weren't.

Even then there were some issues that call the election into question, largely the numbers were too accurate.  Basically the percentage of the votes for Assad and both of the two contenders were accurate to the nearest single voter as pointed out by Andrew Gelman.  He does admit while this points to fabricated results it doesnt role out the possibility that the percentages are correct and that they worked backwards from that to get the vote numbers.

[bee]

35 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

they certainly do now after the excesses of militant Islam. 

 

one does have to wonder if leaders like Hussein, Gaddafi and Assad   had to (have to) have a tough approach to
stop the rise of militant Islam.... the devastation we see in Iraq, Libya and Syria is due to the unleashing of militant
Islam on the civilian populations ---- and it was probably a hard job to keep that from happening under 'normal' circumstances
but when the West decided to use militant Islamic terrorists etc as a proxy army to further it's agenda... that's when the sh** really hit
the fan....

Hussein, Gaddafi and Assad are all accused by elements in the West of being brutal dictators....well perhaps they were brutal
towards militant islamists...... but real '''brutal'''' is what ISIS / Al Qaeda and similar groups do to the general public in those
countries....

the West is using appeasement to try and control the spread of militant Islam in western nations but that will probably come
back to bite us in the not too distant future.... 

 

[bee]

33 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

Only problem with that is that the Syrian civil war started in 2011 and that election, if you could call it that, took place in 2014.  

The issue with that election is that the only Syrians to vote in that election in general were the Syrians living in territory controlled by Assad, some refugees were able to vote but some weren't.

Even then there were some issues that call the election into question, largely the numbers were too accurate.  Basically the percentage of the votes for Assad and both of the two contenders were accurate to the nearest single voter as pointed out by Andrew Gelman.  He does admit while this points to fabricated results it doesnt role out the possibility that the percentages are correct and that they worked backwards from that to get the vote numbers.

 

like I said..... the people of Syria prefer to be lead by the Assad Regime than lead by terrorists and religious nutters....

 

[bmk1245]

On 4/14/2018 at 1:19 PM, Phaeton80 said:

Without US corporate support Nazi Germany could not have done what it did. Case in point, Henry Ford received the Grand Cross of the German Eagle for his avid Nazi support for godsake.

Get a f*ing sense of history, nuance why not.

 

Russia won us the second world war against the Nazi's, without her the outcome would have been highly questionable, dont get it twisted.

USSR won with the help from USA, and from the fact that russians had occupied many lands before WWII, and the fact that russia is a helluva territory.

Heck, russkies are more land grabbing than anglo-saxons. Everyone are blabbering about how western settlers were efking natives in new world, and who gives a f(many stars) about natives slaughtered by russkies in Siberia, huh?