And next, Syria?

[camouflage]

Assad’s on the rampage unless we have a plan to take him out which we could if we wanted to. But we don’t a bit of light air striking is going to do sod all.

Nope, I don't buy it- any of it. Not even coz I reckon Assad is a nice bloke. Makes more sense for Assads enemies to engineer a chem attack so we can "go in" than it does for Assad to use these weapons that he doesn't need and whose effect is hardly useful militarily or even as some sort of 'message'.

Chemical WMD, the main purpose is as Cassus Belle, I've only ever seen em used for that purpose. Fart out a bit of Kitchen Sarin and then wait expectantly, maybe this time.

 

[rekil]

FFS, really, Wikipedia for facts about Syrian regime use of chemical weapons? Do you read the bible for medical advice as well?

CasuallyBrownesque types seem to be going around and looning up wiki pages by referencing a Newsweek article which was shown to be full of lies in order to push chemical weapon trutherism.

From Peter Ford's wiki.



Newsweek Engages in Easily Debunkable Syria Chemical Weapon Trutherism with the Help of Ian Wilkie - bellingcat
Syria: How Newsweek Fell Prey to Chemical Weapons Disinformation - EA WorldView

Lest we forget, Ford works for Assad's father-in-law in the British Syrian Society and Newsweek is a complete shambles.

Firings, resignations and turmoil at Newsweek

“After I was let go, I received several emails from people who had offers to work there. I told them it would be a terrible idea to take the job, that it would ruin their lives,” the former employee said, describing their last months at Newsweek as a traffic-driven, “permanent culture of fear” that led them to worry that they’d be fired at any time.

 

[Doctor Carrot]

Nope, I don't buy it- any of it. Not even coz I reckon Assad is a nice bloke. Makes more sense for Assads enemies to engineer a chem attack so we can "go in" than it does for Assad to use these weapons that he doesn't need and whose effect is hardly useful militarily or even as some sort of 'message'.

Chemical WMD, the main purpose is as Cassus Belle, I've only ever seen em used for that purpose. Fart out a bit of Kitchen Sarin and then wait expectantly, maybe this time.

I think you've said this about pretty much every chemical attack in this war haven't you? Yeah, it's all fake news, man... Fake news. Yesterday I had some idiot claiming it was fake because the inhalers didn't go in the children's mouths properly or because they were dousing them with water, 'you're not supposed to do that in a chemical attack' yeah because everybody's going to follow exact protocol and know precisely what to do when people are running around feeling like their skin is on fire and choking.... It's all fake news though, false flags because why would anyone with a history of bombing flat civilian areas with impunity for seven years feel the need to use chemical weapons? I mean it just makes perfect sense, rebels gas themselves and then, as a result of them gassing themselves, surrender themselves to the army that's been besieging them. Logic, man, logic.

 

[camouflage]

I think you've said this about pretty much every chemical attack in this war haven't you? Yeah, it's all fake news, man... Fake news. Yesterday I had some idiot claiming it was fake because the inhalers didn't go in the children's mouths properly or because they were dousing them with water, 'you're not supposed to do that in a chemical attack' yeah because everybody's going to follow exact protocol and know precisely what to do when people are running around feeling like their skin is on fire and choking.... It's all fake news though, false flags because why would anyone with a history of bombing flat civilian areas with impunity for seven years feel the need to use chemical weapons? I mean it just makes perfect sense, rebels gas themselves and then, as a result of them gassing themselves, surrender themselves to the army that's been besieging them. Logic, man, logic.

Ah yes, the standard Assault-Narrative. No need to work it so much though, Trump already said he'll strike back etc, is it really necessary to keep hustling this thing now?

 

[Doctor Carrot]

Ah yes, the standard Assault-Narrative. No need to work it so much though, Trump already said he'll strike back etc, is it really necessary to keep hustling this thing now?

He won't though. That's precisely why the gassing took place but it's all fake news.

 

[camouflage]

He won't though. That's precisely why the gassing took place but it's all fake news.

In my day we used to call it Propaganda. I still go with that to be honest. Don't worry though, I'm sure Trump'll be made to throw a few bigger more effective bombs around, hopefully kill off a few 'Assad loyalists', maybe from that Doomsday Cult he owns (Awalites or whatever) and make sure we hit a few dual use installations too- serves the fuckers right for living under Assad. Also let's kill off some of them Irani's running about too, and those Russians... Fuck it- wot you reckon we just nuke all the fuckers now, one fell swoop, take em all out. Then the board will be clear for our thousand year crusade against humanities real enemy, the Chinese... Fuck Yeah!

Anyway for now we just keep up the pressure and hope for a few more gas bombs go off. Gas bombs play well in the sticks. We'll quote the BBC that will quote CNN that can back up what it said with Anonymous Sources and then refer to... I dunno, Georgia or summik to back up all that, or whatever. Throw in some twitter posts too yeah.

 

[bemused]

I wonder what bombing Assad is even going to achieve, other than make a few World leaders feel like they got their protest vote in? It's not going to dissuade him from prosecuting the military action against rebels, bring him to any table and unless a bomb lands on his head stop him trying to retake the country.

 

[Doctor Carrot]

In my day we used to call it Propaganda. I still go with that to be honest. Don't worry though, I'm sure Trump'll be made to throw a few bigger more effective bombs around, hopefully kill off a few 'Assad loyalists', maybe from that Doomsday Cult he owns (Awalites or whatever) and make sure we hit a few dual use installations too- serves the fuckers right for living under Assad. Also let's kill off some of them Irani's running about too, and those Russians... Fuck it- wot you reckon we just nuke all the fuckers now, one fell swoop, take em all out. Then the board will be clear for our thousand year crusade against humanities real enemy, the Chinese... Fuck Yeah!

What part of 'Trump's going to do nothing and that's why Assad launched a gas attack' did you miss? No one has done anything to reign the cunt in for seven years, no one's going to start doing it now. He's done countless gas attacks and no one's done anything so why do you think anything meaningful will happen this time?

Anyway for now we just keep up the pressure and hope for a few more gas bombs go off. Gas bombs play well in the sticks. We'll quote the BBC that will quote CNN that can back up what it said with Anonymous Sources and then refer to... I dunno, Georgia or summik to back up all that, or whatever. Throw in some twitter posts too yeah.

This is what I find baffling about people like you. Your reasoning just falls apart under even the slightest prodding. Assad's done countless gassings and no one's done anything, he's bombed, starved, tortured and besieged and no one's done anything. I disagree with pretty much everything you say but I'm still out as to whether you're an idiot or not.

You've stated the attacks are fake, right? So in your reasoning the rebels have repeatedly faked chemical attacks to draw in western air support and possibly ground troops. On every single occasion this hasn't happened. Assad on the other hand has repeatedly stated his intention to, and I'm paraphrasing here, bomb the living fuck out of anyone who opposes him. He's been doing that for seven years and yet you still state 'oh no, why would he use gas? He doesn't need to.' Yet with a straight face you think rebels, in cahoots with civilians no less, have faked a gas attack, sorry not even faked carried out an actual gas attack in their own closed off and besieged area (and don't worry if you're confused as not even the Russian ambassador to the UN can stick to the line properly) and then immediately turned round and surrendered to the army that's been besieging them, have agreed to be bussed off to another area where they can be bombed, starved and besieged further and, presumably, fake more gas attacks? Which of those two scenarios do you think is more plausible? Forget about what you think you know or don't know about who done what just go with your gut, which of those scenarios is the likeliest?

Finally, of all the chemical attacks that have happened in the seven years of this war how many, in your view, have been carried out by the Assad regime?

 

[camouflage]

What part of 'Trump's going to do nothing and that's why Assad launched a gas attack' did you miss? No one has done anything to reign the cunt in for seven years, no one's going to start doing it now. He's done countless gas attacks and no one's done anything so why do you think anything meaningful will happen this time?



This is what I find baffling about people like you. Your reasoning just falls apart under even the slightest prodding. Assad's done countless gassings and no one's done anything, he's bombed, starved, tortured and besieged and no one's done anything. I disagree with pretty much everything you say but I'm still out as to whether you're an idiot or not.

You've stated the attacks are fake, right? So in your reasoning the rebels have repeatedly faked chemical attacks to draw in western air support and possibly ground troops. On every single occasion this hasn't happened. Assad on the other hand has repeatedly stated his intention to, and I'm paraphrasing here, bomb the living fuck out of anyone who opposes him. He's been doing that for seven years and yet you still state 'oh no, why would he use gas? He doesn't need to.' Yet with a straight face you think rebels, in cahoots with civilians no less, have faked a gas attack, sorry not even faked carried out an actual gas attack in their own closed off and besieged area (and don't worry if you're confused as not even the Russian ambassador to the UN can stick to the line properly) and then immediately turned round and surrendered to the army that's been besieging them, have agreed to be bussed off to another area where they can be bombed, starved and besieged further and, presumably, fake more gas attacks? Which of those two scenarios do you think is more plausible? Forget about what you think you know or don't know about who done what just go with your gut, which of those scenarios is the likeliest?

Finally, of all the chemical attacks that have happened in the seven years of this war how many, in your view, have been carried out by the Assad regime?

Yeah whatever. Anyway the main thing is May reckons we should just get stuck in and start bombing, why wait for parliamentary approval? Style of the times I guess... pretend investigative procedures are imporDeclare the guilty Party and get Bombing!

 

[teqniq]

 

[cupid_stunt]

Yeah whatever. Anyway the main thing is May reckons we should just get stuck in and start bombing, why wait for parliamentary approval? Style of the times I guess... pretend investigative procedures are imporDeclare the guilty Party and get Bombing!

Yeah, lets forget the previous independent investigations, just like Russia wants us too.

 

[camouflage]

Yeah, lets forget the previous independent investigations, just like Russia wants us too.

Wow, there's already been investigations of this attack?

Gosh... I stand corrected.

 

[teqniq]

The word 'previous' should be a clue here but I think you already knew that.

 

[cupid_stunt]

Wow, there's already been investigations of this attack?

Gosh... I stand corrected.

Too thick to read, too thick to understand. (((you)))

 

[camouflage]

Too thick to read, too thick to understand. (((you)))

ave that, yer cupid stunt... Now Mattis admits there was no evidence Assad used poison gas on his people

Get back to me with what investigation exactly you're on about this time.

 

[Doctor Carrot]

Yeah whatever. Anyway the main thing is May reckons we should just get stuck in and start bombing, why wait for parliamentary approval? Style of the times I guess... pretend investigative procedures are imporDeclare the guilty Party and get Bombing!

Oh well. At the very least I've answered my own question as to whether you're an idiot or not.

 

[butchersapron]

Mattis:

Q: Just make sure I heard you correctly, you’re saying you think it’s likely they have used it and you’re looking for the evidence? Is that what you said?

SEC. MATTIS: That’s — we think that they did not carry out what they said they would do back when — in the previous administration, when they were caught using it. Obviously they didn’t, cause they used it again during our administration.

And that gives us a lot of reason to suspect them. And now we have other reports from the battlefield from people who claim it’s been used.

We do not have evidence of it. But we’re not refuting them; we’re looking for evidence of it. Since clearly we are using — we are dealing with the Assad regime that has used denial and deceit to hide their outlaw actions, okay?”​

Article takes down that lie and many other idiocies from Wilkie i.e

The article is also filled with other untrue statements, for example claiming the following about the munitions used in the August 21st 2013 Sarin attacks:

Serious, experienced chemical weapons experts and investigators such as Hans Blix, Scott Ritter, Gareth Porter and Theodore Postol have all cast doubt on “official” American narratives regarding President Assad employing Sarin.

These analysts have all focused on the technical aspects of the two attacks and found them not to be consistent with the use of nation-state quality Sarin munitions.

The 2013 Ghouta event, for example, employed home-made rockets of the type favored by insurgents.​

The claim that the rockets used on August 21st 2013 were a “type favored by insurgents” is totally untrue. The type of rocket used, known as the “Volcano rocket” has been well-documented, and is known to come in two types, explosive and chemical. The chemical variant of the munition has been documented at not only the impact sites of the August 21st 2013 Sarin attacks, but in previous attacks against opposition areas and positions as well.

 

[butchersapron]

Oddly enough, the same night newsweek published that series of lies a whole load of the senior foreign correspondents and experts on newsweek resigned. The laughter that article caused.

 

[butchersapron]

Syria: How Newsweek Fell Prey to Chemical Weapons Disinformation

Once a feature of weekly American journalism, the magazine — now online, rather than in print — has been caught out by allowing dubious pundits to fill its Opinion columns.

In one of the worst pieces published about Syria’s 83-month conflict, a man named Ian Wilkie — self-described as an “international lawyer, U.S. Army veteran and former intelligence community contractor” — has regurgitated the favored disinformation points of pro-Assad activists trying to deny the regime’s chemical weapons attacks.

A quick check of Wilkie’s claims would have exposed them as false propaganda, rather than substantial points for analysis. And a look at his Twitter timeline would have immediately pointed out his embrace of pro-Assad agitators (e.g. Vanessa Beeley), “anti-imperialist” conspiracy outlets (Mint Press News), scientists making debunked claims (Theodore Postol), and commentators circulating flawed and distorted claims (Gareth Porter).

Fake Newsweek

The magazine known to the world since 1933 as Newsweek is no more. A simulacrum of it still exists, in name, but the publication that once helped light the path of history—lending its platform to the civil rights movement in the ‘60s; helping launch impeachment processes against both Nixon and Bill Clinton; and being the first magazine to put then-Senator Barack Obama on its cover—is gone; another casualty of that increasingly familiar combination of financial woes (actually alleged fraud, in Newsweek’s case) and a new generation of management priding itself on know-nothing philistinism.

For Syria-watchers, nothing has made this demise clearer than the saga that began on February 8th, with Newsweek’s publication of an article by a previously unknown writer, Ian Wilkie, titled ‘Now Mattis Admits There Was No Evidence Assad Used Poison Gas On His People.’ As the title suggests, the piece was premised on an excruciatingly embarrassing misunderstanding of remarks by US Defense Secretary James Mattis, on the one hand (as the writer later admitted), and an amalgamation of the usual tinfoil-hat denialism about Assad’s chemical weapons use found in far-right, far-left, and pro-Kremlin echo chambers (it can be difficult to tell the three apart).

 

[butchersapron]

Of course what the OPCW-UN’s Joint Investigative Mechanism (JIM) on chemical attacks in Syria actually found as regards Khan Shaykhun was that the regime was guilty as fuck (as far as it's remit stretched anyway - they were only allowed to say what the attack consisted of and how it happened and who had the means and tools - i.e making clear it was from Syrian Army stock). And guess what, as a result Russia vetoed it's mandate for the following year and having the program closed down. So no more investigations of any chemical attacks within syria. Which makes that regime invitation for the OPCW to investigate the latest one all that more deceitful - and that 'invitation' was immediately blocked by guess who - Russia again.

Of course, this attack variously didn't happen at all, was done by the white helmets blah blah as well. The usual line of bullshit posted above about this latest one.

 

[cupid_stunt]

ave that, yer cupid stunt... Now Mattis admits there was no evidence Assad used poison gas on his people

Get back to me with what investigation exactly you're on about this time.

Only just got back to the thread, I see butchersapron has already handed you your arse on a plate, which saves me the trouble.

Cheers BA.

 

[camouflage]

Only just got back to the thread, I see butchersapron has already handed you your arse on a plate, which saves me the trouble.

Cheers BA.

I know that that is part of your shared reality. Mine is that I honestly can't be asked with it (barely bother to scan butcher stuff anymore) and anyway what difference would it make. Create whatever reality you want, then bomb whoever the fuck it is you'll bomb. And when we're good and fattened up for whatever next pointless fucking war you've got cooking up on vim an bullshit this time- bring on the poppies and flags and working mans plight and be all proud and gave their lives and shit. Anyway now the Russians are nice and involved perhaps there'll be enough poppies for everyone this time, so yeah- proper Cambridge Anal this thing yeah, feel superior and well-read and left-wing cred about it or whatever just so long as you stick to plot, good lad.

 

[butchersapron]

Blimey - even crazed assadist patrick cockburn now believes there was a regime chemical attack. Leaves our own loons out on crazier than crazy limb that.

But there is mounting evidence from neutral observers to confirm that chlorine was used last Saturday. The World Health Organisation says that local health authorities in Douma, with whom it is cooperating, confirm that on the day of the alleged bombing they treated 500 patients with the symptoms of exposure to toxic chemicals. It reports that "there were signs of severe irritation of mucous membranes, respiratory failure and disruption to the central nervous systems of those exposed".

Other evidence for the gassing of civilians is cumulatively convincing: large gas cylinders, like those used in past chlorine gas attacks, were filmed on the roof of the building where most bodies were found. Local people report that Syrian government helicopters were seen in the area at the time of the attack. Such helicopters have been used in chlorine gas bombings in the past.

The Russian and Syrian government accounts of what happened, varying between saying there were no attacks or that evidence for them has been fabricated, are contradictory. A Russian spokeswoman said on Wednesday that the use of "smart missiles" on Syrian government forces could be an attempt to destroy the evidence.

The allegations of fabrication are generalised and non-specific and amount to a conspiracy theory for which no evidence is ever produced, other than to throw doubt on the partiality of those who say that chlorine was used. It is true that many of the sources cited by the Western media as if they were bipartisan eye-witness accounts are committed supporters of the opposition. But the Russian and Syrian governments have never produced any counter-evidence to give credence to the elaborate plot that would be necessary to fake the use of poison gas or to really use it, but put the blame on Syrian government air power.

 

[butchersapron]

I wonder, is this logic retroacative - or just for this single one of the 200+ regime chemical attacks?

 

[TruXta]

I know that that is part of your shared reality. Mine is that I honestly can't be asked with it (barely bother to scan butcher stuff anymore) and anyway what difference would it make. Create whatever reality you want, then bomb whoever the fuck it is you'll bomb. And when we're good and fattened up for whatever next pointless fucking war you've got cooking up on vim an bullshit this time- bring on the poppies and flags and working mans plight and be all proud and gave their lives and shit. Anyway now the Russians are nice and involved perhaps there'll be enough poppies for everyone this time, so yeah- proper Cambridge Anal this thing yeah, feel superior and well-read and left-wing cred about it or whatever just so long as you stick to plot, good lad.

And what, pray tell, would you like to happen? Who do you believe, and why? What purpose does it serve?

I honestly can't say I remember you taking any stance other than "propaganda maaaaaaaan" like some washed up Chomsky fan-boy whose cognitive trouser-pockets have holes so massive your scrunched up ballsack is hanging out.

Fucking state of you.

 

[butchersapron]

Interesting piece on the British medical Journal blog:

David Nott: Crossing red lines in Syria – The BMJ

By the end of 2012, Syrian government forces had attacked medical establishments at least 89 times in eight provinces. Near Damascus, security forces entered three hospitals and killed all the patients and staff in cold blood. In Homs, a field hospital was shelled 20 times in two days. In Aleppo, military aircraft completely destroyed the Children’s Hospital and attempted to destroy all the other well known hospitals in the city. This necessitated the construction of secret field hospitals given secret names to try to continue treating the wounded. In 1953, Syria signed the Geneva conventions and fully understood the implications of breaches of humanitarian law. It then follows that by the end of 2012, the first red line was crossed.

...

Since 2011, there have been over 520 strikes against medical facilities in Syria and over 780 medical staff have been killed. Since the start of this year there have been over 60 attacks on medical establishments. The suffering across the country has reached unprecedented levels, with access to medical aid constantly used as a weapon of war. Even at the start of March, the only UN convoy to be allowed into Eastern Ghouta, had its medical supplies removed including surgical kits, insulin, dialysis equipment and other supplies from reaching the enclave where 400,000 people were still living

Sent from my Lenovo TB-8704F using Tapatalk

 

[Borp]

So what is the best thing to do in syria?

Or more accurately least worst.

Normally I would say a grand coalition peace keeping mission with an end goal of a political settlement. But that's not on the table.

 

[krink]

Even a half-wit like me who sometimes struggles to keep up with this long, tragic conflict has been utterly dumbfounded by so-called lefties embracing the 'false-flag' nonsense. Assad has a rap sheet a mile long for brutalising syrian people (how do these people think this all started ffs?). So I don't need convincing of Assad's guilt.

I have a question (I have loads actually but I don't want to clog the thread like certain posters) and that is why the focus on this attack? why now? What is the reason the American/Brit/French etc have really cranked up the threats now rather than at any of the many earlier opportunities in the last 7 or so years? I can't see it so I would appreciate if someone could point out what is probably galringly obvious. Cheers.

 

[OzT]

I for one hope the West stays out, and get out of Syria. I do not try to claim I know anything about the politics there, and I know Russia's flexing its muscles and making all sort of threats, but at least for the sake of the civilians let's leave Syria alone.

Maybe Russia is bad for Syria, maybe their leader is bad too, but it is another country, let them sort it out, We in our own countries have enough problems of our own to sort out before meddling in others.

 

[TruXta]

Can't stay out when we're already in can we.