Claims that Assad has been using Chlorine gas against civilians and rebels.

a reply to: GAOTU789

You believe...

Tell me, how can Assad be in power for more than 4 years (after the so called "revolution"):

- against is own people;
- against "moderate" rebels (i.e al-Nusra / Al-Qaeda) backed by US;
- against ISIS;
- against Turkey;
- against Israel;
- against Money and Weapons from the US, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar;

I tell you what I believe :


Please,

a reply to: voyger2

But Rupert Murdoch tells me he is evil and psychotic and that he harms his own people.

He tells me he is against democracy and freedom.

Thank God Rupert Murdoch also protects me from the propaganda put out by Syria et al... I wouldn't want to fall foul of any of the lies that come from these backwards countries!

originally posted by: GAOTU789
And Obama has said that Chlorine Gas isn't "historically" considered a chemical weapon.

Assad’s air force has launched more than 2,000 raids on Idlib since its capital city was taken by the rebels on 28 March, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.

The escalating air campaign has also coincided with the alleged intensified use of chlorine as a weapon, which is banned under the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention.

www.theguardian.com...

But the Obama administration, which once regarded chemical weapons as a red line, is unlikely to press Assad on the latest chlorine attacks. Though Obama said the US was assisting investigators who were looking into the chlorine allegations, he stunned observers at a press conference in Camp David by saying chlorine was not “historically listed as a chemical weapon”.

“It is true that we’ve seen reports about the use of chlorine in bombs that had the effect of chemical weapons,” Obama said. “Chlorine itself historically has not been listed as a chemical weapon but when it is used in this fashion can be considered a prohibited use of that particular chemical.”

www.newsweek.com...

When used with the intent to hurt or kill, chlorine is considered a chemical weapon, but chlorine itself, used for industrial or domestic purposes, is not included in a state's declaration of chemical weapons.

Read more: www.businessinsider.com...

The world, and more particularly Assad, knows that Obama won't do anything, even though he had his Red Line thingy happening there a while ago. Although I don't think the West should have boots on the ground there, I do think that since we are bombing the piss of ISIS from the sky, why not shoot down any aircraft in the sky as well why we are there? None of the rebels have aircraft as of yet so we could be relatively confident that they are Syrian. It's pretty conclusive that it was Assad that used the chemical weapons originally and most likely still using them on his own citizens.

It's hard to take much that Obama says seriously with a comment like Chlorine isn't a chemical weapon.

The problem with your viewpoint is that it is mainline media propaganda.

The US, West, and its regional allies have been plotting to take down Assad for over 3 years now. They have been funding, arming, and training rebels in a bloody civil war.

They tried to pin the last round of chemical attacks on Assad, even though the UN convoy that was the first on the ground said that the evidence didn't prove either side did it. Moreover, a previous report had implicated the rebels in earlier chemical attacks.

Your red line statements, even while blaming Obama, still paint the picture that Mr. Evil Assad is responsible for all of this, and the west is wavering on playing world police.

No.

originally posted by: wasaka
a reply to: GAOTU789

Israel wants Assad gone, therefore American wants Assad gone.
Toward this objective, the US supports ISIS (and lies about it).

As far as I'm concerned, this is just more war propaganda.

Incorrect.

The US and west want Assad gone because he is a proxy for Iran and Russia. As a triad, they block complete regional hegemony on the part of the western axis (including Israel). Hence, all of the West wants him gone, then Iran. Dominoes.

It is important for you guys to realize that not only are Iran and Syria major regional partners of our enemies (Russia), Syria also has Russia's only Mediterranean sea port, which is profoundly important strategically.

originally posted by: GAOTU789

originally posted by: wasaka


As far as I'm concerned, this is just more war propaganda.

I agree with this. It's all war propaganda but do I believe that Assad has used Chemical Weapons on his own people. A no fly zone or something could be implemented to prevent these attacks from aircraft. I have no problem with Canadian fighters shooting down Syrian aircraft.

Hmmm, can you point to the evidence?

Also, a no fly zone is code word for stopping Assad's main way of stopping the rebels, i.e. air superiority. After that regime change would come. Do...not..fool yourself.

This is what was done in part in Libya.

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14


They tried to pin the last round of chemical attacks on Assad, even though the UN convoy that was the first on the ground said that the evidence didn't prove either side did it. Moreover, a previous report had implicated the rebels in earlier chemical attacks.

You're partially right in your first statement and misleading on the second.

The first claim is partially right. The UN didn't assign blame but enough independent analysis of that report pointed to Assad's forces. The munitions used came from an area under Syrian control. That had been verified by several different groups by the data collectedc by the UN. The Secretary General said that it was for others to determine who, they just went there to determine if the chemical weapons had been used or not.

Here is the actual report...

www.un.org...

Your second claim is wrong. No report was released that blamed the rebels. In fact, the reports released are almost all in agreement that only Assad had the capabilities to weaponize the sarin used. You're talking about a comment made by a UN commissioner after a very preliminary investigation, before the UN could actually get into Syria.

It doesn't strike anyone as odd that Assad agreed to destroy and become a signatory to the CWC just before the report from the UN was released?

a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

I posted several links in the OP. And just posted the link to the actual report from last year. What would you like as evidence? Samples of the gas used? The bodies of the people that were gassed?

The claims are being made that it was done by aircraft. How many aircraft are the rebels using again?

a reply to: voyger2

You've never heard of a civil war going on for 4 years? Ever hear of Chechnya? Columbia? Conga? Sudan?

Assad isn't fighting Turkey or Israel but nice job bringing Israel into it.

Also, although the rebels have been backed by the West, Syria is backed by Russia and Iran. I understand it's a proxy war for all intents and purposes.

originally posted by: GAOTU789
a reply to: voyger2
You've never heard of a civil war going on for 4 years? Ever hear of Chechnya? Columbia? Conga? Sudan?

Sadly, you are missing the point. Did those countries endure more than a 4 year "rebellion" against their leader, with support of US, Israel, Turkey, EAU, Qatar, Terrosist ISIS and Al-Qaeda and most important the majority of their people. No! they didn't.

originally posted by: GAOTU789
a reply to: voyger2
Assad isn't fighting Turkey or Israel but nice job bringing Israel into it.

About Turkey:

Syria’s UN envoy has accused Turkey and Saudi Arabia of giving weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) to terrorist groups fighting in the country.

Turkey, Saudi Arabia giving terrorists WMDs, Syria claims
Turkey shells Syrian artillery units near border: Turkish military
etc, etc..

About Israel:

Israel treats Takfiri terrorists wounded in Syrian conflict: Report

Israeli security forces have kept steady contacts with the Syrian rebels over the past 18 months, mainly treating wounded fighters but possibly supplying them with arms, UN observers at the Israeli-Syrian border reported.

UN details Israel helping Syrian rebels at Golan Heights
etc, etc..

originally posted by: GAOTU789
a reply to: voyger2
Also, although the rebels have been backed by the West, Syria is backed by Russia and Iran. I understand it's a proxy war for all intents and purposes.

If they are backed by Russian and Iran, it's because the trouble makers of the world who need to sell weapons and spread instability keep on doing it. Don't ignore General Wesley Clark statements, please.

originally posted by: GAOTU789

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14


They tried to pin the last round of chemical attacks on Assad, even though the UN convoy that was the first on the ground said that the evidence didn't prove either side did it. Moreover, a previous report had implicated the rebels in earlier chemical attacks.

You're partially right in your first statement and misleading on the second.

The first claim is partially right. The UN didn't assign blame but enough independent analysis of that report pointed to Assad's forces. The munitions used came from an area under Syrian control. That had been verified by several different groups by the data collectedc by the UN. The Secretary General said that it was for others to determine who, they just went there to determine if the chemical weapons had been used or not.

Here is the actual report...

www.un.org...

Your second claim is wrong. No report was released that blamed the rebels. In fact, the reports released are almost all in agreement that only Assad had the capabilities to weaponize the sarin used. You're talking about a comment made by a UN commissioner after a very preliminary investigation, before the UN could actually get into Syria.

It doesn't strike anyone as odd that Assad agreed to destroy and become a signatory to the CWC just before the report from the UN was released?

You are incorrect.

I was actually in a small room, with the very investigative team in question, with them speaking to the lack of evidence AFTER they entered Syria. They were the first independent team on the ground, and the ONLY one within the range of time necessary to test for Sarin and all of that before it dissipates. That panel, in their statements, would disagree with your assessment.

Moreover, the media has continually stated only Assad had the capability to produce sarin. This is entirely foolish. The rebels have been armed by everyone from Turkey and Qatar to the US. It really is quite dumb to use the argument that the rebels could not produce sarin.

Um.... all it takes is any one of their external supporters to provide it.....

Moreover, it would be entirely foolish for Assad to use chemical weapons, knowing that such a move would not only produce no benefit militarily at that level of use, but actually allow the West and allies the pretext for the military intervention they so badly wanted.

Finally, there WAS an initial UN report previously pointing to chemical weapons use by rebels in the past. It was pulled, probably under pressure from the powers.

originally posted by: GAOTU789
a reply to: voyger2

You've never heard of a civil war going on for 4 years? Ever hear of Chechnya? Columbia? Conga? Sudan?

Assad isn't fighting Turkey or Israel but nice job bringing Israel into it.

Also, although the rebels have been backed by the West, Syria is backed by Russia and Iran. I understand it's a proxy war for all intents and purposes.

Assad most definitely is fighting partly Turkey, as Turkey has been openly arming the rebels and training them on Turkish territory... Turkey is in the Western-allied opposing side...

Israel, beyond simply being a general ally of the West, has less culpability.

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: wasaka
a reply to: GAOTU789

Israel wants Assad gone, therefore American wants Assad gone.
Toward this objective, the US supports ISIS (and lies about it).

As far as I'm concerned, this is just more war propaganda.

Incorrect.

The US and west want Assad gone because he is a proxy for Iran and Russia. As a triad, they block complete regional hegemony on the part of the western axis (including Israel). Hence, all of the West wants him gone, then Iran. Dominoes.

It is important for you guys to realize that not only are Iran and Syria major regional partners of our enemies (Russia), Syria also has Russia's only Mediterranean sea port, which is profoundly important strategically.

It would seem you agree with everything I said.

What is incorrect is this claim you make that Russia is our enemy.

Russia is not our enemy.

You've drinking the "zbigniew zabriskie" cool aid.

originally posted by: wasaka

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: wasaka
a reply to: GAOTU789

Israel wants Assad gone, therefore American wants Assad gone.
Toward this objective, the US supports ISIS (and lies about it).

As far as I'm concerned, this is just more war propaganda.

Incorrect.

The US and west want Assad gone because he is a proxy for Iran and Russia. As a triad, they block complete regional hegemony on the part of the western axis (including Israel). Hence, all of the West wants him gone, then Iran. Dominoes.

It is important for you guys to realize that not only are Iran and Syria major regional partners of our enemies (Russia), Syria also has Russia's only Mediterranean sea port, which is profoundly important strategically.

It would seem you agree with everything I said.

What is incorrect is this claim you make that Russia is our enemy.

Russia is not our enemy.

You've drinking the "zbigniew zabriskie" cool aid.

When I say enemy, I mean the enemy of the PTB in the West, not myself. I have no interest in Brezinski's "global chess game."

There is a vast difference between being aware of what is actually happening in the world versus supporting it. I am diametrically opposed to the continuation of the law of the jungle at the international level.

originally posted by: voyger2
a reply to: GAOTU789

You believe...

Tell me, how can Assad be in power for more than 4 years (after the so called "revolution"):

- against is own people;
- against "moderate" rebels (i.e al-Nusra / Al-Qaeda) backed by US;
- against ISIS;
- against Turkey;
- against Israel;
- against Money and Weapons from the US, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar;

I tell you what I believe :

Please,

I agree with you. I think the "seven countries in five years" speech nails it.

The "how" is everything from the invasion of Iraq to the "Arab Spring," including funding/arming/training rebels in places like Libya and Syria. The former is the overt and the latter is the covert.

I was actually studying formally the Libyan and Syrian conflicts with a former advisor to Kofi Annan, an advisor who worked with the UN Security Council, when I realized that this was the covert modus operandi. We even were doing mock UN SC sessions regarding Syria, with real UN officials playing parts.

a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14



"Enemies are necessary for the wheels of the U.S. military machine to turn."
-- John Stockwell, former CIA official and author

a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

So you deny anything the media says, unless it agrees with your POV, and you're pals with the team that did the investigation and claim that what they said isn't what was reported and that others had the original report pulled? Did I get that right? Oh and work with Kofi Anan's aides on studying Libya and Syria?

You're first thread here says you were an intern, and makes all kinds of other claims. I'm a little skeptical. Not about you have done an internship but about your claims. It is the internet after all. And I only skimmed your posts but I don't see any claims of super secret insider knowledge back then. may have missed it though, I only skimmed your posts, not read every word.

You wouldn't happen to have any sort of proof to back that claim up would you? You don't have to post it, you can send it to one of the admins or owners instead of me as well.

Oh and since Clarke claims this happened in '01 and we are now half way through '15, how's that 5 year time line working out?

Oh and if you have done even half the things you claim, good for you, and I am sincere in that. The programs you mention are noble in intention if not impossible to accomplish in todays world.

originally posted by: GAOTU789
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

So you deny anything the media says, unless it agrees with your POV, and you're pals with the team that did the investigation and claim that what they said isn't what was reported and that others had the original report pulled? Did I get that right? Oh and work with Kofi Anan's aides on studying Libya and Syria?

You're first thread here says you were an intern, and makes all kinds of other claims. I'm a little skeptical. Not about you have done an internship but about your claims. It is the internet after all. And I only skimmed your posts but I don't see any claims of super secret insider knowledge back then. may have missed it though, I only skimmed your posts, not read every word.

You wouldn't happen to have any sort of proof to back that claim up would you? You don't have to post it, you can send it to one of the admins or owners instead of me as well.

Oh and since Clarke claims this happened in '01 and we are now half way through '15, how's that 5 year time line working out?

Oh and if you have done even half the things you claim, good for you, and I am sincere in that. The programs you mention are noble in intention if not impossible to accomplish in todays world.

Hmm, first, I don't feel compelled to provide you proof, as to do so would violate anonymity, here and in a message. I have a current UN diplomatic pass (D) but to photo it would break my anonymity, something I am not willing to do.

Here are the links to some of those who I have studied with.

Elizabeth Lindenmayer

www.un.org...
sipa.columbia.edu...

Jeffrey Sachs

www.earth.columbia.edu...

So yes, to a certain degree you could say I have studied personally with "insiders," although often these insiders are smart enough to be closed lipped about some more controversial topics, as their jobs may depend on it.

My working knowledge is actually more international development rather than international security.

As to the small room and panel, it was a small event in NYC with the investigative team on a panel, moderated by Elizabeth Lindenmayer, addressing exactly these topics. It was not "secret" however, nor "insider knowledge" in that sense, as it was a public event. So this actually ADDS credibility, as the panel was not secretive about the information at all. This actually undermines the media narrative, and supports the idea that the media misrepresents many foreign policy issues.

Wesley Clark's timeline obviously hasn't panned out, but the strategy or at least targets align somewhat. I DO think that countries are being targeted that are a block to the West and allies solidifying regional hegemony.

The very reason that countries are not signing on to a Chapter VII SC resolution in Syria is precisely because the very same was abused in Libya and through those abuses facilitated the ouster of the regime (something that many countries and unions that signed on explicitly forbade).

It is entirely possible that Assad has utilized chlorine gas. The thing is, again, previous reports were manipulated by the West to put the blame on him when the actual investigative teams did not find that.

Moreover, the West has been looking for an excuse to increase it's involvement but needs a green light like chemical weapons.

So, perhaps you and the media are correct. But I've lost much trust for good reason in both the speeches of many western officials and media narratives surrounding foreign policy.