It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
-- WARNING! EDUCATED OPINION BELOW! READ AT YOUR OWN RISK!
Believe it or not, there are nations out there who will do this to their own people. The USA isn't the only country with a shady past.
-You are wrong. Although the Syrians have gained significant ground, they are not on the verge of victory. This was a rebel-held city. Rebels hold territory through the outer cities of Syria, and still have aid from Coalition and NATO forces. Stop lying.
-Russia's announcement of this being a hoax was released through their state controlled media. Of course they are going to deny it.
-Syria was found responsible for the Apr 6 chemical attack last year by the UN. Are you really telling me that they are not capable of doing it twice? Or is the UN lying in order for the US to have its way in the world? (Don't flatter yourself). They have denied having chemical weapons altogether, but we even know when and where they were made.
-President Trump recently announced he wanted US involvement in Syria to cease within 6 months. Why the hell would we then go and stage an attack like this? To "nation build"? To go to war with a reemerging Russia? To secure natural resources in Syria? You may not know this, but the resources we gain from Africa and the rest of the Middle East through legal trade alone would make a war with Syria not worth it. War's not free, and we are spread thin already.
-On top of all of this, we have the potential trade war with China, potential nuclear war with North Korea, the national guard being activated to secure the border, not to mention our involvement in other parts of the Middle East. We don't want war with Russia or Syria. And it makes zero sense to stage an attack. The amount of high level cooperation and approval that needs makes it even more unlikely.
Posts like the OP's should be more carefully researched, at the very least based in more then just a distrust for the media.
Conspiracies ARE real. Which is why this site is legit. But not everything is one. In fact, the broken English and poor spelling of the OP shows me that there's another reason he's spouting all this anti USA BS.
In my opinion, the Syrian regime is testing the (soon to be) newly appointed Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, while taking advantage of the fact that we are involved in war elsewhere (social, trade, and military) and our attention is spread somewhat thin. Most importantly, this is a tactic they are using to frighten the rebels and lower their morale. They are trying to crush an extremely resilient force, and they will use any means necessary. Including burning children chemically. They've done it before.
TLDR- The Syrian regime using chemical weapons in not far-fetched. It is an effective tactic to lower the Rebels' morale and gain territory, and they have been guilty of doing so in the past. This scenario is MUCH more likely than the US or NATO forces staging an attack or even fabricating it completely it order to war with Syria or Russia. It makes little to no sense to do that. The amount of bipartisan cooperation it takes to plan a false-flag event really is copious. Have you seen how poorly our government works together? If you haven't already, get familiar with things like Operation Northwoods and learn how such an event would come to fruition. Read my full post for facts and educated opinions.
Stop spouting crap. And stop gassing up people who spout crap.
Deny Ignorance.
originally posted by: TearThePod
a reply to: Tenbatsu
Thank you for your reply. I strongly disagree that the Syrian regime has gone great lengths to protect its civilians as you claim, but I digress.
Let’s just cut to it. Educate me. Someone.
Why is the United States, it’s allies, and all other “players” spreading a false narrative such as what we’re seeing in Syria. I’m not claiming that NATO is the pinnacle of truth. But suggesting that the most powerful allied nation organization in the world is blasting us with fake claims like this is a bold claim.
Tell me what the end game is.
originally posted by: TearThePod
a reply to: Tenbatsu
Thank you for your reply. I strongly disagree that the Syrian regime has gone great lengths to protect its civilians as you claim, but I digress.
Let’s just cut to it. Educate me. Someone.
Why is the United States, it’s allies, and all other “players” spreading a false narrative such as what we’re seeing in Syria. I’m not claiming that NATO is the pinnacle of truth. But suggesting that the most powerful allied nation organization in the world is blasting us with fake claims like this is a bold claim.
Tell me what the end game is.
originally posted by: TearThePod
a reply to: Jay-morris
Thanks for your reply. If you continued reading, I apologized for my grammar comment to the person directly. I realized I was being a dick. And corrected it.
Calling me weak-minded is also a personal attack. And just as uncalled for.
Where do you get your information pertaining to your claim that the Rebels are as good as fallen? The news? How do you determine what is true and what is false then, if I am such a sheep for using the same source. Honest question.
The "government lies" I believe in could have to do with the fact that I am in a position to see some of what has been talked about directly. I am by no means an official source, but chances are I have been involved in things most haven't, and I have a unique perspective on world events. I am only taking available information and trying to determine what is most likely to be the truth. I am not soaking in MSM lies. If I happen to have a viewpoint that lines up with the narrative, then so be it. That doesn't make me a government shill, or a fool, or a sheep. I am an active member on a conspiracy website trying to find the truth, like (most) everyone else here.
I'll ask you again. What is the end game? Show me evidence that points to a conspiracy here. Cite NATO lies that damage their credibility. I see plenty of claims but nobody ever wants to cite something proven. To be fair, I haven't dug a ton. So educate me.
Also, I believe this is relevant to this thread. Who is responsible for the spy attack in England, if not Russia?
If there is enough evidence, or at least smoke, that points away from the official stories discussed then I am open to them. We're all looking for the truth here.
originally posted by: TearThePod
a reply to: Fermy
So if this is an elaborate scheme, which I am open to, then what is there to gain from staging this specific event?
Why are we (United States and allies, NATO, etc.) organizing, or at the very least sponsoring, or flat out staging, chemical attacks on cities in Syria?
Help me make sense of it. Everyone is screaming false flag like they know something I don't.
originally posted by: TearThePod
a reply to: Fermy
What dominance do we have in Iraq and Libya? We haven't known our head from our a$$ in Iraq for quite some time. Geographical strength is a legitimate point. One that the rest of the world powers share, such as Russia. There are dozens of tactical and financial advantages in being in that part of the world. But stability is key in order to secure a long term gain, and that certainly isn't the case in those nations. So if this is an elaborate scheme, which I am open to, then what is there to gain from staging this specific event?
Why are we (United States and allies, NATO, etc.) organizing, or at the very least sponsoring, or flat out staging, chemical attacks on cities in Syria?
Help me make sense of it. Everyone is screaming false flag like they know something I don't.