I posed the question regarding evidence of chems used...

[Javaman]

but as with the last war, "they" (whom ever they are) know that chems were used but, here's the kicker, but not by whom.

So what happens if it's found out that the rebels used the chems and we bomb the Syrian government?

I'm not okay with bombing anyone, period.

I'm really not okay with bombing anyone on circumstantial evidence.

I'm extremely not okay with bombing someone just because we think they are the bad guy.

Now think of those three statements above, just when in recent history could we apply those same statements.

We are now caught up in the rush to war, and once again, we don't have any direct evidence of who did what to whom.

But that doesn't make for good copy.

So which of the many tails is wagging this dog?

Cerberus had three heads, but did anyone every check the other end?

[dipsydoodle]

1. If it was found to be the insurgents who used the chemicals

then given that red lines are red lines I would expect really punitive action to be against them.

[Niceguy1]

2. just because

WE don't have it doesn't mean that the govt doesn't have it.....

[Agnosticsherbet]

3. So your hypothesis is that the Rebels got weapons and gassed their own people to get our support?

That is even more far fetched.

It was widely reported before this that Syria Stockpiles Chemical weapons. (http://carnegieendowment.org/files/DeadlyII.Ch01.FINAL.pdf, http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/cbwprolif)

The Syrian Military has the means to commit an attack. Their control of the weapons gives them the opportunity. Motivation is in the growing size of the conflict that even with the support of Lebanese Hamas and the Iranian Military they have not been able to end. A number of high ranking military men have defected, which shows a military in disarray.

The Syrian government is the most likely culprit in this, not rebels hoping that someone will intervene if they just kill enough of their own innocent women and children.

[EC]

5. Or

there are other countries who would like to see Assad gone that could have done it. Turkey, Saudi Arabia or even Israel. It's not something I'd put past some of those countries trying to force our hand.

[Agnosticsherbet]

6. So there is no report an air attack by other natonal forces.

Something the Syrian government would know about due to this old fangled invention of radar. Also, Syria is known to have one of the most sophisticated air defense systems that an attacking Air Force would have to defeat. (That is widely reported as one of our biggest concerns, Russian made surface to air missiles.)

When Israel took out the Syrian nuclear power plant several years back, they flew in through Turkey, but Syria still knew when they crossed into their air space and engaged their air defense system. So did Turkey who went along with it.

Israel's attack earlier this year was known and reported widely. All the countries in the region knew it happened.

The reports I've seen list Syrian Air Force as the attacker.

A false flag operation on this scale is too far fetched for anything but a movie.

Everybody in the region has radar. Nobody but the US or Russia are flying stealth aircraft. (Israel is not due to receive any until 2016 http://www.algemeiner.com/2013/06/19/israel-to-be-among-first-recipients-of-new-f-35-stealth-fighter-jet/)

The easiest explanation is that Assad, out of desperation and after a series of small scale tests for a year and emboldened by Iranian and Russian support, decided that nothing would be done. Greeks called that hubris, I believe.

[Bluenorthwest]

14. Israel 'took out' a nuke plant project in Iran years ago. Syria has never had such a thing.

Just a point of fact.

[Agnosticsherbet]

16. Yes they did, and that is a point of fact. See links below.

Israel Struck Syrian Nuclear Project, Analysts Say

It was discussed here...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3086244

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x192173

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3136242

[Javaman]

7. boy you jumped from 0 to a million in nothing flat...

where did I said they gassed people to get our support?

I'm just posing a question.

I make claims to nothing.

so please chill.

[Agnosticsherbet]

15. In the OP "So what happens if it's found out that the rebels used the chems . . . ."

. "So what happens if it's found out that the rebels used the chems and we bomb the Syrian government? "

Doctors without borders has reported over three hundred deaths in this incident (I assume they are not a front for the NSA, CIA, or some other nefarious imperial organization), and that the victims were civilians in rebel territory. So if the rebels attacked their own supporters, wives, and children with Chemical weapons, what would be their motive?

I've seen this meme elsewhere, hypotheticals that "the rebels did it." Such a question doesn't pass the smell test or the logic test. Personally, I think this meme is used to muddy the waters. We have an incident, and the first reported, where the Syrian government is reported to have used Chemical weapons. Independent verification by NGO's on the ground testify to the size, scope, and victims of the attack. It is a gross violation of international norms in effect since 1925.

Do we say, "It's none of our business how many children and innocent civilians they kill."

Do we do something to dissuade this behavior?

[Javaman]

17. And that is a question. it's called being a devil advocate.

damn.

just stop, okay? it would save us both a lot of grief.

[bowens43]

4. Why would it even be relevent? Dead is dead, why this bogus red line with the method of death?

Why are chemical weapons less moral the killing people with explosives from drones?

The US needs to learn to stop meddling the affairs of other countries. we need to stop being the cops of the world.

[Javaman]

8. I completely agree...

I'm playing devils advocate, that's all.

and no matter how much I don't want these missiles to be launched, the US government and the UN seem to have already made that decision.

So I'm just asking the logical question of: what if it's not whom the U.S. thinks is responsible?

once again as in 2003, the US is in a rush before the UN inspectors have completed their investigation.

So if the missiles start dropping within the net 48 hours and we still don't have any definitive evidence as to who did what, then I have a massive problem with this whole mess, on top of us rushing to bomb yet another middle eastern country.

[malaise]

9. The war profiteers do not give a fuck who used what

They have money to make

[Javaman]

10. I know...

sadly.

I'm just trying to understand the new brand of stupidity this time around.

[malaise]

11. Seriously

I am pissed

[NightWatcher]

12. Why would Assad (who is winning) draw in the US missiles?

What more likely is that someone who wants Assad to lose is drawing in outside help.

Assad doesn't want us to bomb Assad.

[leftstreet]

13. Notice how the M$M avoid using pictures of Assad?

The war drumming is getting VERY loud, but he's absent from the coverage

Remember when you couldn't turn around without seeing Saddam's mug everywhere?


Why isn't this particular evildoer-of-evil being shown in the daily media lineup?