World Politics

[ToreBear]

Re: Re:

Its confirmed that Sarin or a sarin-like substance was used in the Khan Sheikhoun attack.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-39648503

I haven't been keeping up on Russian disinformation lately. But the story about hitting a weapons store containing Sarin seems to require even more leaps of logic than usual. AFAIK the nature of these substances is that they are stored in binary form. That means the Syrian bombs supposedly were able to mix the substances to make Sarin with an explosion, which likely would have destroyed one or two of the chemical components. Perhaps the Russians have given them some powerful new blender bomb.

Oh well, I'm sure the Russians will come up with another explanation as to why Syria didn't do it. They always do.

....you mean something like what ISIS' good friends in Merikah have developed....

the M687 155 mm field artillery shell, which was a binary sarin weapon system developed by the US Army

....or this one...

The M134 bomblet was designed for the M190 Honest John rocket warhead.[1] The bomblets carried sarin nerve agent and when the missile was fired the bomblets were released 5,000 feet above their target.[1] When the time came for the sub-munitions to be released a mechanical time fuze would cut the warhead's skin and the bomblets were released.[1] The weapon could effectively saturate an area 1,000 meters in diameter with chemical agent.[1]

The Honest John held 356 of the 115 mm M134s.[1] The spherical M134 was 4.5 inches around and constructed of ribbed steel; its interior held about 1.1 pounds (0.50 kg) of sarin (GB).[2] The U.S. Army Chemical Corps originally planned to use the M134 as a VX dissemination method as well, but later regarded this use as ineffective and scrapped the plan

....or this one....

The M139 bomblet was a U.S. sub-munition designed for use in warheads as a chemical cluster bomb. Each bomblet held 590 grams (1.3 lb) of sarin nerve agent

In 1964, a new warhead size was standardized for the 318 mm Honest John rocket. The warhead held 52 M139 bomblets.[1] When the MGM-29 Sergeant was deployed in the 1960s, it had the capacity to deliver a warhead carrying 330 M139 bomblets.[1] Subsequent missile systems, including the Pershing missile, had the capability to carry warheads with the M139 inside.[1] In total, about 60,000 M139s were produced and stored...

Cheers

So you are saying IS had a 155 mm cannon, that they used to fire the shell at the area the Syrians were bombing without anyone noticing?

When the shell was fired the force of the acceleration would cause the disk between them to breach and the spinning of the projectile facilitated mixing.

Or are you saying the Russians had a Bomb that could facilitate all this without destroying any of the precursors?

....no, and in case you have forgotten, you have said that....all I was pointing out was that one of the primary suppliers of arms to the ISIS project, Merikah, had munitions that had the capability to do what you unequivocally stated earlier was impossible ...

...and no they wouldn't have to fire the shell....just lay the shell in the middle of the road and put a small detonation device on it to simulate impact ( see photo and related comments in Postol article posted earlier )....and they would have known when the air strike is coming, so simply co-ordinate the two, cue the world wide outrage, and the cruise missiles are away...easy peezee...instant tragedy....

Cheers

But the key word is had. Both Russia and the US destroyed their chemical arsenal in the 90s through reciprocal verification. The M687 shells were destroyed in the 90s. The bomblets you mentioned were destroyed in 1976 or earlier.

As for Merika being the main supplier of arms to ISIS. So you mean merika produces PKMs RPG-7s and AK-47? Or are you thinking about the weapons captured from merikas allies and choose that wording because it makes merika look worse?

The point is the M687 don't have that capability. The M687 is stored with one of the precurosors. Before use, the second precursor is inserted. The act of firing the shell shatters the separation of the precursors. And the spinning of the shell mixes the precursors together.

The mixing the "Syrian" bombs would have to do for hitting the weapon cache, would be akin to the Russian Blender bomb picking up the precursors and mixing them together correctly at the same time.

In response to your latest theory:
It's not enough to have an artillery shell with poison gas. It doesn't work like that. You need the precursor to insert to arm the shell and the 155m cannon is needed to start the mixing process by firing the shell, and the shell needs to be falling to complete the mixing process.

I'm sorry to have to tell you this: The Syrians dropped a chemical weapon on Khan Shaykhun.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

sometimes a bear gets attacked by a mountain lion.

Sometimes a tiger gets into the mix.

Sometimes a bear just gets a bad cold and cough's himself into a hack.

 

[blutto]

Re: Re:

Its confirmed that Sarin or a sarin-like substance was used in the Khan Sheikhoun attack.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-39648503

I haven't been keeping up on Russian disinformation lately. But the story about hitting a weapons store containing Sarin seems to require even more leaps of logic than usual. AFAIK the nature of these substances is that they are stored in binary form. That means the Syrian bombs supposedly were able to mix the substances to make Sarin with an explosion, which likely would have destroyed one or two of the chemical components. Perhaps the Russians have given them some powerful new blender bomb.

Oh well, I'm sure the Russians will come up with another explanation as to why Syria didn't do it. They always do.

....you mean something like what ISIS' good friends in Merikah have developed....

the M687 155 mm field artillery shell, which was a binary sarin weapon system developed by the US Army

....or this one...

The M134 bomblet was designed for the M190 Honest John rocket warhead.[1] The bomblets carried sarin nerve agent and when the missile was fired the bomblets were released 5,000 feet above their target.[1] When the time came for the sub-munitions to be released a mechanical time fuze would cut the warhead's skin and the bomblets were released.[1] The weapon could effectively saturate an area 1,000 meters in diameter with chemical agent.[1]

The Honest John held 356 of the 115 mm M134s.[1] The spherical M134 was 4.5 inches around and constructed of ribbed steel; its interior held about 1.1 pounds (0.50 kg) of sarin (GB).[2] The U.S. Army Chemical Corps originally planned to use the M134 as a VX dissemination method as well, but later regarded this use as ineffective and scrapped the plan

....or this one....

The M139 bomblet was a U.S. sub-munition designed for use in warheads as a chemical cluster bomb. Each bomblet held 590 grams (1.3 lb) of sarin nerve agent

In 1964, a new warhead size was standardized for the 318 mm Honest John rocket. The warhead held 52 M139 bomblets.[1] When the MGM-29 Sergeant was deployed in the 1960s, it had the capacity to deliver a warhead carrying 330 M139 bomblets.[1] Subsequent missile systems, including the Pershing missile, had the capability to carry warheads with the M139 inside.[1] In total, about 60,000 M139s were produced and stored...

Cheers

So you are saying IS had a 155 mm cannon, that they used to fire the shell at the area the Syrians were bombing without anyone noticing?

When the shell was fired the force of the acceleration would cause the disk between them to breach and the spinning of the projectile facilitated mixing.

Or are you saying the Russians had a Bomb that could facilitate all this without destroying any of the precursors?

....no, and in case you have forgotten, you have said that....all I was pointing out was that one of the primary suppliers of arms to the ISIS project, Merikah, had munitions that had the capability to do what you unequivocally stated earlier was impossible ...

...and no they wouldn't have to fire the shell....just lay the shell in the middle of the road and put a small detonation device on it to simulate impact ( see photo and related comments in Postol article posted earlier )....and they would have known when the air strike is coming, so simply co-ordinate the two, cue the world wide outrage, and the cruise missiles are away...easy peezee...instant tragedy....

Cheers

But the key word is had. Both Russia and the US destroyed their chemical arsenal in the 90s through reciprocal verification. The M687 shells were destroyed in the 90s. The bomblets you mentioned were destroyed in 1976 or earlier.

As for Merika being the main supplier of arms to ISIS. So you mean merika produces PKMs RPG-7s and AK-47? Or are you thinking about the weapons captured from merikas allies and choose that wording because it makes merika look worse?

The point is the M687 don't have that capability. The M687 is stored with one of the precurosors. Before use, the second precursor is inserted. The act of firing the shell shatters the separation of the precursors. And the spinning of the shell mixes the precursors together.

The mixing the "Syrian" bombs would have to do for hitting the weapon cache, would be akin to the Russian Blender bomb picking up the precursors and mixing them together correctly at the same time.

In response to your latest theory:
It's not enough to have an artillery shell with poison gas. It doesn't work like that. You need the precursor to insert to arm the shell and the 155m cannon is needed to start the mixing process by firing the shell, and the shell needs to be falling to complete the mixing process.

I'm sorry to have to tell you this: The Syrians dropped a chemical weapon on Khan Shaykhun.

....or you know just shake it....or if want a real pro mix, use a paint shaker....this isn't rocket surgery....

.....or better still maybe ask your freedom fighting rebel best buds how they did it in Ghouta....

Cheers

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Re: Re:

....or you know just shake it....or if want a real pro mix, use a paint shaker....this isn't rocket surgery....

.....or better still maybe ask your freedom fighting rebel best buds how they did it in Ghouta....

Cheers

Does a bear S*#! in the woods?

 

[Bustedknuckle]

Re: Re:

Its confirmed that Sarin or a sarin-like substance was used in the Khan Sheikhoun attack.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-39648503

I haven't been keeping up on Russian disinformation lately. But the story about hitting a weapons store containing Sarin seems to require even more leaps of logic than usual. AFAIK the nature of these substances is that they are stored in binary form. That means the Syrian bombs supposedly were able to mix the substances to make Sarin with an explosion, which likely would have destroyed one or two of the chemical components. Perhaps the Russians have given them some powerful new blender bomb.

Oh well, I'm sure the Russians will come up with another explanation as to why Syria didn't do it. They always do.

....you mean something like what ISIS' good friends in Merikah have developed....

the M687 155 mm field artillery shell, which was a binary sarin weapon system developed by the US Army

....or this one...

The M134 bomblet was designed for the M190 Honest John rocket warhead.[1] The bomblets carried sarin nerve agent and when the missile was fired the bomblets were released 5,000 feet above their target.[1] When the time came for the sub-munitions to be released a mechanical time fuze would cut the warhead's skin and the bomblets were released.[1] The weapon could effectively saturate an area 1,000 meters in diameter with chemical agent.[1]

The Honest John held 356 of the 115 mm M134s.[1] The spherical M134 was 4.5 inches around and constructed of ribbed steel; its interior held about 1.1 pounds (0.50 kg) of sarin (GB).[2] The U.S. Army Chemical Corps originally planned to use the M134 as a VX dissemination method as well, but later regarded this use as ineffective and scrapped the plan

....or this one....

The M139 bomblet was a U.S. sub-munition designed for use in warheads as a chemical cluster bomb. Each bomblet held 590 grams (1.3 lb) of sarin nerve agent

In 1964, a new warhead size was standardized for the 318 mm Honest John rocket. The warhead held 52 M139 bomblets.[1] When the MGM-29 Sergeant was deployed in the 1960s, it had the capacity to deliver a warhead carrying 330 M139 bomblets.[1] Subsequent missile systems, including the Pershing missile, had the capability to carry warheads with the M139 inside.[1] In total, about 60,000 M139s were produced and stored...

Cheers

So you are saying IS had a 155 mm cannon, that they used to fire the shell at the area the Syrians were bombing without anyone noticing?

When the shell was fired the force of the acceleration would cause the disk between them to breach and the spinning of the projectile facilitated mixing.

Or are you saying the Russians had a Bomb that could facilitate all this without destroying any of the precursors?

....no, and in case you have forgotten, you have said that....all I was pointing out was that one of the primary suppliers of arms to the ISIS project, Merikah, had munitions that had the capability to do what you unequivocally stated earlier was impossible ...

...and no they wouldn't have to fire the shell....just lay the shell in the middle of the road and put a small detonation device on it to simulate impact ( see photo and related comments in Postol article posted earlier )....and they would have known when the air strike is coming, so simply co-ordinate the two, cue the world wide outrage, and the cruise missiles are away...easy peezee...instant tragedy....

Cheers

But the key word is had. Both Russia and the US destroyed their chemical arsenal in the 90s through reciprocal verification. The M687 shells were destroyed in the 90s. The bomblets you mentioned were destroyed in 1976 or earlier.

As for Merika being the main supplier of arms to ISIS. So you mean merika produces PKMs RPG-7s and AK-47? Or are you thinking about the weapons captured from merikas allies and choose that wording because it makes merika look worse?

The point is the M687 don't have that capability. The M687 is stored with one of the precurosors. Before use, the second precursor is inserted. The act of firing the shell shatters the separation of the precursors. And the spinning of the shell mixes the precursors together.

The mixing the "Syrian" bombs would have to do for hitting the weapon cache, would be akin to the Russian Blender bomb picking up the precursors and mixing them together correctly at the same time.

In response to your latest theory:
It's not enough to have an artillery shell with poison gas. It doesn't work like that. You need the precursor to insert to arm the shell and the 155m cannon is needed to start the mixing process by firing the shell, and the shell needs to be falling to complete the mixing process.

I'm sorry to have to tell you this: The Syrians dropped a chemical weapon on Khan Shaykhun.

Don't confuse a civilian's argument with facts...your post is spot on.

 

[Dan2016]

The weaponry is a red herring innit.

Expert MIT prof, as per Blutto's post, says there is no evidence for it being a Syrian attack. The evidence suggests it wasn't them.

Evidence is needed to prove Syrian forces did it.

 

[python]

Re:

The weaponry is a red herring innit.

Expert MIT prof, as per Blutto's post, says there is no evidence for it being a Syrian attack. The evidence suggests it wasn't them.

Evidence is needed to prove Syrian forces did it.

oy, oy...i really resisted to log on to post but lost to myself :redface:

1stly, pls dan keep herring out of it, will you...i absolutely looove herring of any colour, any time of a day, any preparation as long as it's eatable. i will not allow anyone to speak lowly of herring

2nd-ly, the busted endorsement was, well - only i am allowed to say that as the one having a special respect for the red fish - not quite the red herring, but a red-glowing bullcrap.

splainin': as anyone can evidence from his posting record, the busted often positions himself as a proud military aviator (pls note, no quotations marks b/c it's a personal choice to feel proud about serving his country!) ... he oft positions himself, as in his short post above as some sort of special military insider/expert vs. the 'civilians'.

the very obvious trouble with that hollow 'spot-on' is that the proud aviator has never indicated any expertise on chemical weaponry - the subject of the blutto post.

moreover, we have several retired americam military regularly posting here. semper is the most prominent (patrick for sure and perhaps unchained are the others). NONE of then - i repeat none - had ever pounded their chests of being a military expert. in fact, they all showed a lot more reserve, humour or plain smarts that the chest-ponder calling the object he hates 'adolf' in almost every most about him.

so, pls quit the red herring bashing

 

[Bustedknuckle]

Re: Re:

The weaponry is a red herring innit.

Expert MIT prof, as per Blutto's post, says there is no evidence for it being a Syrian attack. The evidence suggests it wasn't them.

Evidence is needed to prove Syrian forces did it.

oy, oy...i really resisted to log on to post but lost to myself :redface:

1stly, pls dan keep herring out of it, will you...i absolutely looove herring of any colour, any time of a day, any preparation as long as it's eatable. i will not allow anyone to speak lowly of herring

2nd-ly, the busted endorsement was, well - only i am allowed to say that as the one having a special respect for the red fish - not quite the red herring, but a red-glowing bullcrap.

splainin': as anyone can evidence from his posting record, the busted often positions himself as a proud military aviator (pls note, no quotations marks b/c it's a personal choice to feel proud about serving his country!) ... he oft positions himself, as in his short post above as some sort of special military insider/expert vs. the 'civilians'.

the very obvious trouble with that hollow 'spot-on' is that the proud aviator has never indicated any expertise on chemical weaponry - the subject of the blutto post.

moreover, we have several retired americam military regularly posting here. semper is the most prominent (patrick for sure and perhaps unchained are the others). NONE of then - i repeat none - had ever pounded their chests of being a military expert. in fact, they all showed a lot more reserve, humour or plain smarts that the chest-ponder calling the object he hates 'adolf' in almost every most about him.

so, pls quit the red herring bashing

Spoken like a..well, a civilian..well done. You own the military, it's a shame you don't know anything about it.

Semper was a proud member of the Marine Corps, but more likely a target of WMD than the user of same.

Never pounded my chest but have I trained in WMD weaponry, as a deliverer of same, Via the aircraft I flew? Why yes I have. As ToreBear expertly pointed out, as an obvious expert and chest pounder of equipment user that 'may' deliver a WMD. Not some gent up north that has access to a computer and google.

But ya don't believe me..like I really GAS?...no, I don't.

 

[python]

you discredited yourself way too many times on both the 'civilian' matters (as the fukushima was the russian design) and on purely military matters. your endorsements are a testament to someone having an agenda as opposed to someone having a real knowledge and trying to wegh in. just as every post about trump is that he is 'adolf'.

a very expression of a primitive - and i dont find you arrogant or overbearing as some other chest pounders - just a party line simpleton. had you really read and understood the post you endorsed, you'd find plenty of factual, easily verifiable problems with it anyone with the real interest would.

 

[blutto]

Re: Re:

The weaponry is a red herring innit.

Expert MIT prof, as per Blutto's post, says there is no evidence for it being a Syrian attack. The evidence suggests it wasn't them.

Evidence is needed to prove Syrian forces did it.

oy, oy...i really resisted to log on to post but lost to myself :redface:

1stly, pls dan keep herring out of it, will you...i absolutely looove herring of any colour, any time of a day, any preparation as long as it's eatable. i will not allow anyone to speak lowly of herring

2nd-ly, the busted endorsement was, well - only i am allowed to say that as the one having a special respect for the red fish - not quite the red herring, but a red-glowing bullcrap.

splainin': as anyone can evidence from his posting record, the busted often positions himself as a proud military aviator (pls note, no quotations marks b/c it's a personal choice to feel proud about serving his country!) ... he oft positions himself, as in his short post above as some sort of special military insider/expert vs. the 'civilians'.

the very obvious trouble with that hollow 'spot-on' is that the proud aviator has never indicated any expertise on chemical weaponry - the subject of the blutto post.

moreover, we have several retired americam military regularly posting here. semper is the most prominent (patrick for sure and perhaps unchained are the others). NONE of then - i repeat none - had ever pounded their chests of being a military expert. in fact, they all showed a lot more reserve, humour or plain smarts that the chest-ponder calling the object he hates 'adolf' in almost every most about him.

so, pls quit the red herring bashing

....ok and lets just leave it at that, like out of reverence, and such....

Cheers

 

[Dan2016]

@Python...oh yeah the noble wee red fishies are worth more than cheap expressions for sure. Fine and tasty wee beasties they are...pickled herring, herring and sauerkraut...very tasty indeed.

The weaponry diversion is, as you say, a red glowing bullcrap...

@Busted...with respect to yourself for whatever military expertise you have, the opinion of a verified MIT professor Trumps (sic) yours as an anonymous online forum user. And Python's fact checking point is valid... ToreBear's post didn't deserve your glowing endorsement IMO (no offense ToreBear)

 

[Bustedknuckle]

Re:

you discredited yourself way too many times on both the 'civilian' matters (as the fukushima was the russian design) and on purely military matters. your endorsements are a testament to someone having an agenda as opposed to someone having a real knowledge and trying to weigh in. just as every post about trump is that he is 'adolf'.

a very expression of a primitive - and i dont find you arrogant or overbearing as some other chest pounders - just a party line simpleton. had you really read and understood the post you endorsed, you'd find plenty of factual, easily verifiable problems with it anyone with the real interest would.

glad you like this dope, adolf..maybe if the president would act 'presidential', I wouldn't be calling him a name common in Germany.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/al-franken-trump-pocahontas

 

[Jagartrott]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/france-syria-chemical-attack-proof-bashar-assad-carry-out-jean-marc-ayrault-foreign-affairs-minister-a7702541.html

French intelligence points to Syrian regime.
Apparently, Assad now also claims the chemical attack and aftermath was staged. Pathetic.

 

[Dan2016]

Re:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/france-syria-chemical-attack-proof-bashar-assad-carry-out-jean-marc-ayrault-foreign-affairs-minister-a7702541.html

French intelligence points to Syrian regime.
Apparently, Assad now also claims the chemical attack and aftermath was staged. Pathetic.

That's a complete non-article from the Indie...

 

[python]

the problem with saying 'according to 'intelligence reports' is that the agencies producing them are the official tools of their govts tasked to promote, including via slick fabrications, their govts foreign policies..

it's the oldest trick in a spooky bookie - reiterate a point produced in a foreign ministry and refer to 'classified sources that could not be disclosed'. attributing it to 'intelligence services' gives laypersons an impression of credibility.

 

[ToreBear]

Re:

@Python...oh yeah the noble wee red fishies are worth more than cheap expressions for sure. Fine and tasty wee beasties they are...pickled herring, herring and sauerkraut...very tasty indeed.

The weaponry diversion is, as you say, a red glowing bullcrap...

@Busted...with respect to yourself for whatever military expertise you have, the opinion of a verified MIT professor Trumps (sic) yours as an anonymous online forum user. And Python's fact checking point is valid... ToreBear's post didn't deserve your glowing endorsement IMO (no offense ToreBear)

Oh it did deserve a glowing endorsment.

 

[ToreBear]

Here is the French report:
http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/170425_-_evaluation_nationale_-_anglais_-_final_cle0dbf47-1.pdf

Python, stop believing RT. It is a propaganda project. If you speak Russian you should know this.

@Bustedknuckel
Thanks!

Was it a Navy Pilot you were back in the 80s?

 

[python]

i dont speak russian nor ever watch the rt...

the only person here i am ready to disbelief - just about as the ABSOLUTE majority of poster in the threads you post (xc ski, gilbert etc) is you. the blind wishful thinking has been pointed out, taken apart and proven by a dozen of posters and is still denied.

 

[ScienceIsCool]

Re:

Here is the French report:
http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/170425_-_evaluation_nationale_-_anglais_-_final_cle0dbf47-1.pdf

Python, stop believing RT. It is a propaganda project. If you speak Russian you should know this.

@Bustedknuckel
Thanks!

Was it a Navy Pilot you were back in the 80s?

Juuust checking. Is the BBC a propaganda project? CBC? ABC? Which government funded media are propaganda and which aren't? The news they report, is it factually correct even if it's selective?

John Swanson

 

[blutto]

Re: Re:

Here is the French report:
http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/170425_-_evaluation_nationale_-_anglais_-_final_cle0dbf47-1.pdf

Python, stop believing RT. It is a propaganda project. If you speak Russian you should know this.

@Bustedknuckel
Thanks!

Was it a Navy Pilot you were back in the 80s?

Juuust checking. Is the BBC a propaganda project? CBC? ABC? Which government funded media are propaganda and which aren't? The news they report, is it factually correct even if it's selective?

John Swanson

...point taken, but there is also that thingee about the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth....the slickest way to lie is be selective about the truth eh....

Cheers

 

[Jagartrott]

Re: Re:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/france-syria-chemical-attack-proof-bashar-assad-carry-out-jean-marc-ayrault-foreign-affairs-minister-a7702541.html

French intelligence points to Syrian regime.
Apparently, Assad now also claims the chemical attack and aftermath was staged. Pathetic.

That's a complete non-article from the Indie...

Correct, but it was the first English-spoken report I could easily find this morning.
Meanwhile, The Guardian has a more elaborate story:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ied-out-sarin-attack-says-french-intelligence

 

[ToreBear]

Re:

i dont speak russian nor ever watch the rt...

the only person here i am ready to disbelief - just about as the ABSOLUTE majority of poster in the threads you post (xc ski, gilbert etc) is you. the blind wishful thinking has been pointed out, taken apart and proven by a dozen of posters and is still denied.

I'm sorry. My assumptions got the better of me. I guess you get your info on the Russian view of the world somewhere else.

I said things are getting better in the Gilbert thread. I feel I backed it up well. I'm pretty sure if I got an "epiphany" and started agreeing with them, they would need no evidence, but would take my sources as gospel. That is what the clinic has come to.

 

[ToreBear]

Re: Re:

Here is the French report:
http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/170425_-_evaluation_nationale_-_anglais_-_final_cle0dbf47-1.pdf

Python, stop believing RT. It is a propaganda project. If you speak Russian you should know this.

@Bustedknuckel
Thanks!

Was it a Navy Pilot you were back in the 80s?

Juuust checking. Is the BBC a propaganda project? CBC? ABC? Which government funded media are propaganda and which aren't? The news they report, is it factually correct even if it's selective?

John Swanson

In a world were the credibility of the governments of the UK, Canada and Australia is the same as that of Russia, they would all be propaganda. I don't live in that world.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

I mentioned this in the US politics thread but wanted to mention it here.

I read the news articles linked here with respect to the gas attack there in Syria. Says the French were able to biologically signature the attack to the syrian way of manufacture. That is pretty good evidence.

I still don't understand why the UN can't dispatch an or should have dispatched a investigation team. Then gave us the results. The UN sux for sure they can't even do something like this.

The other little thing that makes me go back to a previous and obvious lie. Back in 2013 the Syrian's crossed the red line...drawn by "keep it kool". Then "keep it Kool" claimed that all the chemicals had been removed from Syria from the negotiations. Where are all the chemicals? Shouldn't the UN have a team that goes in and verify's the chemicals are all gone now,,,,as in Iraq back in the day?

 

[ToreBear]

Re:

I mentioned this in the US politics thread but wanted to mention it here.

I read the news articles linked here with respect to the gas attack there in Syria. Says the French were able to biologically signature the attack to the syrian way of manufacture. That is pretty good evidence.

I still don't understand why the UN can't dispatch an or should have dispatched a investigation team. Then gave us the results. The UN sux for sure they can't even do something like this.

The other little thing that makes me go back to a previous and obvious lie. Back in 2013 the Syrian's crossed the red line...drawn by "keep it kool". Then "keep it Kool" claimed that all the chemicals had been removed from Syria from the negotiations. Where are all the chemicals? Shouldn't the UN have a team that goes in and verify's the chemicals are all gone now,,,,as in Iraq back in the day?

AFAIK the area is not safe enough. Alqaida types, Salafis, mixed with rebels who are "nice" are those that would have to guarantee any inspectors safety.

Also IIRC the last UN investigation in 2013 was approved by Russia. I think one of the conditions was that it would not point toward who did it.

But initially OPCWs first team, assessed that the Rockets had come from Syrian controlled Territory. But they didn't actually say the Syrians did it.

As for the Red Line, IMHO it was a very good deal that Obama got. The stock piles that were reported were removed and destroyed.

The country is in a state of civil war, so it's not possible to have UN inspectors roaming the country.
The chemicals from this attack could simply have not been reported, or it is a new batch. The Syrians should still know how to produce more.