Oh? Considering he’s continuing direct Obama administration policy, you’re going to have to do WAY better than that, Bucko. Just as I will brook no complaining about Chee-to Jeebus increasing the “surveillance state”, while attempting to give Obama a pass. Trying to parse whether one killed more than the other is USELESS, because either way, it’s f*cking monstrous and there simply is no excuse.
You’re mistaking legitimate criticism of Obama for love of The Orange One, and thus, you’ve already lost the argument.
With Syria in a civil war with many different parties, forces, and interests at play, who is the “Syria” referred to in the headline as “gassing it’s own people”?
It is important to remember that the Syrian army is not the only party in the country’s civil war with access to sarin and, like any horrific tragedy where foul play is suspected, we need to take time to look at all the evidence and be careful not to present assumptions as fact.
There may be more to know here.
Does anyone have a theory as to why, after joining international Chemical Weapons Convention and surrendered 1300 tonnes of toxic weapons and industrial chemicals for destruction, with a comfortable Syrian Army making progress in Hama, on the eve of a Syria conference in Brussels, and one week before peace negotiations are set to resume, the Syrian government would resort to using chemical weapons in Nusra Front occupied Idlib?
Assad HAS gassed people in Syria before, but yes, Al Qaeda is known to have stolen quite a bit of chemical weapons from Assad, themselves, so your point has some potential merit. It WOULD make PR sense, especially for an organization as ruthless as ISIL/ISIS, if they can get the blame placed squarely on Assad. In fact, at least one chemical attack (if not more) in the past was thought to be exactly this (ISIS attempting to “frame” Assad).
This isn’t the best story, because it’s serious and of immediate consequence to real people - not like the usual Trump related shenanigans.
But, I have it figured out. Trump has gone through some kind of Manchurian Candidate style reconditioning, and has been triggered. That is the only thing that explains the complete lack of consistency and flippy-flopping.
The Syrian government is the only faction with access to jet fighters, however, and the attack reportedly came from a Sukhoi 22. That means either Assad or his ally Russia is responsible for the attack.
It’s something that, correct or not, almost every President indulges in (except for good ol’ George Washington, who had to settle for blaming the British, I guess). Obama did it, Dubya did it, Bill did it, Bush Sr. did NOT (as a Reagan acolyte, that makes sense). But Reagan sure picked up the slack!
Found similar claims here. And the Reuters article also states:
U.N.-OPCW investigators found, however, that it continued to use chlorine, which is widely available and hard to trace, in so-called barrel bombs dropped from helicopters.
Not illegal to have but it’s use as a weapon breaks convention rules. (Curiously “teargas” is also a banned chemical weapon under convention rules but apparently not if you use it on your own people.)
Yes, I read those claims in the article along with other journalists saying things like
the Su-22’s bombs are unique and cannot be filled with any chemical substances, which is different than bombs dropped from attack helicopters.
Of course I know nothing of the details or veracity of any of these claims from looking at my computer on the other side of the world - just cautioning against jumping to conclusions is all.
It takes more than one flag to get your post hidden like that. Which means there are more than a few people who think you’ve stepped waaaaay off the deep end.
