You said it. "We the West" have no business even being there, trying to sort things out. It's too far removed from what we understand and consider normal. I don't even have a good feeling on punitive air strikes. There are no sensible cost-efficient options. There is no way to control the chemical weapons stockpile (part of it is in rebel hands, Putin even blames the rebels for the recent large attack in his opinion piece in the NYTimes). You can only strike Assad symbolically by either attacking the launchers that probably performed the attack or hitting targets of prestige value (palaces, ministries, air force bases). None of that will make any difference to the balance of power in the conflict, unless the bombing campaign is prolonged and targets the Syrian Army until it is rendered impotent, in which case there will still be a civil war in Syria, just Assad's side will not be there. Is that a big improvement? I think not.
Just a link to the article that interviews Mother Agnes Mariam el-Salib, a Christian nun from a multinational humanitarian organisation who analysed the various footage of chemical weapons attack and concluded based on compelling evidence that the footage was staged. The same children, without parents, appear in different videos filmed at different locations and other inconsistencies suggesting elaborate staged production and massive kidnapping. Parents of quite a few children recognised them and are looking for them. She presented this evidence to the UN Human Rights Council today.
We Brits should stay out of trouble, We should listen to the Russians not go against possibly one of the most dangerous country in the world, We actually don't benefit at all so why are we helping, stupid Crisis anyway, They are trying to over throw a dictatorship yes, we should help but not if we are going to get negatively imposed threats.
That's far fetched. Having seen real seizures and people with serious neurological nerve damage, I can say those injured people exhibited classic symptoms. How could they have possibly gotten all those people of all those ages to act out those movements so accurately? It'll be interesting to see what the UN HRC does with the claims.
Important point is that nobody is saying there was no chemical attack. The issue is WHO carried it out. These are two very different issues. I hope someone will manage to separate fact from fiction, in this and every other report and claim, regardless of who is making it.
Hopefully, I'll be in Gurcheen, Ireland when all this starts to erupt. (We're going to visit for a few weeks next year.) It's farm country, not the city (i.e. Cork or Shannon). So, when the nukes start coming, I'll have food to eat and it's the country. That's really all I can do should worst come to worst. Still hoping/praying for peace though.
I haven't seen much to suggest government forces were not the perps. There's no reason the US wanted to find Assad responsible. I think motive and money tell you when to believe or not believe US claims about the evidence the CIA has. There was overwhelming evidence Bush manipulated the evidence to invade Iraq. And every school child should be (but aren't) learning how our government faked the Gulf of Tonkin events to get support for going into Vietnam, among many examples. I am the last person to take these things on face value. But what would the motive be for the Obama admin to fake this data? And if the rebel forces faked it to draw the US in, well, I'm just not inclined to believe we are that easily duped. When the US acts on bad info, it's usually because our government faked the evidence themselves.
Sorry Ginger, I must disagree. However, I can't be bothered to have a long convo about it. I stated my position enough times already
National interests that we ordinary citizens don't know about. At this point, I wouldn't put anything past the government.
Wasn't looking for a debate either, Jazz, just stating that I didn't buy the claims in your link. As for interests we don't know about, Thirdwind, given past actions by the US, the evidence has typically been out there for people who were looking. I don't see anything here that Obama or any other corporate interests would benefit from the US bombing Assad. If anything, it seems the corporate interests are more trying to support Assad, even though they are publicly condemning him. This is the view from where I sit.
Ah, sorry Ginger, I must have misunderstood, since you didn't once mention the possibly kidnapped children and the rest of it that my link was actually about, instead, you only lamented about how you can't see why Obama would be lying, lol. Peace
... about the source of the gas attack or the fact it occurred. Just to be clear I did not say I can't see Obama lying about anything, ever. As for kidnapped kids, I stand by what I said, it's highly improbable the kids exhibiting symptoms of a nerve agent in the footage I saw was staged. Only a rare child prodigy could fake seizures like those. Whether other kids have been co-opted for propaganda images, I wouldn't have an opinion one way or another. I'm not convinced by the report in your link, but I have no knowledge the report is false either. Are there any links to the images of the same kids in different settings? Because one would think there were images where others could evaluate Mother Agnes' claims.
I have no idea who was responsible. But as I have pointed out before, it is in other Arab nations interests to undermine the Syrian government. The Saudi's have an interest in undermining support for Syria and Iran (and have been very influential in Washington). They have lots of money and have "previous" when it comes to interfering (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/27/world/middleeast/27saudi.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&). As there are so many foreign people on the ground in Syria it is not impossible that a foreign government was behind the attacks - or at least supported it - (an Arab state not the US), in order to draw in the US and its allies.
Yes. There has been commentary in the US news that the Saudis might be encouraging the US to get more involved. I would not rule this out. But you notice we haven't done any bombing yet. So far, the events following the gas attack remain consistent with Assad's side having lobbed a few gas tipped missiles into that neighborhood. I say side, because it's also been suggested Assad doesn't have the tightest control over his military. If the rebels were mostly all good guys representing the bulk of the people, it might be easier to empathize with them. But it's difficult to sort out good and evil in Syria at the moment.
Didn't John Kerry say the Saudis would finance a US attack? Saudis also tried to bribe Putin with a competition free gas and oil sales to Europe http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/10266957/Saudis-offer-Russia-secret-oil-deal-if-it-drops-Syria.html quite an interesting read. The Saudi Prince, Bandar, admitting that they control the Chechyen rebels fighting Assad and he vowed to guarantee a Chechyen terror-free Winter Olympics, while Putin wants to head a global gas cartel. As we all wonder what this is really about, some of it is falling into place. The Chinese and Russians averted a world war for all of us - who'da thunk it?
The question is how many innocent people die before this excuse crumbles under the weight of their suffering? I don't have that answer.
@GingerCoffee: Nobody is claiming there was no nerve gas. I find it very odd that you keep speaking as if that is in question. I will repeat myself again - the issue isn't whether the gas was used, the issue is WHO used it. Was it Assad, or was it NATO/Saudi/Qatar/ armed and backed rebels? As for this report, it refers to a specific issue of missing children, absence of funerals and the same children appearing as victims in a variety of locations. This raised suspicions, and rightfully so. I am sure that with your internet searching prowess, you can track down the exact 35 videos Mother Agnes referred to in her report, and then see what you think. If not, perhaps reserve your judgement until you can make a more informed opinion. Or don't. It really doesn't matter to me.
It seems that, yet again, US foreign policy can be summed up: “If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail.” -Abraham Harold Maslow
I'm not clear what your position is. You claim the scenes were staged. So was gas used or not? If it was used but the perps were the rebels, why stage any scenes at all. I was addressing 'who' used the gas. But if the scenes were staged, it appeared you thought the gas attack didn't happen. As for the kidnapped children, show me the evidence, the photos. There are thousands of claims on the Net of atrocities and conspiracy theories re Syria. You accept Sister Agnes' claims. I have no issue with that. Had the story shown the images that the claims are based on, I'd take a closer look. Otherwise, I remain neutral about the credibility of the claim. Staging scenes makes no sense if there is no question the gas attack occurred.
@GingerCoffee: If you read my previous comments, you will find out what my position is. I stated it several times.
