Watch Live: President Trump Orders Military Strikes On Syria
- Thread starter Error Correction Funder
- Start date
I’m trying to reconcile the real reason for the attack on Syria. The best available information appears there was no chemical attack. The rebels have claimed two other chemical attacks this year in an attempt to get international sympathy, but rocket fuel and ordinance fumes is probably what they are really talking about.
When North Korea was testing their missles, including a few that went over allied airspace, I wondered what the point was for testing so many. My thought back then was part of North Korean missle testing was done at the behest of China and Russia in order to test the United States Anti-missle defence system.
It is likely this attack had more purpose than “making a little noise” given the risk of escalation with Russia. Was the primary purpose of the lastest attack on Syria to test Russian anti-missle defences? Given the possible situation with North Korea, the Allies may have had some justification for the attack. Unfortunately this would have been unfair for Syria. At least great care appeared to have been taken to minimize casualties.
Russia, China, North Korea, and Syria are not Saints. Neither are we. All of the mentioned countries know or should know actions have consequences and in the long run are best served by following International law. They are playing a dangerous game where the possibility of an accident, miscalculation, or opportunistic action by a third party could have catastropic results.
I predict we have reached the nadir of our current geopolitical situation. There is great opportunity in cooperation that Trump alluded to in his recent speech for all parties concerned.
When North Korea was testing their missles, including a few that went over allied airspace, I wondered what the point was for testing so many. My thought back then was part of North Korean missle testing was done at the behest of China and Russia in order to test the United States Anti-missle defence system.
It is likely this attack had more purpose than “making a little noise” given the risk of escalation with Russia. Was the primary purpose of the lastest attack on Syria to test Russian anti-missle defences? Given the possible situation with North Korea, the Allies may have had some justification for the attack. Unfortunately this would have been unfair for Syria. At least great care appeared to have been taken to minimize casualties.
Russia, China, North Korea, and Syria are not Saints. Neither are we. All of the mentioned countries know or should know actions have consequences and in the long run are best served by following International law. They are playing a dangerous game where the possibility of an accident, miscalculation, or opportunistic action by a third party could have catastropic results.
I predict we have reached the nadir of our current geopolitical situation. There is great opportunity in cooperation that Trump alluded to in his recent speech for all parties concerned.
Stop reading right wing drivel or nothing of your intellect will be left.
Please help me understand what you mean. My analysis and conclusions are based on general information. My main source of general information is from Elitetrader.
I supported my conclusions with specific examples of my reasoning.
Can you support your statement that I’m reading “Right wing drivel”?
If I were reading Right wing sources of information, can you support your statement that my intellect would somehow comprised by reading it?
Do you consider all information that supports Right wing philosophy drivel?
There is no doubt there was a chemical attack
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...nce-report-on-syria-gas-attacks-idUSKBN1HL0N1
Now who ordered it, whether it was a 'false flag', a random Assad's army hit or ordered from the top, those are hard to know given the circumstances. But saying no chemical attacks happened is popular among right wing crazies who worship Assad for some reason.
Thanks for looking up this article. The basis of my belief there was no chemical attack was the CNN interview of the non-credible Syrian rebel and video of kids being washed down in, apparently, a hospital. The bodly language of the children shown and the background sounds were inconsistent with people or children in significant distress. The article you provided indicated the French considered video evidence (as well as other information) in their determination whether chemical weapons were used.
If chemical weapons were used by Assad, that would only add to the justification for the Allied attack against Syria.
FWIW, I can make chlorine gas with a car battery, a gallon of water, and some table salt. So access to such chemical isn't entirely difficult. It's the delivery system that hasn't been cleared up yet.
And even then, let's say I'm a missiles manufacturer that wants in on some sweet tax dollars, I can just pay off some mercenary group to smuggle some in and carry out the attack.
I had similar thoughts that I expressed in another post in a different thread. However, until I see current evidence of victims that look like they have been exposed to a chemical weapon or confirmed evidence by neutral, professional parties who directly examined the victims on the scene, I’ll will place the most weight on what I can see and what is consistent with the parties’ best interests.
What does that even mean?
In any case, good luck getting an impartial group to have access and report on an active war zone.
One must consider the source, but one must also admit that Assad pulling this stunt at this time would seem to be more counter productive than not.
https://www.rt.com/news/424149-skripal-poisoning-bz-lavrov/
https://www.rt.com/news/424149-skripal-poisoning-bz-lavrov/