Did Syria use chemical weapons?

[jimnyc]

And if so, does the international community sit by idly, or do others intervene, even though all of the intervening in the past few decades has been unpopular?

U.S.: Intelligence points to small-scale use of sarin in Syria(CNN) -- The United States has evidence that the chemical weapon sarin has been used in Syria on a small scale, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said Thursday.

But numerous questions remain about the origins of the chemical and what impact its apparent use could have on the ongoing Syrian civil war and international involvement in it.

When asked if the intelligence community's conclusion pushed the situation across President Barack Obama's "red line" that could potentially trigger more U.S. involvement in the Syrian civil war, Hagel said it's too soon to say.

"We need all the facts. We need all the information," he said. "What I've just given you is what our intelligence community has said they know. As I also said, they are still assessing and they are still looking at what happened, who was responsible and the other specifics that we'll need."
Syrian civil war in photos Syrian civil war in photos

In a letter sent to lawmakers before Hagel's announcement, the White House said that intelligence analysts have concluded "with varying degrees of confidence that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons on a small scale in Syria, specifically the chemical agent sarin."

In the letter, signed by White House legislative affairs office Director Miguel Rodriguez, the White House said the "chain of custody" of the chemicals was not clear and that intelligence analysts could not confirm the circumstances under which the sarin was used, including the role of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's regime.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/25/world/meast/syria-civil-war/index.html

[jimnyc]

'Red line' crossed on Syria, senators sayIn response to Thursday’s White House acknowledgement that Syria used chemical weapons, several senators called on the Obama administration to step up its response.

“It’s pretty obvious that red line has been crossed,” Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) told reporters.

“The situation in Syria is unacceptable,” he added. “The president of the United States said that this would be a red line if they used chemical weapons. The president of the United States has now told us they used chemical weapons.”

McCain, who has been advocating more intervention in Syria for years, called for arming the opposition, a step that the White House has resisted thus far, establishing a safe zone and taking proactive steps to ensure that the chemical weapons don’t fall into the wrong hands.

“It does not mean boots on the ground,” McCain said.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/04/syria-chemical-weapons-red-line-crossed-senators-90640.html

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

And if so, does the international community sit by idly, or do others intervene, even though all of the intervening in the past few decades has been unpopular?

U.S.: Intelligence points to small-scale use of sarin in Syria

(CNN) -- The United States has evidence that the chemical weapon sarin has been used in Syria on a small scale, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said Thursday.

But numerous questions remain about the origins of the chemical and what impact its apparent use could have on the ongoing Syrian civil war and international involvement in it.

When asked if the intelligence community's conclusion pushed the situation across President Barack Obama's "red line" that could potentially trigger more U.S. involvement in the Syrian civil war, Hagel said it's too soon to say.

"We need all the facts. We need all the information," he said. "What I've just given you is what our intelligence community has said they know. As I also said, they are still assessing and they are still looking at what happened, who was responsible and the other specifics that we'll need."
Syrian civil war in photos Syrian civil war in photos

In a letter sent to lawmakers before Hagel's announcement, the White House said that intelligence analysts have concluded "with varying degrees of confidence that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons on a small scale in Syria, specifically the chemical agent sarin."

In the letter, signed by White House legislative affairs office Director Miguel Rodriguez, the White House said the "chain of custody" of the chemicals was not clear and that intelligence analysts could not confirm the circumstances under which the sarin was used, including the role of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's regime.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/25/world/meast/syria-civil-war/index.html

Bullshit, just as likely that they haven't. It is after all the obama admin and the government that he runs. He wants any excuse to step up aid to the rebels and even to actually bomb government forces there!
I know a very convenient lie when I read one.
The freaking rebels there are Islamist radicals that ARE OUR SWORN ENEMIES. WHY ELSE DO YOU THINK BAMPUNK IS SO DAMN EAGER TO HELP THEM???

[hjmick]

Is anyone else concerned that Obama is sending arms to a group that is, for all intents and purposes, a branch of al Qaeda?

[jimnyc]

Is anyone else concerned that Obama is sending arms to a group that is, for all intents and purposes, a branch of al Qaeda?

While trying to take away gun rights from his own citizens? Haven't noticed!

But absolutely. More weaponry that can go to the deaths of others or perhaps against the US down the road. I don't think they should arm rebels, but it'll never stop. I don't think we should be sending anything to the Muslim Brotherhood either.

[hjmick]

Funny how none of the Obama supporters seem to take issue with his arming the rebels. Assad is bad, and al Qaeda is good? When did we cross over to Bizarro World?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Funny how none of the Obama supporters seem to take issue with his arming the rebels. Assad is bad, and al Qaeda is good? When did we cross over to Bizarro World?

It is not Bizarro world when one considers what obama really is for.
It damn sure is not our advancement. Rather it is our demise as a great world power. The leftists have long sought that and obama is a muslim loving leftist. I strong believer in that unholy alliance...-Tyr

[jafar00]

Is anyone else concerned that Obama is sending arms to a group that is, for all intents and purposes, a branch of al Qaeda?

AQ is a recent addition to the mix. Al Nusra front are worrying extremists and mostly foreigners but are not AQ. The FSA is made up of Syrians fighting for their freedom. If any support is forthcoming, it should go to them.

Actually I'm surprised Israel hasn't joined in the fight against Bashar since Hezbollah are fighting for him now.

[Drummond]

AQ is a recent addition to the mix. Al Nusra front are worrying extremists and mostly foreigners but are not AQ. The FSA is made up of Syrians fighting for their freedom. If any support is forthcoming, it should go to them.

Actually I'm surprised Israel hasn't joined in the fight against Bashar since Hezbollah are fighting for him now.

This picture you're painting of different factions being involved is all very well. All the same, if weapons are being supplied, what guarantees could there possibly be that the so-called 'right' faction will get them, and keep them, and never pass them on (voluntarily or involuntarily) to the 'wrong' ones ?

If I'm getting any impressions at all about this conflict, it is that it's chaotic and messy. NO armaments should be being shipped there.

The British 'take' on this is straightforward, if also a bit naive. It boils down to seeing the rebels as freedom fighters but as possibly open to exploitation. We want to offer aid of a NON-weapon based type.

[Unfortunately, I heard a BBC report a day or 2 ago which said that significant numbers of Brits were opting to fight alongside the rebels .. mercenaries, I expect. The report did include the thought that when they eventually returned to Britain, a contingent might've been radicalised and pose a future security problem]

[aboutime]

Funny how none of the Obama supporters seem to take issue with his arming the rebels. Assad is bad, and al Qaeda is good? When did we cross over to Bizarro World?


hjmick. Simple answer to your question about WHEN did we cross over?

The very first day Obama announced he would run, and since he won two elections.
All of us have been treated to the Bizarro World of Betrayal, Treason, and Anarchy....with MORE TO COME.

[revelarts]

"...who was responsible and the other specifics that we'll need..."

who is the question.

Tyr may have a point about CiC lying to start a war... it's been done before.
However if Assad did use Sarin gas that's horrific. But Saddam was said to have (http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/31/opinion/a-war-crime-or-an-act-of-war.html) gassed his people and we didn't do JACK (http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/11/20/sbm.documents/index.html). And 6 months later we lent him a billion dollars (http://mondediplo.com/1998/03/04iraqkn).

Also many war crimes by the rebels (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/03/13/syria-opposition-war-crimes-amnesty-rebels_n_2867000.html) have gone by without comment from the media or the list of officials who are now outraged by this intel report about gas from the Syrian gov't.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

who is the question.

Tyr may have a point about CiC lying to start a war... it's been done before.
However if Assad did use Sarin gas that's horrific. But Saddam was said to have (http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/31/opinion/a-war-crime-or-an-act-of-war.html) gassed his people and we didn't do JACK (http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/11/20/sbm.documents/index.html). And 6 months later we lent him a billion dollars (http://mondediplo.com/1998/03/04iraqkn).

Also many war crimes by the rebels (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/03/13/syria-opposition-war-crimes-amnesty-rebels_n_2867000.html) have gone by without comment from the media or the list of officials who are now outraged by this intel report about gas from the Syrian gov't.

The freaking rebels there are worse than those that they oppose!! And yes , they commit atrocities there but a blind eye has been turned to it. -Tyr

[jafar00]

who is the question.

Tyr may have a point about CiC lying to start a war... it's been done before.
However if Assad did use Sarin gas that's horrific. But Saddam was said to have (http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/31/opinion/a-war-crime-or-an-act-of-war.html) gassed his people and we didn't do JACK (http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/11/20/sbm.documents/index.html). And 6 months later we lent him a billion dollars (http://mondediplo.com/1998/03/04iraqkn).

Also many war crimes by the rebels (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/03/13/syria-opposition-war-crimes-amnesty-rebels_n_2867000.html) have gone by without comment from the media or the list of officials who are now outraged by this intel report about gas from the Syrian gov't.

What is it with Kurds and getting gassed? Saddam did it, and now Assad did it.

[logroller]

What is it with Kurds and getting gassed? Saddam did it, and now Assad did it.
Maybe the UN could give them their own country.

[jafar00]

Maybe the UN could give them their own country.

We are dangerously close to using Godwin's law here :D

[logroller]

We are dangerously close to using Godwin's law here :D
Pretty sure it doesn't count when the subject of genocide arises not merely as rhetoric.

[taft2012]

When countries have these weapons, intelligence always has a background account of how it all came to be.

Representatives of X country were seen in Y country, purchasing item A. Then other representatives were seen here buying this, and in that country buying that.

IOW, an entire history of how the WMDs came about.

There's none of that here. Just... BAM! Syria has WMDs.

A big surprise to everyone.

Or maybe not. It's long been suspected that Iraq's chemical weapons were directed to Syria in the days prior to the American invasion.

But I guess that's something that shouldn't be discussed.

[aboutime]

When countries have these weapons, intelligence always has a background account of how it all came to be.

Representatives of X country were seen in Y country, purchasing item A. Then other representatives were seen here buying this, and in that country buying that.

IOW, an entire history of how the WMDs came about.

There's none of that here. Just... BAM! Syria has WMDs.

A big surprise to everyone.

Or maybe not. It's long been suspected that Iraq's chemical weapons were directed to Syria in the days prior to the American invasion.

But I guess that's something that shouldn't be discussed.


taft. That is DANGEROUSLY close to proving Bush, and company like..Hillary...at the time. Weren't Lying as the Liberal Left Insisted.
Which would be turnabout, and make them THE LIARS we all knew them to be????

[taft2012]

taft. That is DANGEROUSLY close to proving Bush, and company like..Hillary...at the time. Weren't Lying as the Liberal Left Insisted.


And Lord knows, *NOTHING* (least of all the truth) is more important than keeping that talking point alive and well.

[revelarts]

Syria is said to have their own chemical weapons program, they don't need to get it from others. Iran had/has it's own as well.

As far a Bush/Chenny/Rummy/Blair lying, they did. It's well known by everyone except those to whom the very idea is unthinkable because it will crush their fantasies of white hat republicans.

But here's a question for those here that are think Assad need to be overturned?
How many U.S. soldiers to you think it's worth to do the job? How many chemical weapons do you think U.S. soldiers and Syrian people should endure "get the job done". How much money to you think we should spend to make sure Assad is out of power? How long should our troops stay there to "help". and rebuild there infrastructure?

and WHO are we going to back to replace him? What democratically elected puppet Jihadist wil we try to set-up that is going to be so much better than Assad? Assad, who like Hussin, was once our good friend in the war on terror, so good that we sent people to Syria to be tortured by him (http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013/02/54-countries-rendition/).

Aren't you guys tried of the foreign policy games the parties and the oligarchs play in the interest of empire building? And the BS stories over why we need to attack this country or that. What fog of lies do we have to swallow to think that one U.S. solider need to set foot in Syria to die?

[taft2012]

Syria is said to have their own chemical weapons program, they don't need to get it from others. Iran had/has it's own as well.



Oh, I see. "It's said".

I had no idea "it's said". That's certainly a different kettle of fish.

[revelarts]

Oh, I see. "It's said".

I had no idea "it's said". That's certainly a different kettle of fish.

:rolleyes:
http://www.nti.org/country-profiles/syria/chemical/
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/2013/0426/Syria-chemical-weapons-Where-did-they-come-from-video
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/R42848.pdf
http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/20130426/where-did-syrias-chemical-weapons-come

[taft2012]

:rolleyes:
http://www.nti.org/country-profiles/syria/chemical/
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/2013/0426/Syria-chemical-weapons-Where-did-they-come-from-video
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/R42848.pdf
http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/20130426/where-did-syrias-chemical-weapons-come

Yeah, that's it. That's the "it's said" stuff.


Despite numerous such allegations by Jane's, U.S. government sources have not made similar claims. Information about the exact location of Syria's CW assets, from stockpiles to production sites, remains vague.

Remember "Chemical Ali"?

Intel could tell us where in Iraq the stuff was being made, even give the names of the scientists involved and who was running the program. It seems we got stugotz here, or our intel doesn't want to tell us something. Which is fine and probably justifiable, but they're essentially giving us nothing to evaluate the situation with.


Between late November and early December 2012, Western intelligence agencies obtained clear evidence that Syrian government units were preparing chemical weapons for potential use. At one base, soldiers were observed to be mixing precursor chemicals and taking other steps to make the chemical weapons battlefield ready. Surveillance photos further confirmed another army unit loading chemical weapons onto special military transport vehicles.

So they have good enough intel sources to get photos of WMDs being loaded on transport vehicles, but not good enough to photograph a chemical weapons plant?

Sorry, you'll have to excuse my skepticism.

[jimnyc]

Syria is said to have their own chemical weapons program, they don't need to get it from others. Iran had/has it's own as well.

As far a Bush/Chenny/Rummy/Blair lying, they did. It's well known by everyone except those to whom the very idea is unthinkable because it will crush their fantasies of white hat republicans.

But here's a question for those here that are think Assad need to be overturned?
How many U.S. soldiers to you think it's worth to do the job? How many chemical weapons do you think U.S. soldiers and Syrian people should endure "get the job done". How much money to you think we should spend to make sure Assad is out of power? How long should our troops stay there to "help". and rebuild there infrastructure?

and WHO are we going to back to replace him? What democratically elected puppet Jihadist wil we try to set-up that is going to be so much better than Assad? Assad, who like Hussin, was once our good friend in the war on terror, so good that we sent people to Syria to be tortured by him (http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013/02/54-countries-rendition/).

Aren't you guys tried of the foreign policy games the parties and the oligarchs play in the interest of empire building? And the BS stories over why we need to attack this country or that. What fog of lies do we have to swallow to think that one U.S. solider need to set foot in Syria to die?

Before your questions... Do you think the world should sit by idly while citizens literally foam at the mouth and then die from chemical weapons, because it's not our/their country?

[revelarts]

Before your questions... Do you think the world should sit by idly while citizens literally foam at the mouth and then die from chemical weapons, because it's not our/their country?

I have ideas on what could be done. but It's not a massive invasion and taking the country over.
I won't mention them because it'll might side track any answer others may have. Doing nothing is not the best thing but it is EXACTLY what we did when Hussin did it, And we gave him a loan. what's that about. you ask as if we always act in a humanitarian way when we do not.

Cambodia, Loas, East Timor to name a few times where we did nothing or maybe aided the dark side.

[jimnyc]

I have ideas on what could be done. but It's not a massive invasion and taking the country over.
I won't mention them because it'll might side track any answer others may have. Doing nothing is not the best thing but it is EXACTLY what we did when Hussin did it, And we gave him a loan. what's that about. you ask as if we always act in a humanitarian way when we do not.

Cambodia, Loas, East Timor to name a few times where we did nothing or maybe aided the dark side.

I'm talking about the WORLD. You condemn the USA actions, or inactions of the past - but that shouldn't mean other sit by idly while chemical weapons are used. Obviously you are against the US getting involved, but what about other countries.

In other words, do you or do you not think ANYONE should get involved and help?

[revelarts]

I'm talking about the WORLD. You condemn the USA actions, or inactions of the past - but that shouldn't mean other sit by idly while chemical weapons are used. Obviously you are against the US getting involved, but what about other countries.

In other words, do you or do you not think ANYONE should get involved and help?
The world, should do something, not war IMO. I've answered your questions 3? times now?
iv'e ask several are you going to answer?

[jimnyc]

The world, should do something, not war IMO. I've answered your questions 3? times now?
iv'e ask several are you going to answer?

With respect, since my post, this is the first I have seen you directly answer it, and only your second reply to me... Anyway...


(1)But here's a question for those here that are think Assad need to be overturned?
(2)How many U.S. soldiers to you think it's worth to do the job? (3)How many chemical weapons do you think U.S. soldiers and Syrian people should endure "get the job done". (4)How much money to you think we should spend to make sure Assad is out of power? (5)How long should our troops stay there to "help". and rebuild there infrastructure?

(6)and WHO are we going to back to replace him? (7)What democratically elected puppet Jihadist wil we try to set-up that is going to be so much better than Assad? Assad, who like Hussin, was once our good friend in the war on terror, so good that we sent people to Syria to be tortured by him (http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013/02/54-countries-rendition/).

(8)Aren't you guys tried of the foreign policy games the parties and the oligarchs play in the interest of empire building? And the BS stories over why we need to attack this country or that. (9)What fog of lies do we have to swallow to think that one U.S. solider need to set foot in Syria to die?

1 - I've not even said that Assad needs to go, but I will say it would be better for the people, as him remaining at this point just isn't going to work. I'd rather he left voluntarily, but using chemical weapons leads me to believe he is in it for the long haul.
2 - I don't judge things like this on how many lives it is worth. Not a single American life lost is what I would want, but that's not very realistic in any conflict. But hey, I've yet to even say I thought the US should be involved, but rather SOMEONE might need to put a stop to this.
3 - None, hopefully. Whoever helps, if they do, should hopefully use great intel to locate and work from the air.
4 - Preferably zero. Maybe someone else will decide to help the innocent. I wouldn't be adverse to the US helping whoever that is financially to get the job done.
5 - I don't believe any American troops should stay there, or be involved in any kind of rebuilding effort.
6 - I don't think we should be a part of building a new administration.
7 - I have no idea, I don't think we should have a part in who leads them at all.
8 - I'm tired of innocent people being targeted. The only policy I would like to see here, is SOMEONE stop the carnage and ensure they can't target civilians with chemical weapons again.
9 - Again, no one said anything about feet on the ground. BUT, if ultimately we helped, I would hope they would limit it to some air support and get out of dodge and let another country do the dirty work and get chastised for helping.

[jimnyc]

Before your questions... Do you think the world should sit by idly while citizens literally foam at the mouth and then die from chemical weapons, because it's not our/their country?

My first time asking...


I have ideas on what could be done. but It's not a massive invasion and taking the country over.
I won't mention them because it'll might side track any answer others may have. Doing nothing is not the best thing but it is EXACTLY what we did when Hussin did it, And we gave him a loan. what's that about. you ask as if we always act in a humanitarian way when we do not.

Cambodia, Loas, East Timor to name a few times where we did nothing or maybe aided the dark side.

I don't see you answering the question directly.


I'm talking about the WORLD. You condemn the USA actions, or inactions of the past - but that shouldn't mean other sit by idly while chemical weapons are used. Obviously you are against the US getting involved, but what about other countries.

In other words, do you or do you not think ANYONE should get involved and help?

I ask again


The world, should do something, not war IMO. I've answered your questions 3? times now?
iv'e ask several are you going to answer?

You answer.

That was my only posts today. Yes, you did ask your questions prior to me even logging in today - but you have not asked me questions 3 times. In fact, I would say I butted in and was willing to answer, but the times you directly asked me questions - zero.

[jafar00]

Aren't you guys tried of the foreign policy games the parties and the oligarchs play in the interest of empire building? And the BS stories over why we need to attack this country or that. What fog of lies do we have to swallow to think that one U.S. solider need to set foot in Syria to die?

Games? But I thought the US invaded countries because it was the nice thing to do? To save the poor people from Dictators? ;)

[jimnyc]

Games? But I thought the US invaded countries because it was the nice thing to do? To save the poor people from Dictators? ;)

So let me ask....

Part of me thinks it WOULD be a good idea to rid Syria of a dictator and someone who would use weapons against his own people. IF the US were ever to make such a move, would you support it?

[revelarts]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-syria-crisis-unbre94409z-20130505,0,2453519.story

------------------------------------------------

U.N. human rights investigators have gathered testimony from casualties of Syria’s civil war and medical staff indicating that rebel forces have used the nerve agent sarin, one of the lead investigators said on Sunday.

The United Nations independent commission of inquiry on Syria has not yet seen evidence of government forces having used chemical weapons, which are banned under international law, said commission member Carla Del Ponte.
“Our investigators have been in neighboring countries interviewing victims, doctors and field hospitals and, according to their report of last week which I have seen, there are strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof of the use of sarin gas, from the way the victims were treated,” Del Ponte said in an interview with Swiss-Italian television.

--------------------------------------------------


GENEVA (Reuters) - U.N. human rights investigators have gathered testimony from casualties of Syria's civil war and medical staff indicating that rebel forces have used the nerve agent sarin, one of the lead investigators said on Sunday.

The United Nations independent commission of inquiry on Syria has not yet seen evidence of government forces having used chemical weapons, which are banned under international law, said commission member Carla Del Ponte.



"Our investigators have been in neighboring countries interviewing victims, doctors and field hospitals and, according to their report of last week which I have seen, there are strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof of the use of sarin gas, from the way the victims were treated," Del Ponte said in an interview with Swiss-Italian television.

"This was use on the part of the opposition, the rebels, not by the government authorities," she added, speaking in Italian.

Del Ponte, a former Swiss attorney-general who also served as prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, gave no details as to when or where sarin may have been used.

The Geneva-based inquiry into war crimes and other human rights violations is separate from an investigation of the alleged use of chemical weapons in Syria instigated by U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, which has since stalled.

President Bashar al-Assad's government and the rebels accuse each another of carrying out three chemical weapon attacks, one near Aleppo and another near Damascus, both in March, and another in Homs in December.

The civil war began with anti-government protests in March 2011. The conflict has now claimed an estimated 70,000 lives and forced 1.2 million Syrian refugees to flee.

The United States has said it has "varying degrees of confidence" that sarin has been used by Syria's government on its people.

President Barack Obama last year declared that the use or deployment of chemical weapons by Assad would cross a "red line".

-------------------------------------------------------------------


So who do we support now? and Who has crossed a "red line".
If the rebels use it now won't they used it if they are in power as well.

who do help if they are both genocidal concerning the people.

It seem the best thing we could do IMO is stay out of the way. and help any civilians victims.

[revelarts]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/8917265/Libyas-new-rulers-offer-weapons-to-Syrian-rebels.html


A while back the "New" Libyan leadership -the Former Libyan Islamic jihadist freedom fighters... before that they were Islamic jihadist mercenary insurgents in Iraq against U.S. troops- offered weapons and troops to Syrian rebels .

Including planes and ????

[Dilloduck]

OOOPS---is the United States supporting the wrong team ? Again ?

[revelarts]

OOOPS---is the United States supporting the wrong team ? Again ?

DOH!

well we seem to pick them for different reasons than "we" say.

Asad was a good friend in the war on terror not to long ago.
Many people on the board think that torture is great as long and we and our friends are the ones doing the torture.
Asad was on board with that.
Torturing for us those that we rendered his way.
----------------
....the chilling words of former CIA agent Robert Baer, in 2004: "If you want a serious interrogation, you send a prisoner to Jordan. If you want them to be tortured, you send them to Syria."
.....
Mohammed Haydar Zammar, a Syrian-born German citizen and alleged al-Qaida recruiter, was arrested in Morocco in October 2001 and rendered by the CIA to Syria, where he was held incommunicado in the notorious Far'Falastin detention centre. "US officials in Damascus submit written questions to the Syrians, who relay Zammar's answers back," reported Time magazine in July 2002. "State department officials like the arrangement because it insulates the US government from any torture the Syrians may be applying to Zammar."....
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/19/syria-us-ally-human-rights
-------------------
Even if some were the wrong guy, Search Maher Arar.

So what's so bad about Asad now a days? killed a few thou of his own? probably "terrorist" anyway right?!!? huh?

Some of the rebels are for sure.

[fj1200]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-syria-crisis-unbre94409z-20130505,0,2453519.story

------------------------------------------------

U.N. human rights investigators have gathered testimony from casualties of Syria’s civil war and medical staff indicating that rebel forces have used the nerve agent sarin, one of the lead investigators said on Sunday.



Uh oh. Now what?

[revelarts]

Uh oh. Now what?

well the good democratic jihadist freedom fighters of the rebel army were FORCED to use the "enhanced tear gas" weapon. And it was only on 3 people BTW. there fore it's OK. no one should have a problem with it. the bigger goal of a Syria free of the homicdial dictator Asad is what matters. he's the worse evil dictator since the last evil dictator. Something must be done.
and WHAT ABOUT HIS VICTIMS FJ? Didn't hear rev.... I mean me, mention them did you?!!!
.. soo why didn't i? I've posted about the alqeada rebel's use of gas like twice now so that means i don't care about the good people of Syria who are dying for their country.... Or Israel or America or weeed.

[Dilloduck]

Bombs and bullets kill em just as dead. Perhaps we should quit freaking out about chemical attacks and focus on anything that kills.

[aboutime]

Games? But I thought the US invaded countries because it was the nice thing to do? To save the poor people from Dictators? ;)


jafar. Your true hatred is showing again. We know you admire, and support dictators like Assad. Not to mention the leaders of Hamas who seem to be among your favorite hero's lately. So. If your mind has been trained to always refer to this kind of NICE stuff as Games. There is no further need for you to remain silent behind your lies.

Just step out like a man and CHEER for the games you insist this kind of thing is, pretending not to be the Coward we know you to be.

[jafar00]

Bombs and bullets kill em just as dead. Perhaps we should quit freaking out about chemical attacks and focus on anything that kills.

The thing is with chemicals that the death is more painful and can be prolonged. Being burned by White Phosphorous or suffocated with gas is a very unpleasant way to go. Also, in the case of gas you have nowhere to hide even if you survived the initial blast. :(

[red states rule]

Bombs and bullets kill em just as dead. Perhaps we should quit freaking out about chemical attacks and focus on anything that kills.

Yea like pacifists and peace nicks who sit on the sidelines and allow evil to fester and grow

and turn a blind eye as the slaughter continues

[aboutime]

Bombs and bullets kill em just as dead. Perhaps we should quit freaking out about chemical attacks and focus on anything that kills.


Only if you PROMISE to do that on your own Dilloduck. It would be a great favor for all of us as you pretend. Lot's of dead people have done that too!

[red states rule]

http://diversitylane.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/diversitylane_islamoterrorism-cartoon_for-websites.jpg