SYRIA thread

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

They were not notified all that far in advance. Time enough to get personnel out of the line of fire, but little else.

They knew it might be coming, if the Syrians hit the town because it was a weapons lab then the Russains would have known.

It takes about ten seconds to say, "No, comrade, it was a rebel cache of toxic gas!"

the fact Russia hasn't claimed they tried to stop the attack tells me that exchange never happened.

[Montmorency]

It takes about ten seconds to say, "No, comrade, it was a rebel cache of toxic gas!

To be fair, bureaucratic details won't be known by every member of the organization, and even important information could take longer than you expect to transmit to those who need it.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

To be fair, bureaucratic details won't be known by every member of the organization, and even important information could take longer than you expect to transmit to those who need it.

So we have incompetence vs the Kremlin policy to just lie, lie, lie.

[Brenus]

So we have incompetence vs the Kremlin policy to just lie, lie, lie.

The problem here, at least for me, is, as French, the experience of US and UK lying lying lying in several occasions in order to justify illegal wars and is still alive in my memory.
The smear campaign against France before and after Iraq II "the Return with a vengeance" and the robust flow of insults (firstly against intelligence) are still in my mind. Russia didn't participate in this, but our "allies" did.
So my experience and point of view is a bit different, I admit.

[Elmetiacos]

And your explanation for the smell of bleach?

Bleach? What are you trying to say, that there was no nerve agent used?

[Gilrandir]

And your explanation for the smell of bleach?

There might have been missiles with different chemicals used some with chlorine, some with sarin.

[rory_20_uk]

Who cares if there were gas agents or not? Do civilians care if is gas, high explosive, "shake and bake" or US cruise? To a degree, who cares if the USA is lying or not? Trump barely manages a sentence without telling a few. It is a war. Every side has killed civilians, destroyed infrastructure, and they always do.

The strategic point remains - should the West get involved in Syria or not? I would say no since we just don't have the strength of will to see if through - frankly to make the sacrifices and shed the blood required to get things resolved.Frankly, it probably isn't worth it.

And lest we think that this is all about the poor children, we manage to ignore those in Nigeria / South Sudan / Burma for years / decades.

[Gilrandir]

Who cares if there were gas agents or not? Do civilians care if is gas, high explosive, "shake and bake" or US cruise? To a degree, who cares if the USA is lying or not? Trump barely manages a sentence without telling a few. It is a war. Every side has killed civilians, destroyed infrastructure, and they always do.

Trump was looking for a pretext to interfere. And he killed two birds with one stone - his approval rating has soared and Americans seem ready to forgive his (and his team's) blunders to feel he made America great again.

[Sarmatian]

Bleach? What are you trying to say, that there was no nerve agent used?

I'm saying that the thing we can be most certain about is that chlorine was used (because only that explains the smell of bleach reported by everyone). Next we can say, with a little less certainty, is that additional agent was used, probably something similar to sarin. With a lot less certainty we can say maybe there were even more types of chemical weapons used.

OPCW statement mentions only chlorine based on the preliminary reports. Until an investigation is conducted by OPCW (which probably isn't happening anytime soon as the area is controlled by Al Nusra), we can't say anything for sure.

And that is only about what type of chemicals were used. After that, an investigation about who's at fault can commence.

OR, we can ignore the experts, put our trusts in politicians and media and accept their version.

There might have been missiles with different chemicals used some with chlorine, some with sarin.

Quite possibly.

[Beskar]

The problem here, at least for me, is, as French, the experience of US and UK lying lying lying in several occasions in order to justify illegal wars and is still alive in my memory.
The smear campaign against France before and after Iraq II "the Return with a vengeance" and the robust flow of insults (firstly against intelligence) are still in my mind. Russia didn't participate in this, but our "allies" did.
So my experience and point of view is a bit different, I admit.

They renamed French Fries to Freedom Fries and banned French Mustard (which is an English Mustard brand). Things got pretty serious.

[Brenus]

They renamed French Fries to Freedom Fries and banned French Mustard (which is an English Mustard brand). Things got pretty serious.

Yeah, and this kind of things and as well "we will forgive Germany and punish France".
And the usual joke about French militaries...
If you think I forgot...

[Elmetiacos]

Trump was looking for a pretext to interfere. And he killed two birds with one stone - his approval rating has soared and Americans seem ready to forgive his (and his team's) blunders to feel he made America great again.

Not true. Polls by both Gallup and CBS News show virtually no increase in his popularity after the strikes.

[rory_20_uk]

Not true. Polls by both Gallup and CBS News show virtually no increase in his popularity after the strikes.

Just because it didn't happen doesn't mean Trump didn't think that it should happen. After all, there were those lovely new reports about how great he was.

[Sarmatian]

And the news anchors almost achieving orgasm at the sight of tomahawks being fired...

[AE Bravo]

So we have incompetence vs the Kremlin policy to just lie, lie, lie.

I don't understand this. They are asking for an investigation, give it to them if they're such liars...

http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-g...411-story.html
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/0...llerson-237097

Rather than breaking national (US) and international laws.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The problem here, at least for me, is, as French, the experience of US and UK lying lying lying in several occasions in order to justify illegal wars and is still alive in my memory.
The smear campaign against France before and after Iraq II "the Return with a vengeance" and the robust flow of insults (firstly against intelligence) are still in my mind. Russia didn't participate in this, but our "allies" did.
So my experience and point of view is a bit different, I admit.

The only incidence of out-and-out "lying" I can think of from the UK/US is Gulf War II and then the lie was essentially turning "he might have WMD, but probably not, but he's blocking inspections" into "He probably has WMD and he's blocking inspections!"

This is what is known in Blighty as "being economical with the Truth".

Compare to Putin in Crimea "we have no troops in Crimea."

See the difference?

Added to which, both the UK and US have been through TWO political leaders since where Russia is still ruled by Putin's iron fist, just like 2003.

I don't understand this. They are asking for an investigation, give it to them if they're such liars...

http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-g...411-story.html
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/0...llerson-237097

Rather than breaking national (US) and international laws.

When the enquiry implicates Assad's regime Russia will call it filthy lies, just like the enquiry into the downing of MH17.

[Brenus]

See the difference?

Not really.
And for forgot "the Operation Horse Shoes" in Kosovo, the bodies piling-up in the Coal Mines, mass-graves to justify the final destruction of what left from Yugoslavia.
Plus I find a bit of irony for a country that use massively the Orange Agent (TCDD is the most toxic of the dioxins) in Vietnam to be the chief prosecution...

[Tristuskhan]

Plus I find a bit of irony for a country that use massively the Orange Agent (TCDD is the most toxic of the dioxins) in Vietnam to be the chief prosecution...

A war that got hot following the Tonkin Gulf Incident. Blattant lie.
What could we say about 89' intervention in Panama?
""necessary to safeguard the lives of U.S. citizens in Panama, defend democracy and human rights, combat drug trafficking, and secure the neutrality of the Panama Canal as required by the Torrijos–Carter Treaties" (Pdt Bush). The part about drug trafficking is not a lie. The rest.... more than so-so.

The overthrow of Juan Bosch of Dominican Republic in 1965 was made under allegations of communism and "foreign support", both a lot unsubstanciated.

What else....?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Found this via BBC:

https://assets.documentcloud.org/doc...hite-House.pdf

The US has declassified a four-page report on the attack, just skimming it shows there's a lot there to indicate Sarin and regime involvement.

Now, it could be a lie but cui bono suggests not, as without the report there's no discernible motivation for the US strike.

[Sarmatian]

The important thing to consider is that there is rarely one intelligence report, and politicians usually pick the one that suits their current narrative.

Often, just like Trump-Nunez fiasco, they tend to circularly support each other, ie. two separate intelligence reports sourcing each other as proof.

In this particular case, it's not a report, it's a White House paper that includes their own one page summary of an intelligence report.

Some of the stuff in there can raise some eyebrows, like how they specifically mention MSF as one of their sources that it was sarin attack but conveniently leave out chlorine which is mentioned in MSF report.

Another one the conclusion that it must have been the regime, because the regime used chemical weapons in the past. OPCW on the other hand, suspects Al Nusra and other opposition groups as being responsible for far more chemical attacks. It doesn't even mention that the territory was in control of none other than Al Nusra. Again, it appeals to authority (OPCW) but cherry picks the bits that support the current narrative, like with the MSF report.

Other issues are dubious statements like "the plane dropped a payload and immediately left the area", like it is standard practice that airplanes stick around for a prolonged period of time after they drop the payload.

And, finally, the idea that Russians must be lying because they have lied in the past, not really understanding that they discredit themselves also, for the dozens of false reports they've made in the past. That part doesn't surprise me though, when even John Kerry uttered the words "it's 21st century, you can't invade a country under a false pretext". On the whole, the western politicians' heads are so far up their asses that they wouldn't understand irony unless it is something made of iron that hits them on the head.

Brenus mentioned "Operation Horseshoe". The particular operation isn't well known now, but in 1999 it was used as a pretext for bombing of Serbia and Montenegro, because it was a detailed plan for extermination of Albanian population in Kosovo. Western media raced to provide details, British, American, German and other politicians held press conferences and it was unanimously confirmed by all major intelligence agencies from multiple countries. Until someone asked an actual question, and it turned out to be a game of telephone that went tragically and horribly wrong. Bulgarian intelligence uncovered the existence of a document titled "Operation Horseshoe", stated they couldn't verify what it actually was, but that it might be a plan for ethnic cleansing of Albanians. With each passing hand, the plan grew more dark and intelligence agencies and politicians more certain of its validity, until some time later, it all started unraveling, showing those intelligence reports were all based on ONE SINGLE UNVERIFIED report, made by Bulgarian intelligence. For more reading, visit Operation Horseshoe.

Now, to turn to those few parts of the document that, if true, condemn Assad pretty heavily, which are:

1) type of crater
2) presence of key personnel that tend be around when chemical weapons get used.

The second one isn't that much contradicting Syrian narrative. If suspected chemical workshops are in the area, it would make sense to have chemical weapons experts close by, but that would make the regime guilty of gross negligence if they bombed the area knowing that chemical weapons might be released on the populace.

The first one is much more damaging, as it would imply that there were no explosives in the payload. There's still the possibility of false information (or even Al Nusra firing on the civilians - less likely but a possibility) but intelligence agencies and politicians are much less likely to lie when the information is easy to verify by other sources.

[Crandar]

Meanwhile, some physics scientists seem to have become ardent followers of Putler:
https://fr.scribd.com/document/34499...017#from_embed
The letters are somewhat blurred, but you can copy-paste it into a more readable format.

[Brenus]

What else....?

Granada? Chile? Nicaragua? Iran?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Confirmed the attack was Sarin:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-39648503

Really hard to see how this wasn't the regime.

[Montmorency]

If one doesn't believe Assad deployed sarin in Ghouta, then one won't be obliged to believe he deployed it here. So nothing changes for either pro or anti-Assad.

[AE Bravo]

Apparently, by now the Syrian Army is an Alawite-populated husk of commissioned officers and heavy weapons units that leaves most of the ground fighting to sectarian militias, i.e. more of a brand than a professional institution. Could explain why they've performed much better on the offense than defense.

I don't think this crop will ever prove up to storming the Golan Heights. Maybe the air force has improved?

Man I had to dig this up because it stuck with me. It's very interesting you put it that way but I'm skeptical, it seems hyperbolic. I've read the publication you linked but it doesn't exactly allude to this claim. I imagine every country in the middle east would take this initiative when faced with a conscription crisis.

Not sure if the example was a figure of speech, but paramilitaries are effectively part of the regime in Syria. These institutional shortcomings are common across many states in the middle east. How do we know that they are sectarian? They seem to be no more so than the regime, people of Damascus, and "Assadist" diaspora are.

Not to mention the (incorrect) implication that the actual army is inactive/not fighting.

[Shaka_Khan]

The problem here, at least for me, is, as French, the experience of US and UK lying lying lying in several occasions in order to justify illegal wars and is still alive in my memory.
The smear campaign against France before and after Iraq II "the Return with a vengeance" and the robust flow of insults (firstly against intelligence) are still in my mind. Russia didn't participate in this, but our "allies" did.
So my experience and point of view is a bit different, I admit.

They renamed French Fries to Freedom Fries and banned French Mustard (which is an English Mustard brand). Things got pretty serious.

It happened at totalwar.com, too. There was a lot of French-bashing until a mod put a stop to it.

[Fragony]

If one doesn't believe Assad deployed sarin in Ghouta, then one won't be obliged to believe he deployed it here. So nothing changes for either pro or anti-Assad.

I am neither, everyone is a scumbag there. I am however suspicious by nature, conclusions came FAST

[Montmorency]

Man I had to dig this up because it stuck with me. It's very interesting you put it that way but I'm skeptical, it seems hyperbolic. I've read the publication you linked but it doesn't exactly allude to this claim. I imagine every country in the middle east would take this initiative when faced with a conscription crisis.

Not sure if the example was a figure of speech, but paramilitaries are effectively part of the regime in Syria. These institutional shortcomings are common across many states in the middle east. How do we know that they are sectarian? They seem to be no more so than the regime, people of Damascus, and "Assadist" diaspora are.

Not to mention the (incorrect) implication that the actual army is inactive/not fighting.

My tone was uncharitable, but I just followed the conclusions of the analysis, which were that the Syrian army had since the beginning of the war become less professional, less focused on its own infantry ranks than on paramilitaries, but that this had in the specific context of the fractured Syrian battlescape allowed it to be more flexible and shield itself from the worst casualties.

I did not say that it was more inactive than in the past, but did mean to suggest that it was less conventionally effective.

Not sure what you are trying to say about sectarianism. So that's just right. As opposed to 5 years ago, the commissioned ranks clearly seem to be more homogeneous in denomination.

[Elmetiacos]

Confirmed the attack was Sarin:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-39648503

Really hard to see how this wasn't the regime.

Physics 1 Holy Mother Russia 0

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

If one doesn't believe Assad deployed sarin in Ghouta, then one won't be obliged to believe he deployed it here. So nothing changes for either pro or anti-Assad.

There's no other reasonable explanation given that it's definitely Sarin, it is virtually impossible that conventional bombing of a lab could have resulted in this.