“For all any of us know, the civilians gassed were directly aiding the rebels or the regime thought they were.” You contradict yourself. If they were directly aiding the rebels, that make them a legitimate target. I don’t think civilians are legitimate targets, but you are free to have an opinion.

“What?” You were denying the Rebels capacity (against evidence given by the UN reporter Carla Del Ponte) to use Chemical Weapons. You now are admitting that they have, even in diminishing their capacities.

“Nope. Still an issue.” How? In a shelling, or mines, how it is an issue? Stop claiming things, give evidence. Only delivered by airplanes, the weather conditions can hampered the effect (area of dispersion). Same can be said for artillery and all weapons, as wind, rain and other elements have impact on use. In what aspect Chemical weapons are specific?

“I took an official tax-payer dollar-funded class on them was in 2008” Claim your money back.

“when I'm using figures of speech” I did know that, I just break the effect. No need of it.

“shove it.” Figure of speech again, I suppose.

“Gas chambers didn't kill 1500 people with small mortars” First, before UN reports you and I don’t know how the gas was delivered, second, you are right, few little pills of Zyklon B did the job (carried by one man) when dropped in the right place. Not really technically difficult, was it?

“one because one or both us of cannot read.” When do you intent to go back to school? Because you even don’t know to read what you wrote (not what you intent to write).