Quote Originally Posted by Sarmatian View Post
1) there were reports of Al Nusra making sarin and using it before (long before this attack)
2) reports mentioned sarin was being produced in Iraq
3) unitary sarin was actually produced first, a long time ago, it is not a "new research path"
4) binary sarin is more advanced, more complicated to produce and harder to deploy. To deploy unitary sarin you just break the container. For binary, you have to have a complicated mechanism to make sure the precursors mix at the right time. Even Iraqi army in the Gulf War had troubles with that. Google for reports US soldier surviving sarin attacks almost unscathed because of faulty mechanism. Iraqis used unitary sarin for the most part.
5) Al Nusra and other terrorist groups have a large number of ex Baathist in their ranks
As you've just highlighted yourself, unitary sarin is unstable and degrades quickly while producing acid which eats at whatever it's stored in which is why everyone gave up on it decades ago. Once again, the issue is not whether rebels could have chemical weapons, it's the extremely unlikely scenario that the alleged rebel sarin was accidentally released as the Kremlin claims.