Syria syrisouly?

Didn't people say that before ww1?

Well, you left out from the analogy that it would not only be in one of our cities, but in a neighborhood occupied by the rebels that was under government attack by conventional weapons as well. And it would probably look to me like the government did it, depending on how sophisticated the weapon was. Were it something that got brewed up in a kitchen I'd have to reconsider.Could the rebels have looted some goodies? Or been given them by outsiders? That seems plausible, but for me it's quite a way from there to probable.People usually don't end up using the best weaponry they have against themselves. Also, even if Assad was winning, these rebel strongholds were in Damascus, very close to his seat of government, he would probably very much like them gone. And on occasions when WMDs have been used historically, they have not been used by a side that is losing.America had virtually won the war when we used nuclear weapons against Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The people in the towns that Saddam gassed were not a military threat to him, rather he made an example of them of what happens to people that don't subject to his rule.Both instances were demonstrations of power by a superior military force, and not acts of desperation by the losing side. Assad needs to demonstrate his own power these days, to force the war to an endgame stage. I hope he'll use more "civilized" meansI agree with you that the rebels are not trustworthy. They've committed some pretty awful low-tech atrocities themselves, and often we could use "terrorist" and "rebel" interchangeably with these guys. Odd to be in a position where I favor attacking the person that I want to win the war.

A religious sect that lived on mount Fudji (a mix of Christianity, nostradamus and yoga LOL) in Japan got their hands on sarin and attacked the Tokyo subway. Killing 13 people and some 5000 had to go to the hospital. So its not rocket science. The US says some 1400 people where killed in Syria France says more like 240 LOL. but even the 1400 number is not that high because it would be hard for those that could be saved to get to a hospital while in Tokyo it would be much easier.making sarin isnt that hard either according to the BBC report form 2003. Technically if the US dint use the bombs i doubt you could conquer Japan as it was in a state of all out ware every citizen would do its best to fight against us soldiers. But if asad did use the gas he is mad he knew Obama was crying dont go over the red line and that something was gonna happen if he gets caught. Now dont get me wrong i dont like Assad either i just doubt he was stupid enough to use the gas. Yea i dont like Assad either but he technically is the lesser of 19 evils LOL. The thing is if the US attacks in syria are what they claim to be just air strikes on Assad military installations and in the end they do help the rebels win the war. What do you think will happen to the minorities that where protected under Assad, you know Christians, sunits and the like.

quote:

---

A religious sect that lived on mount Fudji (a mix of Christianity, nostradamus and yoga LOL) in Japan got their hands on sarin and attacked the Tokyo subway. Killing 13 people and some 5000 had to go to the hospital.

---

This is true, and they made their gas themselves. But the Damascus attack took place outdoors and killed hundreds of people that were sleeping indoors. I don't claim to be an expert in this sort of thing but it appears to me that the scale of this attack implies the weapons used were of professional design and construction. If this were an amateur grade attack, it would probably implicate the rebels, however strange it may seem for them to attack themselves (it could have been an accidental release while they were making weapons). If these are military-grade weapons, then Assad is implicated but not proven guilty, as the rebels could have stolen such things in their civil war or been given them by outsiders.The difference in available medical care in Tokyo vs. Damascus is a good point. The fact that many in Damascus were sleeping during the attack whereas those in Tokyo were able to react and flee probably also matters. But I'm not sure what it really means that 5,000 people were treated in Japan. Japan has a world-class health services and first responders, they probably treated or at least performed cursory physical examinations on everyone in the subway at the time of the attack, as a precaution. And certainly if we assume that all 5,000 of those were exposed but only 13 died, that is a less than 0.3% fatality rate which seems very, very low for a gas used in chemical warfare. So I don't think we have enough information to compare the two, not knowing how many people were actually exposed in Tokyo and not knowing the concentrations of the weapon used in Damascus.

quote:

---

But if asad did use the gas he is mad he knew Obama was crying dont go over the red line and that something was gonna happen if he gets caught. Now dont get me wrong i dont like Assad either i just doubt he was stupid enough to use the gas.

---

It was a risky move, probably stupid but I don't think it's necessarily a crazy one. It appears foolish now because it does not seem to have helped him conquer the rebels in those neighborhoods. But there may be no consequences at all. Well, we'll see if Obama will do anything. I agree with Obama's plan but I have to say it seems very unpopular here. Congress may do to Obama what Parliament did to Cameron. Understandably, the people are tired of war and are worried mostly about money and the economy these days.I do have hope that this talk and posturing maybe have been enough to deter Assad from using the gas again on civilians again, at least in large numbers.

quote:

---

The thing is if the US attacks in syria are what they claim to be just air strikes on Assad military installations and in the end they do help the rebels win the war. What do you think will happen to the minorities that where protected under Assad, you know Christians, sunits and the like.

---

If the rebels win, Christians and minor tribes will be slaughtered, as happened in Iraq. There are some more liberal factions in the rebel movement, but it's always the most ruthless that end up running a country when the war is over. Edited by gene90, : No reason given.Edited by gene90, : re-worded statement on number of casualties in subway attack

Just on a side note the whole fuss about Sarin gas among politicians isnt because people die horribly on a mass scale thats just fhe food for the masses. The problem that ritch countries have with chemical weapons of that sort is that they are real cheap to make.Look depleted uranium rounds and weapons based on depleted uranium ar far worse then sarin. Sure sarin kills alot of people in a short time, but depleted uranium rounds cause cancer, and deformations in the area for generations in effect killing more people it just takes them a long time to do it. But they are legal on the excuse that it isnt their primary purpose to kill people that way. By the same logic you could make a rocket propelled grande that uses compressed sarin gas as its propellant and gassing people that way would be legal.

Response time and the way its distributed is a highly important factor, as the people in Japan could leave the subway and get to fresh air it severely reduced their exposure as sarin is a heavy gas it stayed in the subway system rather then flow up. Anything up to moderate exposure can be treated if you are left untreated you have a good chance of dying. by respiratory system collapse. The symptoms of sarin can take hours to seconds to take effect depends on exposure. So given that the Syrian victims probably had hours to get to a hospital and Japan had an immediate response the different numbers of victims can be easily explained.And we actually dont know the number of victims the US claims 1400 but France claims 240 given that your president is highly motivated to go to war its more plausible that your reports where fudged and not the French ones.Given that there is so much doubt what really happened i dont think the right course is to go to ware before we at least get the UN results on what happened. And given that if it can be proved that Assad used the weapons the only "good" option would be to go full-scale via the UN and stop the fighting enable democratic elections (they should go better then iraq because only 30% in Syria are whaco fundamentalists. But given that that wont happen because china and Russia wouldnt let it happen. The best option is to lock down the country only let refugees leave, no one in no weapons in or out and let them sort it out amongst themselves.P.s. Why dint Assad use VX instead of sarin its much more effective, but if he did i would seriously doubt the rebels used the gas, unless they stole it from Assad. Edited by frako, : No reason given.Edited by frako, : P.s.

"The Schleswig-Holstein question is so complicated, only three men in Europe have ever understood it. One was Prince Albert, who is dead. The second was a German professor who became mad. I am the third and I have forgotten all about it."

So your talking about when Denmark, Prussia, and Austria where fighting about to who do Schleswig and Holstein belong to?I think that that is Americas motivation they want to steal Syria from the domain of china and Russia influence. Insuring that oil will for evermore be mostly sold in us dollars and with a bit of luck iran will help Syria if its attacked so it will be complatly sold in us $.

some more news from syria the rebels are such nice guys

no military solution says the pope.

Well it seems Assad is open to the notion of surrendering all Chemical munitions to International control for destruction.I'd like to think this would be a solution rather than a punitive attack.The question remains, how does anyone even know what their inventory is?

Send in inspectors but also offer a New York Cab medallion for information.

The only attacks that make sense for the U.S. are punitive; occupations are so pricey. But how does taking some chemical weapons from Syria "solve" the problem of Assad's war crimes? Edited by Omnivorous, : quote

Hello Omnivorous, Yes I agree, I meant that any attack at this point would be strictly punitive. It doesn't, I believe the goal is to prevent their further use.In order for Assad to be punished for war crimes he would have to be charged, captured and sent to trial and be found guilty.I am all for it, but wont hold my breath.

Or he could just blow up. Spontaneously, like. Maybe a drone could spot him in a crowd of Al Qaeda...What's the point of being the International Champion Whack-A-Mole Nation if we can't whack an evil, gas-breathing monster mole when we spot one? Personally, I never objected in principle to the CIA's use of extralegal means: the great game isn't played by club rules. I objected to the fact that our whacking always seemed to support or install some evil monster mole or another.Sometimes our justice menu options are rough or none.Has anyone mentioned Hitler in this thread yet?