To think that it is a genuine possibility that the Sarin attacks have been falsified by the us to legitimise air strikes

[Beadoren]

As above really...

Have we been totally conditioned by the media to believe that the uk/us are the good guys and Russia are the bad guys. I think the us have form for things like this, does video constitute proof? All just rings a bit of the whole Iraq war thing. Do they just have different agendas in Syria than Russia?

it is a genuine possibility that the Sarin attacks have been falsified by the us to legitimise air strikes

Tell that to the parents who buried their children, you absolutely offensive tool*

*totally worth the deletion.

I think it's even simpler than that to be honest, Beadoren (Sorry for the horrifically long post above). I think the west are backing the rebels because Russia and Iran are backing Assad. It's the Cold War all over again.

I think it's simpler than that-
America has an ammoral, uneducated, narcissistic cockwomble for a president who will do anything that strokes his ego.

He's now discovered bombing baddies plus eating cake feels great.

Oh, that too. But we've been backing the rebels rather than Assad for far longer than Trump has been in power. It's just Trump that's stepped the actual military aspect up several gears, because he can and BIG BAD THINGS are happening in Syria. BIG BAD THINGS.

Kelly You are being disingenuous by continuing to post on this thread.

Of course there is reason to disbelieve and to think the attacks have been falsified. It's not 'wacky' nor conspiratorial to think so.

Syria has been a problem for decades. ISIS has taken control of some of the oil, Assad is left with Russia as an ally (and perhaps China). It's all a mess.

And Trump to see us all right? Who are we kidding here?

Name,change Lisa?

I thought exactly the same scaryteacher

• I recognised the lecturer story there lisalambe

It's great that we have your expertise to enlighten us

Bad things are happening everywhere.

There is uncontrollable climate change happening right now, which the current POTUS denies. There is famine in Yemen, South Sudan, and Somalia, the so called 'East Africa' or 'horn of Africa'. Nigeria, is another country that is facing famine. 100s of millions of people are going to suffer and die. All is due to climate change. ISIS might well come into these territories and offer food relief. In exchange for what though?

I don't believe for one minute that Assad dropped those bombs.

Don't be so daft

Well Assad is sitting on a country with a lot of oil. Middle eastern conflicts are always thinly veiled attempts to cover up that the two super powers want to control the areas with the oil. Opportunities to exploit a situation so that you can go in and seize power will be taken and spun to look like a necessary action, look at Iraq and the weapons of mass destruction. Hence why atrocities elsewhere such as Zimbabwe and Nigeria are ignored, those countries don't control oil fields.

I am by no means an expert. It's a controversial opinion. One I happen to agree with, but a lot of the English-speaking world doesn't. Hence the mess we're in now. It's also not the only theory on ME politics floating around in that sphere right now. The problem is that it's an emotive topic, and those who write on this stuff tend to have some kind of personal reason for coming to it in the first place. Including myself in that. Largely depends what kind of background various governments source their thinkers on this stuff from. In the US it tends to be military, which explains their attitude to world politics somewhat even before Trump was added to the equation. In the Middle East, it tends to be theologists. The person who solves the ideological clash generated by that will do the world a huge, huge favour, because right now we're all failing miserable.

Those who don't think it was Assad - Do you accept Assad used chlorine gas in Damascus, Aleppo and Homs or were they faked/someone else too?

Histiny, even if I accept that he used chlorine gas before, how does that then lead to the indisputable conclusion that he must have been hit doing this time round?

His doing this time round.

Do you think he used them before?
He said he had no chemical weapons in 2013(?) and yet used them again in 2014/2015. What evidence do you have that it was Isis? (other than the all important 'gut feeling' of course)

What evidence do you have that the sarin gas or sarin gas like substance was used by Assad?

Anyway, this is shaping up to be a circular discussion.

assads own generals SAID they did this attack on a rebel held area. They were proud of it. Assad only denied it later- not only that, he said it was fake news- he said the dead there were not really dead.
There are hundreds of people there, not just civilians, but aid workers and journalists who know what happened to them- but you prefer to believe Assad. (Based on what?- a hunch?) wow.

histinyhands

Why are aid workers and journalists allowed into the area if Assad is so evil?

Can you name the aid organisations and the journalists? Or are you just basing this on a hunch? Wow!

No one has said they believe Assad. But lot's of people are believing Trump. I know that Trump lies and is untrustworthy.

I've never said that I believe Assad, I'm just saying it is a POSSIBILITY that CW weren't used by him, were used by another group (that could be Isis, a rival group, or POSSiBLY the US to discredit Assad and give them an excuse to bomb as discussed)

OR that it wasn't gas. It is possible for pictures to be misleading or Doctored or for
Governments to pay people to say things (I am not saying this is the case here, just that it is not an impossibility).

I think basically what I am trying to say is that the evidence does indeed point to Assad having used sarin gas on the rebels but it is not conclusive, and therefore we should use our brains to consider that we may be being misled. Especially when this gives the US a legitimate reason to bomb syria and also further discredits Assad (which as discussed doesn't benefit Assad at all)

It doesn't matter really anyway as I'm sure we actually know a fraction of what's actually going on.

Rather than just dismissing the hard work of the OPCW, the human rights watch organisations, UN observers, the scientists and those working on the ground in Syria - inc medicins sans frontiers and save the children who all say this points to Assad- why don't you guys post some of your extensive evidence that it was Isis - or the us?

MSF does not operate in IS controlled areas following the capture of their medics by IS and are not allowed access into Government controlled areas.

Msf are lying too? And the others? All liars? All falsifying photos of gassed children?

Why not post your evidence please?

Op, what gave trump a 'legitimate reason' to attack Yemen and Afghanistan?

Who said Assad's general said such and such?

A whole lot of stuff being alleged and claimed to have been said and seen by "them" and "they", etc.

My understanding is that it is unclear who is responsible for the gas attack. I strongly suspect the rebels. However, I don't know and we may only truly know many, many years later once history takes its course.

Given the work that I do, I know that what the media reports and what actually goes on behind the scenes can be very far apart.

People are right to have their doubts and after the famous WMD, I don't blame them. As for me, there are many things about this recent gas attack that does not make sense to me re. Assad being the culprit.

STC doesn't operate in Syria. It was expelled from Pakistan following a false vaccination programme. It gave Tony Blair an award.