Syria's Assad says Western strike could trigger regional war

[Scott]

Is France agreeable to the current plan with regard to the chemical weapons? What are the general thoughts from other countries?

[Publicus]

Publicus, you have learnt nothing about history. Some countries need dictators and tyrants. Look at Iraq, Hussein was a tyrant but look at the alternative that has happened now. The country is in a complete mess with no end in site. Many factions now getting even with the others and it is in a worse position than it was before the war.

So do tell, what is the alternative with Syria? You don't like Assad and Putin, nor China. So you prefer al queda terrorists to run the country as an alternative.

How strange.

You say I "prefer al queda terrorists to run the country as an alternative" to the Assad regime of vicious butchers.

Here is your quote:

So you prefer al queda terrorists to run the country as an alternative. How strange.

Your statement is 100% wrong and 100% misrepresents me.

How can you be so wrong and reckless in your accusations?

You essentially are saying I support the al Qaeda terrorists as a new government in Syria. You're saying I support terrorists.

That is a malicious accusation.

You need to know that you are extreme and offensive; completely out of bounds.

[JetsetBkk]

IMO the German reluctance was out of a fear of Russia. Germany is dependent upon Russian natural gas.

Amazing, how the US gets lambasted for being a "slave" to Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States, yet Europeans conveniently forget about the EU's dependence upon Russian energy. Putin has Germany by the short hairs.

Yet, ironically, both Iran and the GCC want a pipeline straight through Syria to the Med....

Good to see some people haven't forgotten the real reason behind the USA's attempts to destabilise Syria.

[Publicus]

Things at the UN are off to a rough start concerning Putin, Assad, chemical weapons, France and the US.

Russian Foreign Minister forever Sergi Lavrov said the UN resolution introduced by France is "inadmissible" because it states Assad's government used chemical weapons against its population.

This is a bad start to something at the UN that anyway doesn't look like it will go well.

For one thing, as has been pointed out in recent days, only Russia and the United States have the capability to destroy chemical weapons safely. The UN itself, per se, does not have that capability, nor does any other government.

The practical considerations are formidable.

With the civil war raging in Syria, how does the UN secure the 40-some odd chemical weapons sites it's believed Syria has.

The Pentagon estimates 75,000 UN ground troops would be required to secure Syria's chemical weapons. The UN ground forces would require supporting forces for supplies and basic items such as food and water, transportation etc etc.

And how are the chemical weapons to be safely transported to newly constructed destruction facilities without getting caught in the fighting, or without being targeted by some rogue group, or by any group?

The present haggling by Russia over the first French draft UN resolution is nothing compared to the huge obstacles that exist concerning international control and destruction of Assad's chemical weapons arsenal.

Russia rejects French UN draft on Syria

Russia has told France it cannot back a draft UN resolution authorising the use of force if Syria does not give up chemical weapons.

The draft French text, seen by Reuters, "condemns the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian authorities on 21 August 2013" - an allegation denied by the Syrian government.

It calls on Syria to give the UN, in 15 days' time, details of all its chemical weapons facilities, and, later down the line, to "unconditionally destruct, remove or render harmless, under international supervision" its chemical arsenal.

http://euobserver.com/foreign/121389

[Scott]

Posts deleted.

Please stay on topic and refrain from making personal comments directed at other posters.

[FDog]

Publicus, you have learnt nothing about history. Some countries need dictators and tyrants. Look at Iraq, Hussein was a tyrant but look at the alternative that has happened now. The country is in a complete mess with no end in site. Many factions now getting even with the others and it is in a worse position than it was before the war.

So do tell, what is the alternative with Syria? You don't like Assad and Putin, nor China. So you prefer al queda terrorists to run the country as an alternative.

How strange.

Could you tell us the "many factions now getting even with others"?

Or is it, perchance, the ousted Sunni minority trying to get their own back on the (now governing) Shi'a majority of which Saddam oppressed, tortured, jailed and murdered hundreds of thousands over his tenure?

Some countries need dictators, huh? Maybe, if they are benevolent ones. Saddam certainly wasn't in that category.

And where do you get the idea that there are enough Al Qaeda members in Syria to get popular support to form a government?

The Syrian people are no fans of Al Qaida, but for the Sunni, right now, they are a necessary evil.

Plus, not every foreign fighter in Syria is a terrorist. Many of them are untrained Sunni Arabs and went there purely to help protect their Sunni brothers and sisters from Assad's genocide.

But it is ok for the rebel terrorists to commit genocide is it?

Please provide proof that Assad is the one that used chemical weapons. Not just that some say he did, but proof.

[FDog]

Ahh those wonderful rebels going against the govt. Taken a village, killing and forcing residents to convert to islam.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/08/maaloula-captured-christian-village-damascus_n_3890142.html

[Sing_Sling]

This is the crux of it, yet FDog et al. want to pat Putin on the back when he is done nothing to avert genocide or human tragedy. He is just removing the US's rationale for intervention so Assad can continue with his mass genocide and war crimes.

The crux of it is that Assad is fighting terrorists.

The central point of it is that Assad is a tyrant and that Putin is a puppet master in Syria.

I oppose Assad. Am I a terrorist, or a terrorist sympathizer?

Neither. You are an internet forum pundit with no more information than any other poster has or can get.

The central point of this thread is exactly that if the US were to yet again bomb another country there would be greater bloodshed than there is now. We're not only talking civil war to a greater extent, but also a disintegration of the state we see on a map now. This, in turn, will lead to other countries or groups demanding/declaring they 'right's to this and that region etc etc etc

That is the central point of this thread

[Chicog]

IMO the German reluctance was out of a fear of Russia. Germany is dependent upon Russian natural gas.

Amazing, how the US gets lambasted for being a "slave" to Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States, yet Europeans conveniently forget about the EU's dependence upon Russian energy. Putin has Germany by the short hairs.

Yet, ironically, both Iran and the GCC want a pipeline straight through Syria to the Med....

Good to see some people haven't forgotten the real reason behind the USA's attempts to destabilise Syria.

Nor Iran's reason to keep a murderous dictator in power no matter what war crimes he commits.

[Chicog]

But it is ok for the rebel terrorists to commit genocide is it?

Please provide proof that Assad is the one that used chemical weapons. Not just that some say he did, but proof.

No it is not, and where did I say it was? You're good at trying to put words in people's mouths. There are certain extremist factions in the opposition side that as bad as Assad. But that is not representative of the whole of the opposition, nor do they share the same aims.

As for your proof, I think the fact the Russia is now (allegedly) helping to remove them from Assad's hands, coupled with the other evidence that has been offered many times, tells you all you need to know.

[Chicog]

Ahh those wonderful rebels going against the govt. Taken a village, killing and forcing residents to convert to islam.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/08/maaloula-captured-christian-village-damascus_n_3890142.html

I would suggest they are paying the price for supporting Assad.

The rest I've already answered several times.

[Publicus]

This is the crux of it, yet FDog et al. want to pat Putin on the back when he is done nothing to avert genocide or human tragedy. He is just removing the US's rationale for intervention so Assad can continue with his mass genocide and war crimes.

The crux of it is that Assad is fighting terrorists.

The central point of it is that Assad is a tyrant and that Putin is a puppet master in Syria.

I oppose Assad. Am I a terrorist, or a terrorist sympathizer?

Neither. You are an internet forum pundit with no more information than any other poster has or can get.

The central point of this thread is exactly that if the US were to yet again bomb another country there would be greater bloodshed than there is now. We're not only talking civil war to a greater extent, but also a disintegration of the state we see on a map now. This, in turn, will lead to other countries or groups demanding/declaring they 'right's to this and that region etc etc etc

That is the central point of this thread

A Western-Arab coalition have formed to train and arm both secular and moderate Islamist rebels to be more militarily effective.

The Western-Arab coalition consists of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the US, the UK, France and a few others.

Prez Obama and the coalition have a strategy and approach to depose the Assad regime and to replace it with a moderate government that can be supported by the vast majority of the Syrian people.

This is a complex and difficult situation so it is being handled deftly by the Western-Arab coalition. The coalition is seeking to replace the current destabilizing regime with a new and fresh leadership that can provide stability in Syria and to the region.

Assad's statements, such as a military strike by the US could incite a regional war - which is the thread topic - are the wild statements of a desperate tyrant who will say anything, do anything, to preserve in power he and his family and their elite cronies.

If Assad (and Putin) believed a regional war might somehow save their regime, they would start one today.

Edited September 12, 2013 by Publicus

[Publicus]

Publicus, you have learnt nothing about history. Some countries need dictators and tyrants. Look at Iraq, Hussein was a tyrant but look at the alternative that has happened now. The country is in a complete mess with no end in site. Many factions now getting even with the others and it is in a worse position than it was before the war.

So do tell, what is the alternative with Syria? You don't like Assad and Putin, nor China. So you prefer al queda terrorists to run the country as an alternative.

How strange.

Could you tell us the "many factions now getting even with others"?

Or is it, perchance, the ousted Sunni minority trying to get their own back on the (now governing) Shi'a majority of which Saddam oppressed, tortured, jailed and murdered hundreds of thousands over his tenure?

Some countries need dictators, huh? Maybe, if they are benevolent ones. Saddam certainly wasn't in that category.

And where do you get the idea that there are enough Al Qaeda members in Syria to get popular support to form a government?

The Syrian people are no fans of Al Qaida, but for the Sunni, right now, they are a necessary evil.

Plus, not every foreign fighter in Syria is a terrorist. Many of them are untrained Sunni Arabs and went there purely to help protect their Sunni brothers and sisters from Assad's genocide.

But it is ok for the rebel terrorists to commit genocide is it?

Please provide proof that Assad is the one that used chemical weapons. Not just that some say he did, but proof.

You've pulled off a pretty amazing trick to have missed the post on the previous page that contains the information below, that Assad used chemical warfare against his own civilian population, in a suburb of Damascus.

That's a "wealth of evidence" found by UN inspectors.

Then there are the findings of the intelligence and militaries of the United States, France, the UK based on examination of concrete evidence and victims directly affected by the attack which concludes that the particular attack could only be conducted by a state, not a band of rebels or others.

Waiting for a confession by Assad will get you nowhere, which is where you presently are in this clear and obvious matter.

Exclusive: U.N. Report Will Point to Assad Regime in Massive Chemical Attack

U.N. inspectors have collected a "wealth" of evidence on the use of nerve agents that points to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad using chemical weapons against his own people, according to a senior Western official.

The inspection team, which is expected on Monday to present U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon with a highly anticipated report on a suspected Aug. 21 nerve agent attack in the suburbs of Damascus, will not directly accuse the Syrian regime of gassing its own people, according to three U.N.-based diplomats familiar with the investigation.

But it will provide a strong circumstantial case -- based on an examination of spent rocket casings, ammunition, and laboratory tests of soil, blood, and urine samples -- that points strongly in the direction of Syrian government culpability.

http://thecable.fore...chemical_attack

EU: All info on Syria gas attack points to Assad

The European Union agreed on Saturday that the Aug. 21 chemical attack outside Damascus appears to have been the work of Syria's regime, but that any potential military attack against it should wait for a U.N. inspectors' report.

Germany joined in on blaming the attack on the Syrian government - it had been the only European member of the Group of 20 not to co-sign a joint statement issued Friday at the end of the group's meeting in St. Petersburg, Russia, blaming the regime.

The EU ministers also stressed that perpetrators for such chemical attacks should face possible prosecution by the International Criminal Court in The Hague.

http://news.yahoo.co...-112903386.html

Edited September 12, 2013 by Publicus

[simple1]

Ahh those wonderful rebels going against the govt. Taken a village, killing and forcing residents to convert to islam.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/08/maaloula-captured-christian-village-damascus_n_3890142.html

Syrian Christians are represented throughout the Assad regime, from being MPs and government ministers to fighting with the Syrian Army and militias. Given the atrocities committed by the Syrian Army and militias, sadly the civilians would not be exempt from relation and revenge killings by equally cruel rebel force elements. There are both Christian and Muslim holy sites in the town, the Free Syrian Army offered to withdraw from the town, but for some reason the offer was not accepted, who knows why, may be it was considered an opportunity to establish a killing zone by the Assad regime.

The Lebanese government that is composed of Shiite, Sunni and Christian representatives have to date done a great job stopping the ignition of another civil war. Let’s hope they can keep matters under control as the more than 700k refugees from Syria must be destabilising the country.

[Publicus]

Who believes Putin and Assad that Assad's chemical weapons arsenal can be dismantled and destroyed in the midst of a civil war and in short order? If you believe that, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I can sell to you cheap, special today for you only.

Putin's proposal only buys time that delays or precludes a US strike that would degrade the Syrian military and allows Assad's forces to continue their campaign against the rebels, both good guys and bad guys.

Putin's plan is in fact the Assad rescue and preservation scheme, nothing more.

Nothing will come of it except to greatly increase the likelihood Assad will survive and continue to rule in Syria as Putin's best pal in the ME.

The Russian Plan Of Removing Syria's Chemical Weapons Mid-War Is A 'Nightmare'

First, as Eli Lake of the Daily Beast reports, the U.S. will be "relying on one of Syria's chief weapons suppliers to disarm a regime the president has accused of gassing its own people."

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem said Russia's plan was aimed at "knocking the legs out from under American aggression," and several analysts think that the Bashar al-Assad's regime could simply use the move to buy time.

The process in Syria would be "exceedingly difficult" because, even with ceasefire, the destruction and deactivation of those weapons would take years and require tens of thousands of troops to protect inspectors.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/why-russia-plan-for-syria-wont-work-2013-9#ixzz2eg164FSu

Edited September 12, 2013 by Publicus

[F430murci]

There isn't anyone with an IQ over 100 that doesn't know that Assad absolutely CANNOT use those chemical weapons EVER.

Most people would have thought the same thing one month ago, but, apparently, he DID.

Apparently he did 14 times in the last year. The last one was just too big, in a less remote area and got too much attention.

[F430murci]

This is the crux of it, yet FDog et al. want to pat Putin on the back when he is done nothing to avert genocide or human tragedy. He is just removing the US's rationale for intervention so Assad can continue with his mass genocide and war crimes.

The crux of it is that Assad is fighting terrorists.

The central point of it is that Assad is a tyrant and that Putin is a puppet master in Syria.

I oppose Assad. Am I a terrorist, or a terrorist sympathizer?

Neither. You are an internet forum pundit with no more information than any other poster has or can get.

The central point of this thread is exactly that if the US were to yet again bomb another country there would be greater bloodshed than there is now. We're not only talking civil war to a greater extent, but also a disintegration of the state we see on a map now. This, in turn, will lead to other countries or groups demanding/declaring they 'right's to this and that region etc etc etc

That is the central point of this thread

The interesting point is how what I said has has been taken out of context and you guys with deep resentments toward US refuse to comment on or acknowledge the factual support I offered for the above statement.

I have little issue with Assad killing rebel fighters as its a war. I have a huge issue with him napalming, gassing and bombing school yards, markets, hospitals or any anywhere else for the sole purpose of killing children and civilians. Taking out his air strips and delivery systems would go a long ways in protecting children and civilians.

I get both sides are bad, but how in the world can someone truly say in good conscious that no one should do anything to help the civilians and children because both sides suck. That is messed up.

[boomerangutang]

Here's how CBS views the debacle:

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50154862n

1,000 tons of Chemical weapons have been destroyed by US and Russia.

Syria is a chemical weapons 'superpower' according to people who study such things.

Estimated minimal cost to destroy Syria's chem. stockpile: $1 billion

.....and that's if everything goes smoothly, there's no hiding stockpiles, and Syrian officials are good hosts to the thousands of specialized personnel who would have to be involved.

Boomerangutang's spin: Expecting the process to go smoothly (if it starts at all) in a war zone, would be like expecting a large crowd of 21 year old drunk boys to be gentlemanly with some cute sexy girls who, in their midst, decided to take their tank tops and bras off on a hot July night.

[simple1]

Here's how CBS views the debacle:

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50154862n

1,000 tons of Chemical weapons have been destroyed by US and Russia.

Syria is a chemical weapons 'superpower' according to people who study such things.

Estimated minimal cost to destroy Syria's chem. stockpile: $1 billion

.....and that's if everything goes smoothly, there's no hiding stockpiles, and Syrian officials are good hosts to the thousands of specialized personnel who would have to be involved.

Boomerangutang's spin: Expecting the process to go smoothly (if it starts at all) in a war zone, would be like expecting a large crowd of 21 year old drunk boys to be gentlemanly with some cute sexy girls who, in their midst, decided to take their tank tops and bras off on a hot July night.

Slight correction, the report states approx 27,000 tones of chemical weapons destroyed to date by the US at facilities costing approx US$26.5 billion to build. The Syrian Foreign Minister recently admitted that Syria has continually been processing chemical agents for use in chemical warfare; he did not admit deployment of chemical weapons. Some countries estimate that current stock in Syria is 1,000 tons and would take around ten years to safely destroy.

Edited September 12, 2013 by simple1

[F430murci]

An article on Putin's real motivations.

-----

Of great interest to the Russians is its navy’s access to the strategically important base in the port of Tartus on Syria’s Mediterranean coast, as well as the arms it sells the Syrian government, said Amy Knight, a leading U.S. historian and expert on Russia. And there's the arms trade: The Kremlin sent $1 billion worth of weaponry to the Assad regime in 2011, the year the war broke out, she said.

And beyond the practical considerations are matters of principle for Russia, Kremlin watchers say.

“In the Iraqi crisis, the Libyan crisis and now the Syrian crisis, Putin perceives the desire by the West to kick out those the West doesn’t like,” according to Moscow-based independent journalist Konstantin von Eggert. “And I think that he always thinks, in the end, about himself and his regime.”

“He sees himself as a defender of the principle of the inviolability of the internal affairs of the state,” he said. “Essentially, what Russia wants to tell the world is that no one, including the U.N., is going to decide who is going to run which country.”

And Assad’s fall would indeed set a bad precedent for Putin, Russia expert Knight added.

“Putin and his colleagues do not like the whole idea of seeing a strong dictatorial leader fall. It is a bit close to home for them and does not set a good example,” she said.

Finally, Putin’s international standing is surely top of mind.

. . .

“He’s only focused on several things that he thinks are his lifetime achievements. That is keeping Russia respected or at least noticed on the international scene, keeping any foreign interference at bay and keeping himself in power,” he said.

James Nixey, head of the Russia and Eurasia Program at the London-based Chatham House think tank, agreed that Russia’s motivation was strategic.

“Russia is so desperate for influence it takes anything it can," he said. "It is not that it adores Assad by any means.”

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/12/20448911-analysis-why-putin-is-backing-assads-blood-soaked-syrian-regime?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=1

[SinglePot]

I wouldn't want to meet Putin on a dark night.

Would You?

[JetsetBkk]

You've pulled off a pretty amazing trick to have missed the post on the previous page that contains the information below, that Assad used chemical warfare against his own civilian population, in a suburb of Damascus.

That's a "wealth of evidence" found by UN inspectors.

Then there are the findings of the intelligence and militaries of the United States, France, the UK based on examination of concrete evidence and victims directly affected by the attack which concludes that the particular attack could only be conducted by a state, not a band of rebels or others.

Waiting for a confession by Assad will get you nowhere, which is where you presently are in this clear and obvious matter.

Exclusive: U.N. Report Will Point to Assad Regime in Massive Chemical Attack

<snip>

I'm surprised you quote that report from "thecable" since the title is not so much misleading as a lie. Once you actually read the article, you realise there is nothing much in it at all. Even 'the "wealth" of evidence' you refer to is in quotes, because there is none.

Here's my précis of that article (my comments in italics):

The inspection team ... will not directly accuse the Syrian regime of gassing its own people ... But it will provide a strong circumstantial case ...

...."It seems they are very happy with the wealth of evidence they got."... - that chemical weapons were used. (Yes, we know that already)

... according to the United States and other Western powers, Syrian forces launched a chemical weapons attack that killed more than 1,400 people in the al Ghouta suburb of Damascus... - yes, but where's the proof?

... Syria and Russia have denied that the government in Damascus carried out the attack, saying it was the work of Syrian rebels seeking to persuade the West to intervene militarily on their behalf ...

... Assad denied his government used chemical weapons -- and compared the U.S. case against Syria to former Secretary of State Colin Powell's flawed presentation against Saddam Hussein's Iraq. In Syria, Assad said, "the Russians have completely opposite evidence: that missiles [were] thrown from areas that the rebels controlled."...

... Syria and Russia, meanwhile, have highlighted several other alleged chemical weapons attacks that wound up hitting Syrian forces ...

... Syria's U.N. ambassador Bashar al Jaafari, requested that investigators look at three other cases of alleged chemical weapons use in late August against Syrian forces ...

... Sellström's inspection team is only planning to report next week on the al Ghouta attacks. The team plans to return to Damascus at a later date to complete its investigations into the other incidents ...

... the U.N. inspectors are only authorized to conclude whether chemical weapons have been used in Syria, not assign responsibility for their use ... - so pretty pointless as we all know CW were used.

... Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem, admitted his country operated a clandestine chemical weapons program, and vowed to open them up to international scrutiny as part of a Russian-brokered deal to place Syria's chemical agents under international control ...

So there you have it. You quoted a report with a headline that comes nowhere near reflecting the content of the article.

I won't bother with your "Yahoo.news" quote.

[Ulysses G.]

I'm surprised you quote that report from "thecable" since the title is not so much misleading as a lie.

The article says that there is strong circumstantial evidence and the title says that the UN report will point to the Assad Regime. It is neither misleading or a lie.

[FDog]

The UN inspectors were not there to assign blame at all, that isn't their brief. They even stated they would not be assigning any blame. They are simply there to ascertain the use of the chemical weapons and what chemicals were used.

Even John Kerry has dismissed any findings as 'irrelevant' as they are only to find out if chemical weapons were used, not who used them.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10277868/UN-weapons-inspectors-leave-Syria-earlier-than-planned.html

Or is that just another Obama administration 'mistake'.

Where was Obama and the UN when there was complaints the rebels used chemical weapons at other sites?

Edited September 12, 2013 by FDog

[Publicus]

You've pulled off a pretty amazing trick to have missed the post on the previous page that contains the information below, that Assad used chemical warfare against his own civilian population, in a suburb of Damascus.

That's a "wealth of evidence" found by UN inspectors.

Then there are the findings of the intelligence and militaries of the United States, France, the UK based on examination of concrete evidence and victims directly affected by the attack which concludes that the particular attack could only be conducted by a state, not a band of rebels or others.

Waiting for a confession by Assad will get you nowhere, which is where you presently are in this clear and obvious matter.

Exclusive: U.N. Report Will Point to Assad Regime in Massive Chemical Attack

<snip>

I'm surprised you quote that report from "thecable" since the title is not so much misleading as a lie. Once you actually read the article, you realise there is nothing much in it at all. Even 'the "wealth" of evidence' you refer to is in quotes, because there is none.

Here's my précis of that article (my comments in italics):

The inspection team ... will not directly accuse the Syrian regime of gassing its own people ... But it will provide a strong circumstantial case ...

...."It seems they are very happy with the wealth of evidence they got."... - that chemical weapons were used. (Yes, we know that already)

... according to the United States and other Western powers, Syrian forces launched a chemical weapons attack that killed more than 1,400 people in the al Ghouta suburb of Damascus... - yes, but where's the proof?

... Syria and Russia have denied that the government in Damascus carried out the attack, saying it was the work of Syrian rebels seeking to persuade the West to intervene militarily on their behalf ...

... Assad denied his government used chemical weapons -- and compared the U.S. case against Syria to former Secretary of State Colin Powell's flawed presentation against Saddam Hussein's Iraq. In Syria, Assad said, "the Russians have completely opposite evidence: that missiles [were] thrown from areas that the rebels controlled."...

... Syria and Russia, meanwhile, have highlighted several other alleged chemical weapons attacks that wound up hitting Syrian forces ...

... Syria's U.N. ambassador Bashar al Jaafari, requested that investigators look at three other cases of alleged chemical weapons use in late August against Syrian forces ...

... Sellström's inspection team is only planning to report next week on the al Ghouta attacks. The team plans to return to Damascus at a later date to complete its investigations into the other incidents ...

... the U.N. inspectors are only authorized to conclude whether chemical weapons have been used in Syria, not assign responsibility for their use ... - so pretty pointless as we all know CW were used.

... Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem, admitted his country operated a clandestine chemical weapons program, and vowed to open them up to international scrutiny as part of a Russian-brokered deal to place Syria's chemical agents under international control ...

So there you have it. You quoted a report with a headline that comes nowhere near reflecting the content of the article.

I won't bother with your "Yahoo.news" quote.

The "lie" is in defending Assad and Putin.

Assad is gassing and murdering his own population. It's now in its 30th consecutive month. Assad is Putin's friend and one knows a person by his friends.

And the record is clear what Putin is doing to his own population at home in Russia. Once a KGB always a KGB. Russia anyway is a used to be that never was.

Edited September 12, 2013 by Publicus

[F430murci]

I wouldn't want to meet Putin on a dark night.

Would You?

Haha, he is actually kind of small, but those Russians are crazy tuff. Putin just sends a bunch of dudes armed with automatic weapons to your house or business to take you away. He even sent dues armed with automatic weapons to take that artist away and the owner of vk, but both of them got out like a day or two before.

[Publicus]

The UN inspectors were not there to assign blame at all, that isn't their brief. They even stated they would not be assigning any blame. They are simply there to ascertain the use of the chemical weapons and what chemicals were used.

Even John Kerry has dismissed any findings as 'irrelevant' as they are only to find out if chemical weapons were used, not who used them.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10277868/UN-weapons-inspectors-leave-Syria-earlier-than-planned.html

Or is that just another Obama administration 'mistake'.

Where was Obama and the UN when there was complaints the rebels used chemical weapons at other sites?

UN inspectors will visit the other 14 sites after their present report is completed, the sites Assad used chemical weapons previously against his own population.

Everyone already has dismissed any possibility that chemical weapons in Syria could be used by non-state actors. The weapons used could only have been used by a state.

Edited September 12, 2013 by Publicus

[FDog]

You've pulled off a pretty amazing trick to have missed the post on the previous page that contains the information below, that Assad used chemical warfare against his own civilian population, in a suburb of Damascus.

That's a "wealth of evidence" found by UN inspectors.

Then there are the findings of the intelligence and militaries of the United States, France, the UK based on examination of concrete evidence and victims directly affected by the attack which concludes that the particular attack could only be conducted by a state, not a band of rebels or others.

Waiting for a confession by Assad will get you nowhere, which is where you presently are in this clear and obvious matter.

Exclusive: U.N. Report Will Point to Assad Regime in Massive Chemical Attack

<snip>

I'm surprised you quote that report from "thecable" since the title is not so much misleading as a lie. Once you actually read the article, you realise there is nothing much in it at all. Even 'the "wealth" of evidence' you refer to is in quotes, because there is none.

Here's my précis of that article (my comments in italics):

The inspection team ... will not directly accuse the Syrian regime of gassing its own people ... But it will provide a strong circumstantial case ...

...."It seems they are very happy with the wealth of evidence they got."... - that chemical weapons were used. (Yes, we know that already)

... according to the United States and other Western powers, Syrian forces launched a chemical weapons attack that killed more than 1,400 people in the al Ghouta suburb of Damascus... - yes, but where's the proof?

... Syria and Russia have denied that the government in Damascus carried out the attack, saying it was the work of Syrian rebels seeking to persuade the West to intervene militarily on their behalf ...

... Assad denied his government used chemical weapons -- and compared the U.S. case against Syria to former Secretary of State Colin Powell's flawed presentation against Saddam Hussein's Iraq. In Syria, Assad said, "the Russians have completely opposite evidence: that missiles [were] thrown from areas that the rebels controlled."...

... Syria and Russia, meanwhile, have highlighted several other alleged chemical weapons attacks that wound up hitting Syrian forces ...

... Syria's U.N. ambassador Bashar al Jaafari, requested that investigators look at three other cases of alleged chemical weapons use in late August against Syrian forces ...

... Sellström's inspection team is only planning to report next week on the al Ghouta attacks. The team plans to return to Damascus at a later date to complete its investigations into the other incidents ...

... the U.N. inspectors are only authorized to conclude whether chemical weapons have been used in Syria, not assign responsibility for their use ... - so pretty pointless as we all know CW were used.

... Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem, admitted his country operated a clandestine chemical weapons program, and vowed to open them up to international scrutiny as part of a Russian-brokered deal to place Syria's chemical agents under international control ...

So there you have it. You quoted a report with a headline that comes nowhere near reflecting the content of the article.

I won't bother with your "Yahoo.news" quote.

The "lie" is in defending Assad and Putin.

Assad is gassing and murdering his own population. It's now in its 30th consecutive month. Assad is Putin's friend and one knows a person by his friends.

And the record is clear what Putin is doing to his own population at home in Russia. Once a KGB always a KGB.

The rebels have been reported as using chemical weapons, but I suppose that is ok then.

By the way, this may surprise you but this thread is about Syria, not your blatant hatred of Putin. We all know of your hatred of Russia and China but this isn't the thread to try and spout your bigoted views.

[Publicus]

Assad and Putin lie when they accuse rebels of using chemical weapons.

That's a part of the "lie" in all of this, i.e., trying to defend Assad and Putin, pathetic mass murderers both.

[F430murci]

All of you anti US guys thinking that US just wants to do harm to countries like Syria or Iraq because oil of whatever should watch this video and pay close attention to the soldier at the very end. This is what Americans are really like . . .

http://www.upworthy.com/a-boy-makes-anti-muslim-comments-in-front-of-an-american-soldier-the-soldiers-reply-priceless