Trump says chemical attack in Syria crossed many lines

[webfact]

Trump says chemical attack in Syria crossed many lines

By Jeff Mason and Tom Perry

REUTERS

 

A man breathes through an oxygen mask, after what rescue workers described as a suspected gas attack in the town of Khan Sheikhoun in rebel-held Idlib, Syria April 4, 2017. REUTERS/Ammar Abdullah

 

WASHINGTON/BEIRUT (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump accused Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's government of going "beyond a red line" with a poison gas attack on civilians and said his attitude toward Syria and Assad had changed, opening a rift with Moscow.

 

Trump declined to say how or whether his administration would respond but said the attack, which killed at least 70 people, many of them children, "crosses many, many lines", an allusion to his predecessor Barack Obama's threat to topple Assad with air strikes if he used such weapons.

 

"I will tell you, what happened yesterday is unacceptable to me," Trump told reporters at a news conference with Jordan's King Abdullah on Wednesday.

 

"And I will tell you, it’s already happened that my attitude toward Syria and Assad has changed very much," though when asked at an earlier meeting whether he was formulating a new policy on Syria, Trump said: "You'll see."

 

U.S. officials rejected Russia's assertion that Syrian rebels were to blame for the attack.

 

Trump's comments, which came just a few days after Washington said it was no longer focussed on making Assad leave power, suggested a clash between the Kremlin and Trump's White House after initial signals of warmer ties. Trump did not mention Russia in his comments on Wednesday but Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said it was time for Russia to think carefully about its support for Assad.

 

Western countries, including the United States, blamed Assad's armed forces for the worst chemical attack in Syria for more than four years.

 

U.S. intelligence officials, based on a preliminary assessment, said the deaths were most likely caused by sarin nerve gas dropped by Syrian aircraft on the town of Khan Sheikhoun on Tuesday. A senior State Department official said Washington had not yet ascertained it was sarin.

 

Moscow offered an alternative explanation that would shield Assad: that the poison gas belonged to rebels and had leaked from an insurgent weapons depot hit by Syrian bombs.

 

A senior White House official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the Russian explanation was not credible. "We don't believe it," the official said.

 

COUNTER-RESOLUTION

 

The United States, Britain and France have proposed a draft U.N. Security Council resolution that would condemn the attack; the Russian Foreign Ministry called it "unacceptable" and said it was based on "fake information".

 

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Moscow would press its case blaming the rebels and Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov said Russia would veto the draft if Western nations went to a vote without further consultations, Interfax news agency reported.

 

Moscow has proposed its own draft, TASS news agency quoted a spokesman of Russia's U.N. mission, Fyodor Strzhizhovsky, as saying on Wednesday.

 

The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, issued what appeared to be a threat of unilateral action if Security Council members could not agree.

 

"When the United Nations consistently fails in its duty to act collectively, there are times in the life of states that we are compelled to take our own action," she told the council, without elaborating.

 

Trump described the attack as "horrible" and "unspeakable." He faulted Obama for failing to carry through on his "red line" threat and when asked if he had responsibility to respond to the attack, said: "I now have responsibility".

 

The new incident means Trump is faced with same dilemma that faced his predecessor: whether to openly challenge Moscow and risk deep involvement in a Middle East war by seeking to punish Assad for using banned weapons, or compromise and accept the Syrian leader remaining in power at the risk of looking weak.

 

While some rebels hailed Trump's statement as an apparent shift in the U.S. position, others said it was too early to say whether the comments would result in a real change in policy.

 

Fares al-Bayoush, a Free Syrian Army commander, told Reuters: "Today's statement contains a serious difference from the previous statements, and we expect positivity ... from the American role.

 

Others who declined to be identified said they would wait and see.

 

Video uploaded to social media showed civilians sprawled on the ground, some in convulsions, others lifeless. Rescue workers hose down the limp bodies of small children, trying to wash away chemicals. People wail and pound on the chests of victims.

 

The charity Medecins Sans Frontieres said one of its hospitals in Syria had treated patients "with symptoms - dilated pupils, muscle spasms, involuntary defecation - consistent with exposure to neuro-toxic agents such as sarin". The World Health Organisation also said the symptoms were consistent with exposure to a nerve agent.

 

"We're talking about war crimes," French U.N. Ambassador Francois Delattre told reporters in New York.

 

Labib Nahhas, chief of foreign relations at Ahrar al-Sham, one of the biggest rebel groups in western Syria, called the Russian statement factually wrong and one which contradicted witness accounts.

 

"This statement provides Assad with the required coverage and protection to continue his despicable slaughter of the Syrian people," Nahhas told Reuters.

 

The incident is the first time U.S. intelligence officials have accused Assad of using sarin since 2013, when hundreds of people died in an attack on a Damascus suburb. At that time, Washington said Assad had crossed a "red line" set by then-President Obama.

 

Obama threatened an air campaign to topple Assad but called it off at the last minute when the Syrian leader agreed to give up his chemical arsenal under a deal brokered by Moscow, a decision which Trump has long said proved Obama's weakness.

 

SAME DILEMMA

 

The Western-drafted U.N. Security Council resolution condemns the attack and presses Syria to cooperate with international investigators. Russia has blocked seven resolutions to protect Assad's government, most recently in February.

 

Trump's response to a diplomatic confrontation with Moscow will be closely watched at home because of accusations by his political opponents that he is too supportive of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

 

U.S. intelligence agencies say Russia intervened in the U.S. presidential election last year through computer hacking to help Trump defeat Hillary Clinton. The FBI and two congressional committees are investigating whether figures from the Trump campaign colluded with Moscow, which the White House denies.

 

Trump's relationship with Russia has deteriorated since the presidential election campaign, when Trump praised Putin as a strong leader and vowed to improve relations between the two countries, including a more coordinated effort to defeat Islamic State in Syria.

 

But as Russia has grown more assertive, including interfering in European politics and deploying missiles in its western Kaliningrad region and a new ground-launched cruise missile near Volgograd in southern Russia - an apparent violation of the 1987 Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty - relations have cooled, U.S. officials have said.

 

The chemical attack in Idlib province, one of the last major strongholds of rebels, who have fought since 2011 to topple Assad, complicates diplomatic efforts to end a war that has killed hundreds of thousands of people and driven half of Syrians from their homes.

 

Over the past several months, Western countries, including the United States, had been quietly dropping their demands that Assad leave power in any deal to end the war, accepting that the rebels no longer had the capability to topple him by force.

 

The use of banned chemical weapons would make it harder for the international community to sign off on any peace deal that does not remove him. Britain and France on Wednesday renewed their call for Assad to leave power.

 

(Additional reporting by Maria Tsvetkova and Polina Devitt in Moscow; Michelle Nichols at the United Nations and Lesley Wroughton and Steve Holland in Washington; writing by Peter Graff, Philippa Fletcher and Yara Bayoumy; Editing by Sonya Hepinstall, Louise Ireland and Lisa Shumaker)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-04-06

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, webfact said:

"And I will tell you, it’s already happened that my attitude toward Syria and Assad has changed very much," though when asked at an earlier meeting whether he was formulating a new policy on Syria, Trump said: "You'll see."

Use of chemical weapons tend to change a person's attitude.  Congrats to Trump. 

[stevenl]

Use of chemical weapons tend to change a person's attitude.  Congrats to Trump. 

When another chemical weapons attack happened years ago, and Obama drew a line, Trump was there saying 'don't take military action'. Let's see what happens now.

sent using Tapatalk

[craigt3365]

4 minutes ago, stevenl said:

When another chemical weapons attack happened years ago, and Obama drew a line, Trump was there saying 'don't take military action'. Let's see what happens now.

sent using Tapatalk
 

What stopped the military action was Russia getting involved and forcing Syria to say it wouldn't use chemical weapons again and were going to disclose their entire inventory.  That stalled the action.  Sadly, the Syrian government never did what they said and the Russian's never held them to it.

 

Here we are again.  But don't think Obama is to blame for that one.  It was also an action taken by congress.

[edwinchester]

I think Trumps Syrian red line will be in exactly the same place as Obama's Syrian red line.

[mamypoko]

I fear the day Trumps says he is a war time President. absolute chills

It won't be executive orders blocked any court. It is the CinC orders

absolute chills

[wonder6281]

Pot calling the kettle black again!

[craigt3365]

2 minutes ago, wonder6281 said:

Pot calling the kettle black again!

The US has used chemical weapons on it's own people?  Really?

[malibukid]

take out Assads air capability. this could be accomplished with coordinated air strikes. we have the intel on this.  i am sure we also have the intel on the chemical weapons strike as well.  nothing flies in Syria without this. eyes in the sky.

but Dump will do nothing.

[Ulic]

Yes, yes, yes Donald it has crossed "many lines" but has it crossed the line that will lead you respond in a meaningful way or is that line still further up the road so to speak.

[sujoop]

There's reportedly a crater at the initial site thus, not from a factory etc. Assad has the upper hand now so did not need to risk a renewed backlash. So, who besides Assad has free range of air space in Syria? Trump's pal, comrade Putin (Russia also has monitor control over Syria's chemical weapons).  

This despicable act comes as Russia-Gate was dominating and increasingly revealing complicit ties between Trump's Whitehouse & Russia. But now, suddenly Trump & Putin appear on opposite sides.

Assad is utterly reprehensible but also a mere pawn to be used and then tossed under the Kremlin bus at any time deemed convenient. Clearly the horrific murder of innocent children  does not matter in the least to whoever is behind this.

[craigt3365]

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/04/05/middleeast/syria-airstrike-idlib-how-it-unfolded/index.html

 

 

Quote

 

From airstrike to aftermath: How a chemical attack in Syria unfolded

 

Hospitals targeted in follow-up airstrikes, activists say

The makeshift clinic and Al-Rahma hospital, where the injured are being triaged, are targeted in new airstrikes four hours after the chemical attack, Idlib's health directorate and the SCD say in a joint press release.

 

Mohammed Hardan, who works for AMC, says he was at al-Rahma hospital when it was targeted by aerial bombardment, posting footage of the incident hours later.

 

 

Doesn't seem like a false flag.  Assad doing what he's done before.  Supported by Russia and Iran.

[Andaman Al]

7 hours ago, webfact said:

Trump says chemical attack in Syria crossed many lines

But as long as it didn't cross the line that leads to his lucrative deals with Putin then Assad can carry right on.

[billd766]

Assad doesn't care. He can always hide under Putin's coat tails.

[Andaman Al]

7 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Assad doesn't care. He can always hide under Putin's coat tails.

There is no room, that's where Trump already is.

[dunroaming]

6 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

What stopped the military action was Russia getting involved and forcing Syria to say it wouldn't use chemical weapons again and were going to disclose their entire inventory.  That stalled the action.  Sadly, the Syrian government never did what they said and the Russian's never held them to it.

 

Here we are again.  But don't think Obama is to blame for that one.  It was also an action taken by congress.

And the UK, who like Obama were very aware that with ISIS being part of the Assad opposition, it was tricky to say the least.  Arm the rebels and inevitably you are also arming ISIS.  Bad guys versus bad guys with hundreds of thousands of innocents stuck in the middle.

[dunroaming]

Well at least Trump has managed to get on the same page as the rest of us.  But talk is cheap, let's see if the POTUS actually does something.

[sujoop]

The situation in Syria could now make for a mutually convenient, distracting, 'theatre' of faux confrontation between Russia and the Whitehouse. Trump could order a couple strategic air strikes on Syrian bases or chemical targets, with Russia threatening back but it's only theatre. Meanwhile all the steam behind Whitehouse/Russia-Gate evaporates ... Then, on to North Korea to continue escalating distractions. China also being primed as the bogeyman all along (despite team Putin/Russia being a far greater and PROVEN threat to invade neighbours and destabilise the West).
 

Under all the distracting noise, Putin salivates at re-taking more former states and continuing to destabilise our western  economic unions & institutions, meanwhile Trump's team eyes tax cuts and gutting regulations on banks & the environment etc, removing the 'burden' from rich taxpayers of subsidising healthcare and gaining a loaded supreme court (to then make ANY executive order one wishes) among other plums. It's a win-win, just not for many...

 

 

Edited April 6, 2017 by sujoop

[ddavidovsky]

Can someone explain to me why it's worse to die in a chemical attack than to die in a bloody mangled mess after having your limbs blown off in a bomb attack? I know which way I'd rather die. Faux outrage here?

[mamypoko]

36 minutes ago, ddavidovsky said:

Can someone explain to me why it's worse to die in a chemical attack than to die in a bloody mangled mess after having your limbs blown off in a bomb attack? I know which way I'd rather die. Faux outrage here?

the footprint?

[simple1]

46 minutes ago, ddavidovsky said:

Can someone explain to me why it's worse to die in a chemical attack than to die in a bloody mangled mess after having your limbs blown off in a bomb attack? I know which way I'd rather die. Faux outrage here?

It's currently believed that Sarin gas was deployed which can take up to 10 minutes to kill if sufficient contact and a nasty way to die. 

 

Rather odd to posit 'faux outrage'. Chemical Weapons are WMD. Banned by most countries, not Syria (?),  by the Chemical Weapons Convention 1997.

 

https://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapons-convention/preamble/

 

Edited April 6, 2017 by simple1

[ddavidovsky]

9 minutes ago, mamypoko said:

the footprint?

After quick rummage I can't find any information regarding the comparative 'footprint' of chemical vs bomb attacks. No doubt it depends on population density and other things. Any info on this would be of interest, as the OP article provides no analysis.

[ddavidovsky]

9 minutes ago, simple1 said:

It's currently believed that Sarin gas was deployed which can take up to 10 minutes to kill if sufficient contact and a nasty way to die. How one can decide from afar what's a more preferable  way to die, by explosion or nerve gas is IMO bizarre.

 

Rather odd to posit 'faux outrage'. Chemical Weapons are WMD. Banned by most countries, not Syria (?),  by the Chemical Weapons Convention 1997.

 

https://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapons-convention/preamble/

 

 

Maybe it's a personal phobia, but I would rather die by any means other than in a state of physical carnage, and I'd be surprised if most people don't feel the same.

 

It's faux outrage because of the distinct implication that it's relatively acceptable for people to be killed by ordinary bombs which scatter their body parts about the scene - because those are not 'banned'.

[simple1]

19 minutes ago, ddavidovsky said:

 

Maybe it's a personal phobia, but I would rather die by any means other than in a state of physical carnage, and I'd be surprised if most people don't feel the same.

 

It's faux outrage because of the distinct implication that it's relatively acceptable for people to be killed by ordinary bombs which scatter their body parts about the scene - because those are not 'banned'.

Can you indicate where anyone has claimed it's 'relatively acceptable' for civilians to be killed by the Assad regime by way of bombing.

[Andaman Al]

31 minutes ago, ddavidovsky said:

 

Maybe it's a personal phobia, but I would rather die by any means other than in a state of physical carnage, and I'd be surprised if most people don't feel the same.

 

It's faux outrage because of the distinct implication that it's relatively acceptable for people to be killed by ordinary bombs which scatter their body parts about the scene - because those are not 'banned'.

I completely understand your sentiments regarding the use of chemical weapons Vs conventional weapons to achieve the objective of killing people. When innocents are killed there should be outrage regardless of the method used. There is very little chance of escape from a chemical weapon if you are in the 'zone'. One thing to remember is that this stuff is not available down at your local weapons dealer 'Guns and Bombs R Us' and tends to only come (funnily enough) from the 5 members of the UN Permanent Security Council (and one other country that cares little for the UN and what it has to say). They sell it, they control it and they express the 'faux outrage' when it is used.

 

The political games being played at the moment between the US, Russia, China are extremely complex and something does not add up at all about Assad using chemical weapons. He had absolutely NO REASON, it makes no sense. They have the co-operation and operational support of Russia and Trump had just given them (Syrians) their extra time ticket by stating that Assad was no longer a priority for regime replacement. After 5 years of brutal conflict and the destruction of a once jewel of the Middle East, Assad would have sat down with a large brandy, breathed a sigh of relief and said 'thank freak for that'. Instead we are now led to believe his first actions are - "okay we have a stay of execution from the USA, so lets wheel out the chemical weapons that will have every country possible wanting to slit my throat after they have sent in cruise missile attacks to destroy what is left of the country". Much as I want to believe it was Assad I simply cannot. The easiest thing would be to blame him and go to the next step but it makes no sense at all. The alternatives are far more sinister. Either Russia or the US giving the rebels the weapons and a truck full of money for a 'special mission'. Whatever happened we are never going to see the truth we will just bear witness to the carnage that will no doubt follow, probably to suit the temporary political requirements of whoever really instigated the dreadful attack.

Edited April 6, 2017 by Andaman Al

[Peterw42]

America are not the world police. What right do they have to interfere in another country, good or bad.

 

[Thorgal]

America are not the world police. What right do they have to interfere in another country, good or bad.   

 

 Nikki Haley, Trumps UN representative said in her opening speech:

 

'There's a new sheriff in town...'

 

http://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/politics/2017/march/theres-a-new-sheriff-in-town-ambassador-nikki-haley-vows-to-take-on-the-un

 

 By irony, the word 'sheriff' originally came from Arabic and means, 'the honourable or the noble man'...due to its descendance to to the prophet Mohammed...

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

 

 

[craigt3365]

35 minutes ago, Peterw42 said:

America are not the world police. What right do they have to interfere in another country, good or bad.

 

So you are saying it's better to be like Russia and not only condone these actions but also participate in them?  Seriously?

 

Seems like the citizens in Syria are asking for help from the US.  Lots of articles about this.  Easy to research.

 

Danged if you do, danged if you don't.

[ballpoint]

34 minutes ago, Thorgal said:

 Nikki Haley, Trumps UN representative said in her opening speech:

 

'There's a new sheriff in town...'

 

http://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/politics/2017/march/theres-a-new-sheriff-in-town-ambassador-nikki-haley-vows-to-take-on-the-un

 

 By irony, the word 'sheriff' originally came from Arabic and means, 'the honourable or the noble man'...due to its descendance to to the prophet Mohammed...

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

 

 

The English word sheriff comes from the old English term Shire Reeve - the local reeve (enforcement agent) of the king in the shire.  It has no relationship to the Arabic Sharif or Sherif.

[Peterw42]

11 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

So you are saying it's better to be like Russia and not only condone these actions but also participate in them?  Seriously?

 

Seems like the citizens in Syria are asking for help from the US.  Lots of articles about this.  Easy to research.

 

Danged if you do, danged if you don't.

Whos side will america help ? The Syrian Government, the Kurdish forces, The rebel forces.