Chemical weapon 'used in Syria' - both sides blame the other as 15 civilians reportedly killed
23 replies, posted
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-21841217[/url]
[QUOTE]Syrian rebels and the government have accused each other of firing chemical weapons, reportedly killing at least 25 people in the north of the country.
A Syrian minister said it was a "dangerous escalation" and the "first act" of a new rebel authority.
However, both a chemical weapons monitoring body and the US said there was no evidence they had been used.
If confirmed, it would be the first time chemical weapons have been used in the two-year Syrian conflict.[/QUOTE]
While there are of course people in the rebels stupid enough to use CWs, I think it's more likely it was done by the Assad regime as an attempt to make the rebel factions look bad
Uh-oh...
What exactly would make the conflict end?
You know, I wouldn't put it past either of the sides in Syria.
[QUOTE=PollytheParrot;39968237]What exactly would make the conflict end?[/QUOTE]
The destruction of one side or the other. Short of foreign intervention it isn't going to end until either side beats the other one. Neither party wants to end it peacefully - Assad wants to keep power, the Rebels want to gain it.
[img]http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20121225191625/cnc/images/0/08/Generals_Scud_Launcher.jpg[/img]
Chemical missiles, huh?
Oh man, they went there.
[QUOTE=download;39968213]While there are of course people in the rebels stupid enough to use CWs, I think it's more likely it was done by the Assad regime as an attempt to make the rebel factions look bad[/QUOTE]
Why not the rebels using it to make the assad regime look bad?
There are some real assholes on both sides. Both sides have committed atrocities.
I'm more inclined to believe it was the rebels given that it was apparently the deployment of a single weapon. If the SAA, a much more organized and unified faction, were desperate enough to deploy chemical weapons chances are they would do so en masse. I don't see a situation where an SAA unit would be ordered to deploy a single small chemical warhead in such a wonton manner being likely, but one of the many loosely related rebel groups somehow obtaining such a weapon and firing it without much regard or communication between other groups seems not too unlikely.
Of course information is lacking and no one can really claim anything for fact at this point.
So, do people still belive that rebels only want freedom and democracy or have they snapped out of it?
My brother went to Libya 3 months ago, and he said that the place didn't look any better at all and that most of the (normal) people actually liked Gaddafi (contrary on what the media reports to us).
Besides, isn't this the exact thing that was leaked by British PCM? I'd appreciate it if some gold member could PM me the thread I made about the leak.
EDIT: Found the thread. [url]http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1242490[/url]
[QUOTE=download;39968213]While there are of course people in the rebels stupid enough to use CWs, I think it's more likely it was done by the Assad regime as an attempt to make the rebel factions look bad[/QUOTE]
Why the hell would he do that when he knows that he'll get wrecked by NATO as soon as he does that?
I'd discuss more about this but I doubt I'd do it here considering this is Facepunch.
[QUOTE=Spirit_Breaker;39969435]
My brother went to Libya 3 months ago, and he said that the place didn't look any better at all and that most of the (normal) people actually liked Gaddafi (contrary on what the media reports to us).
[/QUOTE]
Your brother might just as well have ran into a few Gaddafi sympathisers and mistaken them for the majority. Gaddafi was really kind of a dick. Also do you think shit will "look any better" when it's just been fucked in a war, developement takes years or decades.
Also Assad sure as hell will use the chemical weapons because nato wont be doing fuck as long as Russia and China support Syria.
You dudes are like "Yeah there are no bad guys or good guys but let's support the X side more because what the hell we like to feel involved and the other side was reported doing something bad more recently".
[QUOTE=mastermaul;39968410]
Of course information is lacking and no one can really claim anything for fact at this point.[/QUOTE]
Thanks for that disclaimer I will review your claims for entertainment purposes only.
I wonder if it's confirmed that the Assad regime used chemical weapons if the US'll intervene like they said.
Only fifteen people? There would be tens if not hundreds of people dead and dying if it had been a chemical weapon. The breathing problems are likely from the combination of rocket and explosive vapours with dust thrown in to the mix.
Unless they actually know what sort of chemical it is then it's all up in the air right now.
For all we know it was probably just a shitton of rocket exhaust or tear gas.
[QUOTE=Spirit_Breaker;39969435]So, do people still belive that rebels only want freedom and democracy or have they snapped out of it?
My brother went to Libya 3 months ago, and he said that the place didn't look any better at all and that most of the (normal) people actually liked Gaddafi (contrary on what the media reports to us).[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure "my brother told me" is a reliable source of information. I'd rather see a poll of some sort which could tell us exactly what Libyans thought of the conflict.
[url=http://www.gallup.com/poll/157400/opinion-briefing-arabs-doubt-benefits-uprisings.aspx]Oh[/url]
[img]http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/vwcpqqmtfuyfxw683h2g8a.gif[/img] [img]http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/9pslzzuzvuunnarnueyvfw.gif[/img]
[url=http://www.gallup.com/poll/156539/Opinion-Briefing-Libyans-Eye-New-Relations-West.aspx]Also these[/url]
[img]http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/wlmxlxmppeoiwvkdtnxtvq.gif[/img] [img]http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/jl8gcm3qc0m48nis9pi8ca.gif[/img]
Haven't the rebels been making fairly significant gains in the conflict? They've had their struggles at times, certainly, but from what I've seen they've been winning the fight. It doesn't make much since for them to risk everything by criminalizing themselves when they're already in the lead.
Wasn't there a leaked security firm email a while back that talked about using an old russian chem weapon and blaming it on assad?
[QUOTE=smurfy;39970039]I'm not sure "my brother told me" is a reliable source of information. I'd rather see a poll of some sort which could tell us exactly what Libyans thought of the conflict.
[url=http://www.gallup.com/poll/157400/opinion-briefing-arabs-doubt-benefits-uprisings.aspx]Oh[/url]
[/QUOTE]
Although the polls are only a year old, it's still quite a long time considering the timescale of the Arab spring. I would be interested to see how opinions have changed over time since the dictators have been deposed - especially considering the reports of oppression by Islamists in Libya and the whole Mohamed Morsi powers fiasco.
Talking about Libya whilst chem weapons supposedly deployed in Syria.
On topic, I seriously doubt chem weapons were used. If they were, then it was probably a false flag operation, I don't see it making sense to risk chem weapons on 25 civilians in the country side.
There have been rumblings of chemical weapons before but they were quickly dismissed, nothing here but propaganda
[editline]20th March 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;39970153]Haven't the rebels been making fairly significant gains in the conflict? They've had their struggles at times, certainly, but from what I've seen they've been winning the fight. It doesn't make much since for them to risk everything by criminalizing themselves when they're already in the lead.[/QUOTE]
The Syrian army is down to ~50 000 personnel but I have no doubt they can hold out for quite a while
[QUOTE=smeismastger;39969957]Only fifteen people? There would be tens if not hundreds of people dead and dying if it had been a chemical weapon. The breathing problems are likely from the combination of rocket and explosive vapours with dust thrown in to the mix.[/QUOTE]
It depends on the size. Most individual chemical weapons aren't nearly as deadly as you think, not so much as incapacitating. It would have to be some high grade shit or a large deployment of multiple weapons to kill hundreds of people.
For example, mustard gas is unlikely to kill so much as maim unless the victim is exposed to it in high concentrations. It can sometimes take weeks for a fatally exposed person to die. In the First World War, only about 2-3% of British gas causalities were ultimately fatal. Common gasses used were Chlorine, mustard, and Phosgene.
Of course, nerve agents are a completely different story. If it's determined nerve agents were deployed, it's very likely there will be some form of international intervention given that they're WMDs.