UN investigators: Syrian rebels may have used sarin - Polidicks

Wonder what Israel is going to say since they just attacked Syria on the grounds of chemical weapons use by Assad

[QUOTE=Rofl my Waff;40548391]Wonder what Israel is going to say since they just attacked Syria on the grounds of chemical weapons use by Assad[/QUOTE] No, they bombed because of missile and weaponry shipments going to Hezbollah.

[QUOTE=sgman91;40548525]No, they bombed because of missile and weaponry shipments going to Hezbollah.[/QUOTE] Except the last time they didn't bomb missile shipments, they targeted a research facility.

[QUOTE=coldroll5;40544625]If it turns out the rebels used chemicals weapons isn't it kind of justified since the Assad regime has been killing people in a mass genocide for two years?[/QUOTE] You breath in some sarin or VX and tell us if its justified after, chemical weapons are un-controlable, and they kill slow, wind changes direction and suddenly a daycare is a morgue, a hospital has a 100% mortality rate, and that school down the street is a deathtrap. Nuclear weapons have NOTHING on chemical weapons, they are by far the worst form of weapon ever created, along with biological weapons

the chemical weapons they are talking about are not the gas weapons of ww1, these are the weapons that were engineered for decades to kill as quickly and as dispersed as possible, sarin and VX are weapons that were never intended to be used, the only reason why they were developed was because the other guys could have them and we needed to know how to counter them, one of these weapons going off in a populated area is bad to begin with, but the problem with chemical weapons is that they linger alot longer than anything else besides nuclear weapons

[QUOTE=laserguided;40548576]Except the last time they didn't bomb missile shipments, they targeted a research facility.[/QUOTE] It was still targeting missiles: "The target was Fateh-110 missiles, which have precision guidance systems with better aim than anything Hezbollah is known to have in its arsenal, the official said." - [URL]http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/syrian-report-israel-bombs-outskirts-of-damascus-for-second-time-in-recent-days/2013/05/05/8d48a818-b570-11e2-b94c-b684dda07add_story.html[/URL] If you still think this was about chemical weapons please provide a source.

[QUOTE=Glorbo;40547166]Bullets can do that too. [/QUOTE] Sure, but you'd have to hit the spine for that. The nerve agent would hurt the nervous system anyway, if not kill you.

[QUOTE=Sableye;40548814]the chemical weapons they are talking about are not the gas weapons of ww1, these are the weapons that were engineered for decades to kill as quickly and as dispersed as possible, sarin and VX are weapons that were never intended to be used, the only reason why they were developed was because the other guys could have them and we needed to know how to counter them, one of these weapons going off in a populated area is bad to begin with, but the problem with chemical weapons is that they linger alot longer than anything else besides nuclear weapons[/QUOTE] Actually the United states wasn't the first country to develop Sarin gas. It was actually created in Germany in 1938 and was going to be used in World War 2 but the Nazis didn't have enough resources or time to develop it properly so they never used it during the war, although near the end of the war they started research on it again. Sarin also has a relatively short shelf life and in order to make it last longer it has to be refilled constantly, contrary to nuclear weapons which can last for years.

[QUOTE=Valiantttt;40545405]So the Allied pilots who bombed innocent germans that weren't punished imply that no western country is a democratic or benevolent state in any way? It is basically the same thing in Syria but instead of 2 countries, it is 2 parties in 1 country. Yeah, they kill innocents but you can't argue that the Allies did the same thing. Not that it is ANY less horrible but what you are saying that must happen for a democratic or benevolent state? No, not really.[/QUOTE] I'm not arguing that Allied units did the same thing. I know that most countries that fought in World War 2 committed their fair share of atrocities, including western and supposedly democratic countries, and that's beyond my point. My point is that because syria is an authoritarian state, government units will not be punished for committing atrocities.

[QUOTE=Fahrenheit;40543701]I think it's obviously the rebels who used chemical weapons. Assad may be crazy but he isn't stupid enough to risk outside intervention. The rebels, who are losing ground and probably wanted to cross the "red line" were probably hoping to convince the outside world to get involved on their behalf.[/QUOTE] I am sorry Muhammad but you must die to chemical weapons for the good of Syria so Americans think Assad is naughty and comes save the day like 1960's superman.