It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

UN report: Assad is responsible for more than two dozen chemical weapons attacks in Syria

page: 1
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 7 2017 @ 06:59 AM
link   
I know that despite the dozens of interviews with witnesses, victims and first responders, satellite imagery, photos of bomb remnants and early warning reports used in this investigation, many here will still claim that all of these attacks are black flags. And indeed, out of 33 chemical weapons attacks in Syria to date, perpetrators had not been identified in six of them. These six attacks could have been carried out by terrorists (like Jabhat al-Nusra or ISIS) or anybody else for that matter. But what about the 27 confirmed attacks? Is every last one of them is a black flag?
Now, I understand that if Assad will fall there is a chance that a terror organization will take his place, but aren't the Syrian people diverse the chance to replace the dictator who massacres his own civilian population?


Government forces have used chemical weapons more than two dozen times during Syria’s civil war, including in April’s deadly attack on Khan Sheikhoun, U.N. war crimes investigators said on Wednesday. A government warplane dropped sarin on the town in Idlib province, killing more than 80 civilians, the U.N. Commission of Inquiry on Syria said, in the most conclusive findings to date from investigations into that chemical weapon attack.
Source


Apparently, at least part of the weapons (chemical or conventional) used by the Assad regime, came from North Korea.


Two North Korean shipments to a Syrian government agency responsible for the country’s chemical weapons program were intercepted in the past six months, according to a confidential United Nations report on North Korea sanctions violations.
The U.N. experts said activities between Syria and North Korea they were investigating included cooperation on Syrian Scud missile programs and maintenance and repair of Syrian surface-to-air missiles air defense systems.
Source


Meanwhile, it seems that Israel is got sick of talking, and started acting.


The Syrian army said Israel targeted a military site in Hama province early on Thursday which a war monitor said could be linked to chemical weapons production.
The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, which monitors the war, said the strike hit a Scientific Studies and Research Centre facility, an agency which the United States describes as Syria’s chemical weapons manufacturer.
The strike took place the morning after U.N. investigators said the Syrian government was responsible for a sarin poison gas attack in April.
[url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-israel/israel-hits-syria-target-reportedly-tied-to-chemical-weapons-idUSKCN1BI0MH]Source[ /url]




posted on Sep, 7 2017 @ 07:13 AM
link   
a reply to: MaxMech

It's very kind of Israel that they've understood and accepted UN statement and react. It's like few hundreds more UN resoulutions considering them to accept and fullfil.



posted on Sep, 7 2017 @ 07:25 AM
link   
How fantastically convenient it is for them to miraculously come to this conclusion as the Syrians have lifted the seige of Deir Azzor and are on the verge of kicking Islamic State out of the country.

Also how nice of Israel to act despite not being asked to, by anyone. Personally I'd call that a completely unprovoked act of aggression against a sovereign nation.



posted on Sep, 7 2017 @ 07:34 AM
link   
a reply to: MaxMech


Ummm...yada...yada...yada...weapons of mass destruction in Iraq...Yada...yada...yada...

Haven't we heard this tune sung before...?






YouSir



posted on Sep, 7 2017 @ 07:36 AM
link   
a reply to: MaxMech

Guess we have a solid lead on where Saddam Hussein's chemical weapons ended up.



posted on Sep, 7 2017 @ 07:45 AM
link   
And with a bit of Hollywood type production by the White Helmets along with some class room playing training for the kids we wouldn't even need to imagine baby's being torn from incubators and thrown on the floor . Think of the children .



posted on Sep, 7 2017 @ 07:53 AM
link   
a reply to: residentofearth

I think it's pretty obvious that they attacked not in order to help the Syrian population but only for their own interest.
Nevertheless, every blow to Assad is good news for the Syrian people.



posted on Sep, 7 2017 @ 08:00 AM
link   
a reply to: MaxMech


but aren't the Syrian people diverse the chance to replace the dictator who massacres his own civilian population?

WMD, one_more_time.

Assad gave up his chemical weapons, this was monitored and certified.

Poor NATO, they havent any other just cause to invade his country (like all the rest) and regime change the Syrian gubment (like all the rest).

The real world knows the tired propaganda, all to well. The same excuse of murder and WMD have been used to invade Iraq (twice), and Libya.



posted on Sep, 7 2017 @ 08:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Ohanka



How fantastically convenient it is for them to miraculously come to this conclusion as the Syrians have lifted the seige of Deir Azzor and are on the verge of kicking Islamic State out of the country.

You can question the timing but it does not change the conclusion.



Also how nice of Israel to act despite not being asked to, by anyone. Personally I'd call that a completely unprovoked act of aggression against a sovereign nation.

To me it seems Israel is acting in their own best interest. Never needed anyone to ask for that before.
You can call it as you like, it doesn't changes the fact that this attack was carried out on a murderous totalitarian regime which have been arming a terror organization for years.
Israel is no saint but neither is Assad, and every attack on his chemical weapon manufacturing facilities is good news in my book.



posted on Sep, 7 2017 @ 08:03 AM
link   
a reply to: MaxMech

Meh, seen enough white helmets faking this bull# that I have to question all sides. I'd put money on these "chemical attacks" being regular attacks on weapons bunkers that happen to have chemicals in them.



posted on Sep, 7 2017 @ 08:09 AM
link   
a reply to: YouSir




Ummm...yada...yada...yada...weapons of mass destruction in Iraq...Yada...yada...yada... Haven't we heard this tune sung before...?

Yeah I guess what happened in Iraq means that every thing happening in the world is a lie by the MSM or a black flag.
Pssssst, buy the way... North Korea does not have nuclear weapons either. It's all a conspiracy by the USA and the MSM.



posted on Sep, 7 2017 @ 08:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: MaxMech
a reply to: residentofearth

I think it's pretty obvious that they attacked not in order to help the Syrian population but only for their own interest.
Nevertheless, every blow to Assad is good news for the Syrian people.


I am sure the good people of Syria will appreciate being forced back into the stone age, ruled by a Saudi-style Wahhabist theocracy, by foreign powers. That is at the top of their wish list that is.

Especially for the numerous religious minorities. The Shia, the Christians, the Druze, the Alawites...

I really do wonder why anyone would fight for this Al-Assad character if he was as universally hated and evil as the media likes to depict him. The real man certainly doesn't match up with this ridiculous caricature that has been invented about him.

I doubt a cackling psychopath muttering to himself as he randomly launched chemical rockets indiscriminately at random targets of no military importance would be able to maintain the support of the majority of the people, and mobilize them to fight those who sought to remove him.

I also wonder why any of his Generals wouldn't get rid of him for fouling up a war he is winning just fine as it so he could gas random people for absolutely no reason.

My thoughts are either all this is a lie, and nothing but blatant wartime propaganda. Alternatively Syrian Generals are all exceptionally stupid and incompetent, and the Syrian people are a spineless, servile bunch who won't stand up to such a monster.

Personally I go with the former since his Generals seem quite good, and the Arabs in general are known for being a defiant and proud people. Especially the Syrians.
edit on -050008am9kam by Ohanka because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2017 @ 08:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ohanka
How fantastically convenient it is for them to miraculously come to this conclusion as the Syrians have lifted the seige of Deir Azzor and are on the verge of kicking Islamic State out of the country.

Also how nice of Israel to act despite not being asked to, by anyone. Personally I'd call that a completely unprovoked act of aggression against a sovereign nation.


Israel backed the wrong side. Their radical proxy criminal have failed.
Israel is panicking and feels all alone.

Get ready for some fireworks in the region.

Oh..... and Syria wants the Golan back

Did Benjamin Netanyahu Just Panic?
edit on 7-9-2017 by Avicenne because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-9-2017 by Avicenne because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2017 @ 08:25 AM
link   
a reply to: MaxMech

Of course they've acted on their own interest. Problem is that Israel likes to choose which of UN statements they want to follow. One of the principles of the UN is to accept and obey its statements and resolutions as a international body created to keep and build peace worldwide. Israel should start creating peace from TelAviv.
edit on Thu, 07 Sep 2017 08:26:13 -0500America/Chicago132607America/Chicago9302017f by residentofearth because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2017 @ 08:26 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr




Assad gave up his chemical weapons, this was monitored and certified.

According to the Russians, yes. But not according to reality, no.



Chlorine, a common industrial chemical, was allegedly used in poison-gas attacks by the Assad government in 2014. Chlorine is not on the list of prohibited chemicals covered by the disarmament agreement, however, its use as a weapon violates the Chemical Weapons Convention.

The Economist reported in early October that Syria had disclosed 19 chemical weapons-related sites, whilst unnamed Western intelligence sources believed 45 sites to exist in total. One U.S. official said it was not clear if the discrepancy is "a deception" or merely a "difference of definition" regarding what constitutes a chemical weapons site. In Science Insider, experts stated that there was a possibility of incomplete record-keeping, citing an incident in 2002 wherein Albania discovered, in a cluster of mountain bunkers, 16 tons of primitive, undocumented chemical weapon agents that Albania had forgotten about. Chemical weapons expert Winfield has commented that the success of the destruction plan depends on Syria revealing all of its chemical arms stockpile, much of which is moveable and may be spread across dozens of sites.
Source



posted on Sep, 7 2017 @ 08:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: MaxMech
a reply to: intrptr




Assad gave up his chemical weapons, this was monitored and certified.

According to the Russians, yes. But not according to reality, no.



Chlorine, a common industrial chemical, was allegedly used in poison-gas attacks by the Assad government in 2014. Chlorine is not on the list of prohibited chemicals covered by the disarmament agreement, however, its use as a weapon violates the Chemical Weapons Convention.

The Economist reported in early October that Syria had disclosed 19 chemical weapons-related sites, whilst unnamed Western intelligence sources believed 45 sites to exist in total. One U.S. official said it was not clear if the discrepancy is "a deception" or merely a "difference of definition" regarding what constitutes a chemical weapons site. In Science Insider, experts stated that there was a possibility of incomplete record-keeping, citing an incident in 2002 wherein Albania discovered, in a cluster of mountain bunkers, 16 tons of primitive, undocumented chemical weapon agents that Albania had forgotten about. Chemical weapons expert Winfield has commented that the success of the destruction plan depends on Syria revealing all of its chemical arms stockpile, much of which is moveable and may be spread across dozens of sites.
Source


According to OPCW and America as well, actually.

Were the OPCW and America lying?



posted on Sep, 7 2017 @ 08:31 AM
link   
a reply to: MaxMech


According to the Russians, yes. But not according to reality, no.

The Russians aren't the ones making stuff up.



posted on Sep, 7 2017 @ 09:08 AM
link   
a reply to: MaxMech

To me the Iran using chemical weapons seems fake...

Human beings act on what they believe to be their best intrests.

Assad has far better weaponry than the rebels without using chemical weapons.

I see no beneficial reason for him to use them..

It is only a negative since the whole world has basiclly given him carte branch to kill whoever as long as he DOESNT use chemical weapons.


What leader that is competent at all would use chemical weapons when conventional weapons will work, and everyone else has promised not to get involved as long as he doesn't use chemical weapons..



posted on Sep, 7 2017 @ 09:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Ohanka

Same here...


I'm not there so I don't claim to know, but why would he use chemical weapons when conventional weapons would work, and the world has promised not to intervene unless he uses chemical weapons???



posted on Sep, 7 2017 @ 09:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Ohanka




I am sure the good people of Syria will appreciate being forced back into the stone age, ruled by a Saudi-style Wahhabist theocracy, by foreign powers. That is at the top of their wish list that is.

According to you, this is the only alternative to Assad. How about a democratically elected leader? Or just a leader that doesn't massacres his own people?
Many here think that Arabs are not compatible with "western democracy", but I think the Syrian people are more than capable to decide their own fate. They proved it when they started a revolution against their dictator.



I really do wonder why anyone would fight for this Al-Assad character if he was as universally hated and evil as the media likes to depict him.

Thousands of officers deserted from the Syrian army. The ones who didn't, serve Assad for the same reason every other soldier serving under a dictator (money, fear of desertion, fear for the lives of their family etc.).



The real man certainly doesn't match up with this ridiculous caricature that has been invented about him.

Have you met him?



I doubt a cackling psychopath muttering to himself as he randomly launched chemical rockets indiscriminately at random targets of no military importance would be able to maintain the support of the majority of the people, and mobilize them to fight those who sought to remove him.

Never saw someone characterize him as a "cackling psychopath muttering to himself" or anything of the sort. No one said "he randomly launched chemical rockets indiscriminately at random targets of no military importance". No one claims that this is the case. Your doubt is justified.



I also wonder why any of his Generals wouldn't get rid of him for fouling up a war he is winning just fine as it so he could gas random people for absolutely no reason.

Same as above, no one claims he "gas random people for absolutely no reason". The Syrian regime justifies their actions as "killing terrorists". Sometimes it can be actual terrorists surrounded by civilians, other times, it's the Syrian opposition (also categorized as "terrorists" by Assad) surrounded by civilians. In both cases innocents die in the most horrible way imaginable.



My thoughts are either all this is a lie, and nothing but blatant wartime propaganda. Alternatively Syrian Generals are all exceptionally stupid and incompetent, and the Syrian people are a spineless, servile bunch who won't stand up to such a monster.

As history shows, the third option is the most likely: When the people decided that they had enough of this tyrannical dynasty they started a revolution. The king wasn't going to give up his throne and the status of his family name. So he decided that he is going to teach his people a lesson they won't forget for decades. After tens of thousands dead and thousands of army defectors he got scared that he is loosing control. Didn't matter how many he killed, the rebels grew in size. Now was the perfect time to use the super weapons he stockpiled all those years. Of course, as the use of this weapon is illegal, he denied everything and blamed the rebels.
This scenario happened numerous times in history, thus it's strikes me as far more reasonable.
Remember, if Assad would swallowed his pride and stepped down, nothing of this would happen.



Personally I go with the former since his Generals seem quite good

Is this why they never won a war?



and the Arabs in general are known for being a defiant and proud people. Especially the Syrians

This is exactly the reason for the uprising against Assad.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join