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

originally posted by: MaxMech
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.

Ummm...quite frankly sir...I find it extremely disingenuous of you to suggest that any media...governmental...or quasi world governmental organization has the best interest of any other than their own self preservation at heart...

If you care to remember...The last administration and former President Obama...implemented policy that openly allows the deep state to propagandize the media...

When we have a historic record of these very organizations lying about weapons of mass destruction...while knowing none existed or were destroyed...then it is specious of you to claim that their actions are noble in this regard...

I don't believe them...I don't believe you...

I am a skeptic...you've got to use truth in order to sway my opinion...usually...and none can be found falling from the lips of informers...none...



YouSir

a reply to: residentofearth

Of course they've acted on their own interest. Problem is that Israel likes to choose which of UN statements they want to follow.

Again, I don't think that Israel attacked this weapons manufacturing facility as an act of following a UN statement.
It probably did it to prevent these weapons getting into Hezbollah's hands.

Israel should start creating peace from TelAviv.

Even if Israel will make peace with the Palestinians tomorrow, it will not change the fact that Assad used chemical weapons 27 times in order to stay in power.

a reply to: Ohanka

According to OPCW and America as well, actually. Were the OPCW and America lying?

Nope, but it seems that you are.
The OPCW declared that nearly all chemical weapon stockpiles declared by Syria, have been destroyed. Not that, as you say, "Assad gave up his chemical weapons".
Western intelligence sources believe that Assad disclosed only 19 of the 45 sites believed to exist.

At 02:42AM Damascus time a certain complex near Masyaf went Snap, Crackle, Pop.

Hmmm, imagine that.

Buck

According to you, this is the only alternative to Assad.

Well it is. Every terrorist organisation active within Syria are either hardcore Islamist fundamentalists, ethnic cleansing racial supremacists, or puppets of foreign powers. Sometimes all three.

How about a democratically elected leader?

So, President Al-Assad?

"Presidential elections were held in Syria on 3 June 2014. It was the first multi-candidate election in decades since the Ba'ath party came to power in a coup. In late April 2014, Bashar al-Assad announced he would run for a third term in Syria's first multi-candidate direct presidential election."

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.

I dunno, it seems to do okay in Jordan, for the time being. Personally I think Western Democracy, circa 2017, is little more than a facade for corporate interests to present the illusion of choice. It would be nice to have a real choice, I think the Arabs should stay away from our current system.

They proved it when they started a revolution against their dictator.

What revolution? in 2011 when Islamist rioters attacked the Syrian police? Some Revolution. The President is still around. A real revolution would be Romania 1989, Ceausescu was gone in a matter of days.

Thousands of officers deserted from the Syrian army.

Indeed they did. I am sure they will meet an appropriate end for betraying their country.

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.).

His 300,000 man Army are all scared of one man? That seems a little farfetched.

Have you met him?

No, I'd be lying if I said I didn't want to though. From his interviews he seems a very articulate and intelligent man.

Never saw someone characterize him as a "cackling psychopath muttering to himself" or anything of the sort.

You haven't been paying attention to the Western Media for the past 6 years.

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 don't know what else you would classify children's schools and hospitals as other than targets of no military importance. Attacking these targets, and in such a manner, does absolutely nothing to aid his war effort against the terrorists. My doubt is indeed justified.

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.

They do kill terrorists. This is true. The Syrian opposition are indeed terrorists. The terrorists intentionally surround themselves within civilian populations. This is a particularly reprehensible tactic of using civilian populations as human shields Innocent people die in war this is unavoidable. The Syrians do not use gas. They don't need to.

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.

What King? Syria is a Republic, led by a President. Over the course of this war Pro-Syrian forces have swelled barring the defections in 2011-2012, and terrorist forces have dwindled from attrition, desertion and defection. This war is lost for them, and they know it.

People have taken up arms to defend their country from the terrorists. Many of them are not even Syrian, rather foreign fighters imported from other chaotic warzones that are also swarming with Islamist fanatics.

One "rebel" faction is literally just the Turkish Army.

Remember, if Assad would swallowed his pride and stepped down, nothing of this would happen.

Do you think a man should just surrender his country to foreign terrorists? If Al-Qaeda demanded Trump should step down, submit himself, his wife and his children for execution, and that they should rule America, should Trump do it? I think not.

Is this why they never won a war?

They've certainly won wars. The 1982 Lebanon War and the Lebanese Civil War ended in their favour. They're definitely winning this one.

This is exactly the reason for the uprising against Assad.

It wasn't an uprising. Typically when you have a popular uprising and revolution you don't end up with a civil war.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Most chemical attacks took place before 2014, when Assad was a lot weaker then now (and before the Russian deal to remove the chemical weapons from Syria). Many soldiers defected from the Syrian army. Many said back then that his days are numbered. I guess he was counting on the psychological effect of the use of such weapon, but I really don't presume to understand what goes on in his head. Indeed it did him more damage than good.

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's just in a sour mood because their proxy fighters (ISIS) are on the verge of final defeat.

originally posted by: Antipathy17
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.

That's what the "chemical attack" in Idlib almost certainly was. The question that everyone is deliberately avoiding is, why did the rebels have a stockpile of chemical weapons in the first place?

The BBC in last nights news were very careful to say that the UN report was difficult to verify independently, that's unusual when it comes to reports from the UN. There's good reason though, the BBC itself had some seriously bad reporting that was obviously staged about a gas attack, as well as 'independent' footage they aired in the same report, that they themselves couldn't verify....that was simply ridiculous acting. A very low period for them.
I don't think anybody has got the right end of all this, and given that many of the rebel forces in Syria are simply bad apples, I don't think we'll ever hear the right story.
The UN has no mandate to speak when there are no forces on the ground, and I don't even think the observer mission exists any more.

As for Trump and his bermbs, that was a total joke.

You guys are thinking so inside the box.............



Buck

a reply to: YouSir

Ummm...quite frankly sir...I find it extremely disingenuous of you to suggest that any media...governmental...or quasi world governmental organization has the best interest of any other than their own self preservation at heart...

Didn't suggested that. But the fact that the media or the UN has the best interest of it's own self preservation, doesn't mean that every single thing they are reporting is a lie/conspiracy/black flag.

When we have a historic record of these very organizations lying about weapons of mass destruction...while knowing none existed or were destroyed...then it is specious of you to claim that their actions are noble in this regard...

I see your point. But I don't agree that the fact they were wrong/lied before, means that everything they say now is automatically a lie, and thus the opposite must be the truth. Just not the way the world works.

I am a skeptic...

Good, me too.

you've got to use truth in order to sway my opinion...usually...and none can be found falling from the lips of informers...none...

Well it's hard when you don't believe anything reported by the media or by an independent international organizations which provide witness accounts among other evidence. I wished I had a video clip showing Assad giving the order for the chemical attack, but I don't. It seems to me that the only thing you consider as "truth" is the events you are personally witnessing.

Of course I also have my doubts as well. When someone will provide evidence for each of the 27 confirmed attacks, proving them to be false flags, I will agree with the narrative which is so popular here.

Israel were treating wounded ISIS soldiers. They are stealing oil in the Golan heights and they are committing genocide in Palestine. They have broken more UN resolutions than any other country on the planet and as for their Nukes? lol They wont allow inspections or declare how many they have. Lets not forget the Samson option were they have said they would blow the world up, if anyone does not agree with their policies. Their country was founded on Terrorism and most of their leaders were and are terrorists. Maybe they should build a wall around Syria, they love building walls. Like their allies the Americans under trump.

a reply to: Ohanka

a reply to: Ohanka

So, President Al-Assad? "Presidential elections were held in Syria on 3 June 2014. It was the first multi-candidate election in decades since the Ba'ath party came to power in a coup. In late April 2014, Bashar al-Assad announced he would run for a third term in Syria's first multi-candidate direct presidential election."

Is this considered a democratic elections by your standards? In 2014 Assad controlled a fraction of Syria, allowing only to citizens which live in areas under his control to vote. Isn't it funny how every dictator out there holding an "election" gets about 90% of the votes?

I dunno, it seems to do okay in Jordan, for the time being.

What seems ok? Monarchy? In the sense that there is a king out there which isn't massacring his own people? Yeah, it is nice. Let's see what will happen when the Jordanians will demand a presidential election (though in my opinion Abdullah is an ok guy).

I think the Arabs should stay away from our current system.

Hmm, I still think it beats living under a maniacal dictator.

What revolution?

The one in which started by the Syrian regime violently suppress protests calling for Assad's removal, leading to tens of thousands dead by the end of the first year.

A real revolution would be Romania 1989, Ceausescu was gone in a matter of days.

Although it's amusing to see you arbitrary decide what a "real revolution" is, I don't think the average Syrian would agree.

Indeed they did. I am sure they will meet an appropriate end for betraying their country.

I hope that this fate will be met by the real traitors of the Syrian nation, Assad and his commanders.

His 300,000 man Army are all scared of one man? That seems a little farfetched.

Do I really need to address this? You are just playing silly.

I don't know what else you would classify children's schools and hospitals as other than targets of no military importance. Attacking these targets, and in such a manner, does absolutely nothing to aid his war effort against the terrorists. My doubt is indeed justified.

When a hospital is giving treatment to opposition forces it does has military importance.
I didn't heard about any direct attack on a school. Care to provide a source?

The Syrian opposition are indeed terrorists. The terrorists intentionally surround themselves within civilian populations. This is a particularly reprehensible tactic of using civilian populations as human shields Innocent people die in war this is unavoidable.

Yes, this does happen in Gaza quite a lot. The thing here is, legitimate Syrian opposition which is welcomed by the people is categorized as terrorists. This is how you get 90% approval rating, kill everyone who apposes you.

What King? Syria is a Republic, led by a President.

It was just a figure of speech, demonstrating the fact that this revolution in not different from hundreds similar uprisings throughout history.

This war is lost for them, and they know it.

It is very likely, yes, thanks to Iran and Russia. But every dog has it's day, Assad will not die a natural death. He killed too many people to be just left alone. Sooner or later he will be put down.

Do you think a man should just surrender his country to foreign terrorists.

But this is the thing isn't? There was no foreign terrorists in Syria in 2012.

They've certainly won wars. The 1982 Lebanon War and the Lebanese Civil War ended in their favour. They're definitely winning this one.

Hhahahaha! What a joke... Keep living in a fantasy.
The 1982 Lebanon War:
Israeli casualties: 657
Syrian casualties: 1,200
Israeli captured: 8
Syrian captured:296
Israeli tanks lost: 30
Syrian tanks lost: 300–350
Israeli aircraft lost: 1
Syrian aircraft lost: 82–86
It ended in their favor alright hahahahahaha. Truly great generals.. pppffffhahahah...

Lebanese Civil War was a series of conflicts between 1975 and 1990. During several short months in 1976 Syria sent some troops to fight some Palestinian and leftist militias in Lebanon, which they did, while massacring 1000-1500 civilians in Tel al-Zaatar refugee camp in East Beirut.
A glorious victory indeed.

I'm pretty sure they are wining this war thanks to the Russian and Iranian generals, not Syrian.

It wasn't an uprising. Typically when you have a popular uprising and revolution you don't end up with a civil war.

Actually, many time in history this was exactly what happened. Not so common is to sell out your county's sovereignty to foreign countries in exchange for them saving your ass.

Sorry...

But this all reads like blatant Zio-Hasbara...

Israel didn't mind when they were using White Phospherous in Gaza...
But now chemicals weapons are bad because their boogeyman Assad won't roll over and fall to their proxy army ISIS...

& it looks like many ageee with that here...

ATS isn't stupid, we know what Israel is and has always been...
A terror state!!!



Viva Assad. I hope he takes Golan back by force as well.

a reply to: illuminnaughty

Israel were treating wounded ISIS soldiers.

False. Care to provide evidence?

They are stealing oil in the Golan heights

False. Care to provide evidence?

committing genocide in Palestine.

Wrong again. Israeli conflict with Palestinian terrorists in not genocide.

They have broken more UN resolutions than any other country on the planet

I wonder how is this possible...

Lets not forget the Samson option were they have said they would blow the world up

Are you capable of saying something correct? Where, when and how did "they said they would blow the world up, if anyone does not agree with their policies"?

Their country was founded on Terrorism and most of their leaders were and are terrorists.

I bet you Imam gets really aroused when he gets to this part.

a reply to: Black_Fox

Now this is something I can except as evidence. Will not surprise me if ISIS or jabhat al nusra pulled something like this.
But this is one case of 33. I would be glad to see similar testimonies regarding the remaining 32 chemical attacks.
Same organization she is working at, presented evidence for 27 attacks carried out by the Syrian regime.
I don't suppose you believe the UN only when it fits your agenda?

If Assad is guilty of murdering his own people to preserve his power, who arose on their own to oppose his regime's tyranny, he deserves to be toppled. What I'm against is if this whole sequence of events is being amplified by foreign powers. That's manipulation, it's an attack on a sovereign power. If Russia influenced our election to destabilize our country, ti's very much similar. These proxy wars, assuming htey exist, are acts of war. I don't care what our justification is. I believe interference of this nature is likely adding to our list of problems. I also think it's injected with 'might makes right' or mob rule elements. It exposes some of our worst instincts.

EDIT: Russia's annexing of Crimea is another example. It's highly probable they nursed it into being. They used it as a pretext to annex. The point is it's not their choice to annex. It should have been left to Crimea to deliberate with the Ukraine, and the UN to possibly intercede.

a reply to: Hazardous1408

But this all reads like blatant Zio-Hasbara...

Of course... anybody who doesn't fall in line with your opinion is "Zio-Hasbara". You must be fun at parties.

Israel didn't mind when they were using White Phospherous in Gaza... But now chemicals weapons are bad because their boogeyman Assad won't roll over and fall to their proxy army ISIS...

I don't think that Israel attacked this weapons manufacturing facility because "chemicals weapons are bad".
I'm pretty sure they did it to prevent these weapons getting into Hezbollah's hands.

& it looks like many ageee with that here... ATS isn't stupid, we know what Israel is and has always been...

Didn't know that you were appointed as ATS spokesman. Will make sure to run my posts by you first, next time.

Viva Assad.

Obviously never been in Syria or met a Syrian, or maybe.. even know where Syria is? hmm?

a reply to: MaxMech

Is this considered a democratic elections by your standards? In 2014 Assad controlled a fraction of Syria, allowing only to citizens which live in areas under his control to vote. Isn't it funny how every dictator out there holding an "election" gets about 90% of the votes?

Well, the election was internationally observed. The observers said they were free, fair and transparent. The UN had issues with holding an election during a war but we were told that the "moderate opposition" wanted elections.

Of course he only held it in areas he controlled. in the 1864 US election did the people in the confederate states vote? I think not. How exactly is he supposed to facilitate an election in the parts of his country occupied by terrorist forces?

Of course, expatriates and refugees voted in the election. Except for those countries who support terrorist forces in Syria, theydid not permit the Syrian refugees to vote in the Syrian election. You can find the list on that wiki page.

The terrorist opposition boycotted the vote, despite saying all they wanted was "democracy". They don't actually want democracy at all. That's why their forces in Syria bombarded polling stations with artillery. 50 people were killed by the terrorist opposition trying to participate in the election that the "opposition" apparently wanted.

Even one of those early regime opponents who held the small protests for reform, before the Islamists began rioting, participated in the election. He was condemned by the "moderate democratic opposition"

What seems ok? Monarchy? In the sense that there is a king out there which isn't massacring his own people? Yeah, it is nice. Let's see what will happen when the Jordanians will demand a presidential election (though in my opinion Abdullah is an ok guy).

Well, Jordan is a constitutional monarchy. The King doesn't have absolute political power. They have an elected parliament. Do you think the British Queen has absolute power?

Hmm, I still think it beats living under a maniacal dictator.

I don't know who you're talking about. Certainly not President Al-Assad.

It was just a figure of speech, demonstrating the fact that this revolution in not different from hundreds similar uprisings throughout history.

Again you insist on calling foreign powers flooding terrorists into Syria and arming them in an attempt to overthrow the legitimate Government an "Uprising". This is no uprising.

It is very likely, yes, thanks to Iran and Russia. But every dog has it's day, Assad will not die a natural death. He killed too many people to be just left alone. Sooner or later he will be put down.

??? Well yeah Al-Assad will die one day, everyone will. He'll probably die an old man having lived a long and productive life.

Syria would have won this war without Iran or Russia. Though I am sure the Syrian people and her Government are thankful for Iran and Russia for coming to their aid in their darkest hour. I know I would be.

Snipped your crap about the wars

They lost some battles, yes. But they won the war. George Washington lost almost every single battle he fought but he still won the war. The Vietcong lost almost every battle, but they still won the war. Lebanon would be an ally to Syria until 2006 when the Zionists orchestrated a coup against the Lebanese Government. Israel was still bitter after all those years apparently.

I'm pretty sure they are wining this war thanks to the Russian and Iranian generals, not Syrian.

Is General Zahreddine, arguably the greatest hero in all of Syria, Iranian or Russian? Is General al-Hassan Iranian or Russian?

Those fighting the terrorists are primarily Syrian men & women, led by Syrian commanders. Russia and Iran play a far smaller role than you seem to think.

Actually, many time in history this was exactly what happened. Not so common is to sell out your county's sovereignty to foreign countries in exchange for them saving your ass.

Syria has not sold her sovereignty. She is defending it from those who seek to take it from her people. Russia and Iran are Syria's allies and have answered her call in her time of need.

Do terrorists from Libya, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Chechnya and Tunisia, funded and supplied by Israel, Saudi Arabia, the UK, and US represent Syria more than the Syrian people? This is just an absurd claim.