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.
originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: Sublimecraft
I doubt it can be proven otherwise.
But who’s telling us this?
Russian state media, Russian military and Syrian government officials.
All who have a good reason to distance themselves from such acts, and all with an anti American agenda.
originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: Sublimecraft
Another poster brought a different thread to my attention a week or so ago. The thread is a year old and it's about yet another "chemical weapons" attack in rebel held areas and Putin's claims that the US planned to blame Assad and attack.
President Putin claims the US is preparing to strike areas around Damascus.
Putin also said he wants the international authorities to conduct a careful investigation of last week's chemical warfare attack on the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhoun last week that left 89 dead.
Until proven otherwise, the US, France and the UK executed the correctly called (1 month prior) false flag chemical weapons attack by authorizing the rebels to use the chemical weapons on Syrian civilians and consequently the global propaganda behemoth (already on notice) took the premeditated story and ran with it, before the dust had even settled.
The hawkish former United Nations ambassador, 66, told the Washington Examiner in an interview this week that he stands by the decision made by his old boss, President George W. Bush, to invade Iraq and topple dictator Saddam Hussein. Bolton, long a strong supporter of the Iraq war, said his opinion wasn't altered by the post-war discovery that Hussein's regime did not possess weapons of mass destruction.
“The outcome of the president’s policy review should be to determine that the Ayatollah Khomeini’s 1979 revolution will not last until its 40th birthday,” Bolton said. (The 40th anniversary of the Iranian revolution will be on February 11, 2019.) “The declared policy of the United States should be the overthrow of the mullahs’ regime in Tehran,” Bolton added. “The behavior and the objectives of the regime are not going to change and, therefore, the only solution is to change the regime itself.”
Accordingly, regime change in Syria is prima facie in America’s interest as well as the interests of Israel and our Arab friends in the region, who see nothing but danger for themselves if Iran’s hegemonic ambitions unfold successfully. Why Republicans and Democrats alike have coddled Syria’s tyrants over the years is extraordinarily difficult to understand. Of course, as with overthrowing Saddam Hussein and Moammar Qaddafi, there is the question of what will replace a concededly distasteful regime. And today, that uncertainty is a major factor constraining our options for dealing with Syria’s conflict.
It would have been one thing to work with the Syrian diaspora to remove Assad and the Baath party when we had a massive military presence in Iraq, right on Syria’s border. In the days just after Saddam’s ouster in 2003, conditions were optimal (if nonetheless imperfect) for overthrowing Assad and replacing his regime with something compatible with American interests. We would not have needed to use U.S. ground forces. Our mere presence in Iraq could have precluded Iran — or, what we see today, an Iraq under Iran’s influence — from trying to protect Assad.
Significantly, U.S. intervention could not be confined to Syria and would inevitably entail confronting Iran and possibly Russia. This the Obama administration is unwilling to do, although it should.
“We have many options for Venezuela and by the way, I’m not going to rule out a military option,” he said.
“We have many options for Venezuela, this is our neighbor,” Trump added. “We’re all over the world and we have troops all over the world in places that are very very far away, Venezuela is not very far away and the people are suffering and dying. We have many options for Venezuela including a possible military option if necessary.”
“You have a bunch of bad hombres down there,” Trump told Pena Nieto, according to the excerpt given to AP. “You aren’t doing enough to stop them. I think your military is scared. Our military isn’t, so I just might send them down to take care of it.”
TRUMP: Take the oil. We're going out of Iraq. Take the oil. Give the families of the veterans and the families of the soldiers that died there and the wounded warriors -- give them millions of dollars each. It's peanuts compared to what we're talking about. I said, Take the oil. Everybody said -- not everybody -- the stupid people said, Don't do that.
HANNITY: Let them pay for their -- this was about paying for their liberation that we gave -- that we gave them
Hannity: I've actually had an idea -- no one listens to little ol' Sean Hannity. But I'm like -- I think the Iraqis, with all their oil resources, need to pay us back for their liberation. Every single solitary penny. Because we really need --
“ I say why isn’t Iraq paying us back with oil, and paying every American family and their soldiers that lost loved ones or have injured soldiers — and why didn’t they pay for their own liberation? For the Kuwait oil minister — how short his memory is. You know, we have every right to go in there and frankly take all their oil and make them pay for the liberation.”
Besides making for awesome propaganda for the super-rich, the warpigs and the low-info liberals - dead women & children from chemical weapons is irrelevant
originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Sublimecraft
Besides making for awesome propaganda for the super-rich, the warpigs and the low-info liberals - dead women & children from chemical weapons is irrelevant
Even though the narrative being pushed by the Syrian and Russian governments is that no chemical weapons attack happened and the scenes we see are fabricated.
Low information ?
The Guardian
Russian foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, claimed Moscow had “irrefutable” evidence that the suspected chemical weapons attack in Syria was staged
The narrative of the Syrian regime and Russia appeared to be contradictory with some accounts claiming that the rebels had staged their own chemical attack while others held that Russian chemical monitors who had visited Douma have found no sign of contamination. The Russian defence ministry has produced “testimony” from medical workers in Douma that a team with video cameras had entered medical facilities and started a panic by claiming there had been a chemical attack.
www.independent.co.uk...
originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Sublimecraft
Anything is possible. But why does the U.S. think Syria is so important now? Before, Iraq was "all that".
I want President Trump to announce that the original time table for withdrawal from Syria has not been altered. In 6 months, we will be out of there.
Then see if another "chemical attack" is launched by President Assad, to keep us there, breathing down his neck. He enjoys it!
originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: xuenchen
This seals the proof that Russia is behind every chem attack in Syria.
Could you explain to me why you think that.
Interviewer: You say that the Syrian Army protects civilians, yet there are all sorts of reports about war crimes committed by Assad’s forces, such as the bombardments with barrel bombs.
Father Daniel: Do you not know that the media coverage on Syria is the biggest media lie of our time? They have sold pure nonsense about Assad. It was actually the rebels who plundered and killed. Do you think that the Syrian people are stupid? Do you think those people were forced to cheer for Assad and Putin? It is the Americans who have a hand in all of this, for pipelines and natural resources in this region and to thwart Putin.
Saudi Arabia and Qatar want to establish a Sunni state in Syria, without religious freedom. Therefore, Assad must go. You know, when the Syrian army was preparing for the battle in Aleppo, Muslim soldiers came to me to be blessed. Between ordinary Muslims and Christians, there is no problem. It is those radical Islamic, Western-backed rebels who want to massacre us. They are all al Qaeda and IS. There are not any moderate fighters anymore.