reply to post by Senduko
I would love to know the details of this "common sense test," because the test of LOGIC says he is not responsible.
While the regime has the access to and possession of the weapons (known), and the means of deployment (known), they have no logical reason to use
Assad has NOTHING to gain by their use, and everything to lose, because he likely knows that the international community would not tolerate such a
thing, and I don't think he's that stupid or desperate. Now, this does not speak of the fact that he *could* have used them and tried to pin it on the
rebels, nor does it speak of the fact that possibly some rogue element within his regime acted without his authority or command. Those are two
entirely different points of argument.
The extremists/rebels (I am using extremists/rebels to speak of TWO groups of people: the actual rebels and the extremists/al Qaeda within the rebel
groups) have EVERYTHING to gain by their use. If they can use them and make it look as if Assad used then, they will garner international support for
their "cause" as well as probable intervention, which will help tip the civil war in their favor, which they NEED because they aren't exactly winning,
and which, since there is, I have heard, and estimated 25% al Qaeda rebels, tipping the war in their favor will solidify them more power (and possibly
even more access to WMD stockpiled in Syria, at least for the extremists).
It is known that extremists will use WHATEVER means necessary to inflict damage and hurt innocent people. Why would they not do the same in Syria, for
above stated reason? They have EVERYTHING to gain and have NO scruples about using them.
Reports and video have come out about that defense contractors have had something to with this, and knowing how they play both sides and work WITH
extremists (see bin Laden circa 2001), this is not a far fetched possibility.
Reports and video have also come out of rebels claiming to have possession of the weapons. Since the rebels include extremists/al Qaeda, it is not
unlikely they have or used them on innocent people to pin it on Assad's regime.
Now any attack on Syria, according to initial administration reports, ranges from punishment to taking out the means of deliver, and NOT to secure or
destroy the chemical weapons themselves. Once again, anything that continues to destabilize the country by outside forces has a real possibility of
making the weapons less secure, tipping the war in the favor of the rebels/extremists, and thereby giving them easier access to the chemical weapons,
which al Qaeda would LOVE to have (and which is a valid argumentative point in expanded military intervention, and why in order to secure this there
would likely HAVE to be "boots on the ground" in some fashion to secure the cache after everything is even more destabilized).
So, by LOGIC and everything outlined above, WHO benefits most from the use of chemical weapons?
It ain't Assad or his regime. It's the rebels, or at least the extremists within the rebels.
Common sense and logic dictate that Assad is NOT behind it, nor is he responsible.
edit on 8-9-2013 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)