New Chemical Attacks in Syria?

The Syrian government is demanding that UN investigators look into three additional chemical attacks that were allegedly waged by rebels against Syrian troops. These attacks allegedly happened between August 22nd and 25th outside Damascus.

If this is legitimate does that change things in people's minds or is Syria just trying to keep the inspectors in Syria in order to buy time?

Story

They must of done it themselves so they could point and go look the rebels are attacking us...


Never-mind the flawed logic of that, but I can tell those reply's are coming.

reply to post by jtma508


Is this news to them? Why weren't these locations included in the investigation from the start? Were they removing evidence in those 3 locations while the one location was being investigated?

I'm just speculating because it's odd they weren't demanding these spots be checked until now, hours before a presumed attack should be taking place on Assad's regime.

reply to post by jtma508


I saw that article earlier as well. However, at this point I don't think there will be anything stopping the western powers from intervening in Syria.

I do not know what to make of these other supposed chemical attacks. It could be a delay tactic, but to what end? Russia will surely realize what the western nations plans are by now.

I think at this point it could be for more of the "smear" factor and make the US lead intervention appear even more deplorable.

If the terrorist/rebels have used or are using chemical weapons they will be caught eventually and then what? will the U.S. launch missiles at them?

This whole situation is massively screwed-up. All we know for sure is that a lot of people are suffering in the most morally repugnant ways and someone is doing it to them. It seems to me this is a no-win situation and there is a level of manipulation and gamesmanship going on that is epic.

I agree, how could the UN not have known about this? Why isn't this being covered by the MSM (as if we don't already know the answer to that one)?

I think something thats worth remembering is that its just as possible that the Rebels have attacked themselves to draw the international community into Syria as it is for Assad to attack his own soldiers and blame it on the rebels to put off any international response.

But that doesn't really matter, what matters is that chemical attacks have been used, if you listen to what the international community has been saying the consensus seems to always have been that the "red line" is when either side uses WMD's.

The fact is they have been used, there is evidence that would support a view that both sides have been using them

At this point their seems to be a growing consensus amongst the international community that a international force must step in to prevent any further escalation in the use of WMD's.

reply to post by jtma508


Is it just me or does it seem kind of odd that the government forces waited until they were winning most of the battles to use chemical weapons.

It also looks out of place to use them on the civilian population that close to Damascus. Yes, I know the rebels had been holding the city for a long time. But it is still close and has mostly women and children living there.

I'm sure I read an article recently about Syrian Goverment ceasing a few kilos of Gas from the Rebles.

And a video showing syrian troops affected by gas -



and



If MSM is reporting this, as well as 'assuming' assad attacked rebles with gas then...I'm at a loss.

The confusion caused by this makes me hope the Goverments that are to strike Syria have their facts right.


eee.