False regime claim that inspectors reached Douma on Tuesday, 10 days after chemical attacks
LATEST
- 1 Killed, 3 Injured in Latest Russian Airstrikes on Idlib Province
Senators “Unnerved” After Briefing on Trump Administration’s Syria Policy
UPDATE 1545 GMT: Inspectors from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons have been further delayed in reaching Douma, after a UN risk assessment team came under fire on Tuesday.
The team returned to Damascus. There were no casualties.
The risk assessors encountered a large crowd and then came under gunfire and heard an explosion, said the UK envoy to the OPCW Peter Wilson, quoting the organization’s chief Ahmet Uzumcu.
The area was under the control of Russia’s military police, who took over after the capitulation agreement, a day after the chemical attacks.
Uzumcu reportedly said that it is now unclear when the team — already held up by the Assad regime since its arrival in Damascus last Saturday — can go to Douma.
An “official close to” the Assad regime said the UN team was met by protesters demonstrating against last Saturday’s missile strikes by the US, UK, and France.
Hadi al-Bahra of the opposition High Negotiations Committee:
We condemn the shooting incident at a team from #OPCW this is a criminal act and efforts for concealment of evidence, in an area where all armed groups have left and handed over completely, as per terms of agreement. #Syria #Duma #Chemicalwepons
— Hadi Albahra (@hadialbahra) April 18, 2018
The Assad regime continued to stall on Tuesday over a visit by inspectors to the sites of two chemical attacks near Damascus on April 7, even resorting to the lie that the team from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons had reached Douma.
State news agency SANA put out the false information, which was circulated by many mainstream outlets. But the OPCW did not confirm the arrival of the team, held up in Damascus since Saturday, and US State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said, “Our understanding is that the team has not entered Douma.”
Finally, the Assad regime’s UN ambassador Bashar al-Ja’afari walked back the line, saying it was a “UN security team” that had traveled to Douma. He said the inspectors would finally be allowed into the town on Wednesday.
Regime officials have cited “security issues” to continue the delay of any inspections, even as they allowed journalists into Douma on Monday.
Russia has already limited any inspection by barring attribution of blame, and Russian personnel reportedly removed and disturbed evidence from the sites soon after the regime’s attacks.
French officials said Tuesday that it is “very likely” that evidence has disappeared.
Up to 85 people were killed and hundreds were wounded in the April 7 attacks with chlorine and a stronger agent. The assault forced a capitulation agreement with rebels, confirming the forced displacement of thousands of people from Douma to northern Syria.
Mohammed Alloush, a senior official of the rebel faction Jaish al-Islam, claimed on Tuesday night that Assad forces are digging up graves in a search for the bodies of victims, hoping to remove them before the OPCW inspectors can test for chemical exposure.
A former senior officer in the regime’s chemical weapons program, Brig. Zaher al-Saket, said Douma residents with whom he worked had buried up to 50 bodies in an undisclosed site in the area.
The head of the White Helmets civil defense, Raed al-Saleh, confirmed on Wednesday, “We have handed to the fact-finding mission of the OPCW all the information we gathered about the chemical attack, including the exact burial place of the victims.”
Medical Staff Intimidated in Douma to Deny Attacks
Douma medical staff and the head of the largest medical relief agency in Syria have bolstered reports that medics in Douma have been threatened by Russian personnel and subjected to “extreme intimidation” by Assad regime officials who seized biological samples, forced them to abandon patients, and demanded their silence.
Dr. Ghanem Tayara, the director of the Union of Medical Care and Relief Organisations, said doctors have been told that their families will be at risk if they offer public testimony about the April 7 chemical attacks.
Last weekend local activists said several doctors had been taken by Russian personnel for interrogation and warned that they would be arrested if they did not make the appropriate statements about the attacks, denied by both Moscow and the Assad regime. The Russian State outlet Sputnik soon featured medical personnel who questioned reports of the two assaults, and British journalist Robert Fisk also posted an account from a local doctor blaming dust from shelling for the casualties.
See UK Journalist Given Access to Douma to Deny Chemical Attacks
A number of doctors who spoke to London’s The Guardian said intimidation has increased since last week, as the Assad regime faced a possible visit to Douma by the OPCW inspectors.
Tayara, who is based in Turkey and supervising the departure from Syria of some of the Douma medics, said:
There has been a very heavy security presence on the ground ever since the attack and they have been targeting doctors and medics in a very straightforward way. Any medic who tried to leave Douma was searched so vigorously, especially for samples. At one medical point, seven casualties were taken away. The Russian military police were heavily involved. They were directing things.
They were looking through their WhatsApp messages and phones. The doctors were treated abusively and have been threatened ever since. Their families have been threatened that they will pay a price and they themselves have told they will be arrested, and much more if they give any evidence, or interviews about what happened in Douma.
Tayara said the medics saw symptoms in patients pointing to a stronger chemical agent than chlorine, with “convulsions, foaming” and something that had affected the central nervous system”.
He said the death toll is likely to be higher than estimates of between 40 and 70.
A Douma doctor told the Guardian:
Our colleagues who appeared on television [to deny the attacks] were coerced, because some hadn’t served in the military or completed their degree, and for other reasons, some had family in Damascus. They decided to stay in exchange for being reconciled with the regime. But the regime used them.
A medic who treated victims echoed:
Anyone who has knowledge of what happened cannot testify. What was being said is that the medical centres would be destroyed on top of those working in it.
The testimony of people under pressure cannot be relied on. Imagine if you spoke out while under the control of those that you were speaking out against, what will your fate be?
And another doctor said:
We were receiving threats since the siege began, prior to the chemical weapons attack. When the attack took place, things became much more dangerous. They’re wiping out evidence that would prove the crime, and they are forcing doctors and residents who are witnesses to say that nothing took place.
US: Strong Chemical Agent Used, But Not “Absolute Certain” It Was Sarin
US intelligence and defense officials have said that, while they assess that a chemical agent stronger than chlorine was used by the Assad regime in the attacks on Douma, they do not have “absolute certainty” that it was sarin.
The officials said the decision to proceed with missile strikes last Saturday was based on “a standard of evidence” accepted by the intelligence community. However, the strikes were limited in part because the absolute confirmation of sarin had not been obtained.
An intelligence official said:
It’s a hard, long process, especially in an attack like this without physical access to victims, site. Therefore we had to work with closest allies quickly to ensure we had confidence in the intelligence picture, enabling policymakers to choose best course of action.
1 Killed, 3 Injured in Latest Russian Airstrikes on Idlib Province
The White Helmets civil defense organization reports on the latest Russian bombing of opposition-held Idlib Province in northwest Syria:
After midnight, 1 civilian was killed and 3 others injured, after 3 brutal air raids targeted a popular market in #kafranbil city in #Idlib countryside. White Helmets teams worked to help the wounded, and continue the rescue operation. pic.twitter.com/3TajpmIwCM
— The White Helmets (@SyriaCivilDef) April 18, 2018
Russian bombing has diminished after a pro-Assad offensive took part of southeast Idlib over the winter, before redeployment to the East Ghouta front; however, periodic attacks have continued.
Senators “Unnerved” After Briefing on Trump Administration’s Syria Policy
Leading Senators have expressed concern about the Administration’s approach to Syria after a classified briefing.
“I am very unnerved by what I’m hearing and seeing,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, a Republican, who said the briefing on the strikes made him more worried. He cautioned that the administration is “going down a dangerous path”, without offering details.
Other Senators appeared to be worried that Trump will pursue his desire for a withdrawal of US forces, despite opposition from the Pentagon. Democrat Chris Coons told reporters:
The only thing worse than a bad plan on Syria is no plan on Syria, and the President and his administration have failed to deliver a coherent plan on the path forward.
I think it’s important for us to remain engaged in Syria and to pursue a diplomatic resolution. If we completely withdraw, our leverage in any diplomatic resolution or reconstruction or any hope for a post-Assad Syria goes away.
Bob Corker, the chair of the Foreign Relation Committee, expressed resignation, “Syria is Russia and Iran’s now. They will be determining the future. We may be at the table, but when you’re just talking and have nothing to do with shaping what’s happening on the ground, you’re just talking.”
Asked if he felt the Administration should take more military steps, Corker said:
They’re not going to. I understand it’s not going to happen. It’s just not going to happen. To do so would take a significant effort by our military and I just don’t think that’s where the American people are right now.
Trump has said for weeks that he wants US personnel to “get out”, asking Saudi Arabia for $4 billion to cover the withdrawal and take over stabilization efforts in northern Syria. The response to the Assad regime’s chemical attacks on April 7 near Damascus raised the prospect of a reversal, but the White House said earlier this week that Trump is still committed to withdrawal — albeit with the escape clause that it will be after the Islamic State is defeated.
Lawmakers of the House of Representatives, after their own briefing, said there was little discussion about a broader strategy for addressing the Assad regime, or about additional military or diplomatic efforts.
Democrat Adam Schiff said the briefing focused on last Saturday’s US-UK-French missile strikes:
We certainly did get additional insights into the targeting of the facilities, what we knew about it, what we know about the [Assad regime’s chemical] attack itself, what these facilities were used for, what actions if any took place between the time the President announced we were going to strike and when we did strike, so we got an additional granularity.
Special for Meokur (“Turks are becoming more observant Muslims”) –
“Why so many Turks are losing faith in Islam”
https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2018/04/turkey-why-so-many-turks-are-losing-faith-in-islam.html
What Akyol and other columnists are missing is the observant muslims’ number in turkey was always low. AKP getting 50% of votes does not mean that, that 50% is made up of obversant muslims. Lots of them don’t pray 5 times a day. However when I compare the number of observant people around with 20 years ago I still think we are on the rise.
It is true that there is a loss of motivation among some muslims the reason for that is, in the past turkey wasn’t run by an islamic party, and there was pressure on observant muslims by the secularists. Today that pressure does not exist and there is a party which has islamic roots in power. We have a president who recites quran in his speeches which was unthinkable 20 years ago. Observant muslims achieved most of their initial goals. Their dreams become real. However I believe the lethargy is temporary and an idealist generation will reborn.
UN says more security needed at Douma site: https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/nation-world/article209203999.html
And yet the Syrian government sponsored journalists reported no security threats whatsoever.
Surely even to you the Russian PR cockup must be obvious …
Yeah more security is needed from the Mukhaberati agents masquerading as rebels and harassing OPCW, as part of the coverup campaign.
OPCW Update on Douma visit: https://www.opcw.org/fileadmin/OPCW/EC/M-59/en/ecm59dg02_e_.pdf
“The United Nations Department of Safety and Security (UNDSS) had made the necessary arrangements with the Syrian authorities to escort the team to a certain point and then for the escort to be taken over by the Russian Military Police. However, the UNDSS preferred to first conduct a
reconnaissance visit to the sites, which took place yesterday. Fact-Finding Mission (FFM) team members did not participate in this visit.”
Comment: So the decision to delay was the UN’s, not the Syrian government, who wanted the FFM inspection to go ahead. The security personnel for the OPCW entered Douma but not the scientists.
“On arrival at Site 1, a large crowd gathered and the advice provided by the UNDSS was that
the reconnaissance team should withdraw. At Site 2, the team came under small arms fire and
an explosive was detonated. The reconnaissance team returned to Damascus. The UNDSS will continue to work with the Syrian National Authority.”
And yet the journalists could roam free without fear …
Journalists routinely venture into conflict zones where UN personnel fear to tread,
These ones were brought in by the Syrian government. .. and were unharassed. Funny that.
These ones were brought in by the Syrian government. .. and were unharassed. Funny that.
You mean like embedded journalists in Iraq?
Yes, quite the irony that one of the loudest voices against embedding of journalists in Iraq was Robert Fisk.
‘It just doesn’t ring true’: The leading UK figures questioning ‘proof’ of Douma ‘gas attack’: https://www.rt.com/uk/424505-fisk-hitchens-west-syria-attack/
One of them is Lord West: “He’d [Assad] had a long, hard slog capturing that part of the city. Just before he goes in and takes it all over, he decides to go and have a chemical attack. It just doesn’t ring true. We know in the past some of the Islamic groups have used chemicals and there would be huge benefit in them labeling an attack as coming from Assad.”
Yeah, I watched that Lord West interview with Sky — what was striking was his complete lack of knowledge of Syrian matters.
Not sure if Peter Hitchens is a “leading UK figure”, but nice to see Peter Ford earning his keep as both an RT go-to and a director of the British Syrian Society, headed by Bashar al-Assad’s father-in-law.
Lord West is simply employing common sense. Assad had everything going for him. He was winning and Trump announced his intent to withdraw US troops from Syria.
Launching a chemical attack risked undermining both of these benefits to Assad and promised to achieve nothing. None of the anti Assad movement have even tried to explain why Assad would snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Ah yes, the “Assad is winning, why would he…” narrative. After five years of using that one, perhaps it’s time it be retired?
First, it’s self-contradictory. Second, the premise is wrong thrice over, with respect to Assad’s goals in using CW, with regards to the risks he is taking, and with the imminence of his victory.
Finally, the Islamic groups don’t have a meaningful CW capability.
Ah yes, the “Assad is winning, why would he…” narrative. After five years of using that one, perhaps it’s time it be retired?
Assad only started winning in 2016/2017 so no
Finally, the Islamic groups don’t have a meaningful CW capability.
What makes a CW capability meaninglful?
Nope. Every CW attack over the last 5 years, I have heard “but Assad is winning, why would he …”
But the Syrian government has been pushing the “Assad is winning” narrative since the beginning …
So the, “Yes, but now he really is winning. ..” sounds idiotic.
As to what makes a CW capability significant: something that is stronger and requires more sophistication than chlorine and sulphur.
But the Syrian government has been pushing the “Assad is winning” narrative since the beginning …
Not true. They wouldn’t have turned to Russia for help if that was the case. It wasn’t until 2016/2017 that he started winning. 2013 was absurd because the attack coincides with OPCW inspectors arriving in Syria.
As to what makes a CW capability significant: something that is stronger and requires more sophistication than chlorine and sulphur.
The rebels have that
No, the rebels did not have CW capability in Douma. I appreciate your ongoing advocacy but let’s start from facts.
Assad only started winning in 2016/2017″
Lol, before those days you were also pushing the “Assad is winning” narrative, we all knew it was pure BS but thanks for the sincerity (thou a little late)
Lol, before those days you were also pushing the “Assad is winning” narrative,
No I wasn’t
“Assad is winning, why would he…”
Applying conspiranoic logic: maybe he wanted the US to attack its regime
Qui bono is a conspiracy theory? Funny how motive is such a taboo a among regime changers
Not clear when an Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons fact-finding mission will be able to travel safely to Douma: https://www.rte.ie/news/2018/0418/955315-opcw_douma/
“Ambassador Peter Wilson told reporters that OPCW Director-General Ahmet Uzumcu had said the departure of a team of inspectors was delayed after an incident in which an advance UN security detail performing reconnaissance in Douma was forced to withdraw after being fired upon. Earlier, a diplomatic source told Reuters that Mr Uzumcu had said when UN security forces arrived at the city yesterday a large crowd gathered. When they went to look at one potential site, they were subjected to gunfire and light shelling and withdrew. The fact-finding mission will be unable to depart until it is given a green light for departure by the UN security detail, the source said.”
OPCW security team fired upon in Douma: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-inspectors-secur/head-of-chemical-weapons-watchdog-un-security-team-was-shot-at-in-douma-idUSKBN1HP1HW
“The head of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons said on Wednesday that a U.N. security team doing reconnaissance in Douma, Syria came under gunfire a day earlier.”
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/04/17/middleeast/syria-chemical-attack-fallout-intl/index.html
“Syrian state TV and the White Helmets volunteer rescue group said separately that a fact-finding team from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons had come to Douma……The team did eventually visit the area, White Helmets member Ammar Al-Selmo said Tuesday.”
The main body of the inspection team is awaiting final approval from the security force: Chemical inspectors await all-clear to begin work in Douma: http://www.thejournal.ie/douma-syria-chemical-inspectors-await-all-clear-3963748-Apr2018/
“The Assad regime continued to stall on Tuesday over a visit by inspectors to the sites of two chemical attacks near Damascus on April 7, even resorting to the lie that the team from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons had reached Douma.”
Reconnaissance team from OPCW fact-finding mission entered Douma on Tuesday: https://sana.sy/en/?p=134714
A security inspection must precede a chemical/scientific one. Security reasons were provided to explain why the OPCW did not visit Khan Sheykoon last year as it ought to have done: “The Leadership Panel considered that the high security risk of a site visit to Khan Shaykhun, which is currently in a situation of armed conflict and under the control of a listed terrorist organization (Nusrah Front), outweighed the
benefits to the investigation.”
The OPCW has already started its work of reviewing videos and conducting interviews with doctors.
The number of people pushing ‘false flag’ narratives is depressing. I feel compelled to respond, but it seems futile.
1) I work for the ‘deep state’ of a country, and it’s a misnomer: there is nothing deep about it. I’m somewhat amazed every morning to see the real flag flying outside my window and no government I know of has the capacity to raise such a sophisticated false one.
2) “What about Iraq’s supposed WMD?” Yes, case in point. The US didn’t lie about the evidence; they misinterpreted it. When it turned out they were wrong, they didn’t invent non-existent WMD labs. Maybe it’s because they are fundamentally honest; it’s far more likely they knew they couldn’t do it and get away with it.
3) “But the rebels have used chemical weapons.” Yes, that is true. They have been found responsible for a small number of attacks using primitive CW (chlorine, sulphur, primitive delivery). That’s evidence that they have a limited, primitive capability. Larger, more sophisticated attacks have to be the state.
4) “Syria was a stable state destabilized by a foreign conspiracy.” This is not a great analysis: it’s shallow and raises more questions than it answers, and doesn’t relate well to known facts.
Contrast it with this: “Failed agricultural policies along with drought led to the migration of poor rural Sunnis to the cities. The stagnant state-run economy failed to absorb them, creating unemployment and unrest. The state responded by amping up repression, which fueled anger along with despair. The result were Sunni protests, which Assad tried to repress with Sunni military units. The latter defected and turned on the government, generating a civil war that then drew in neighboring nations.”
Sounds more thoughtful, doesn’t it?
1) I work for the ‘deep state’ of a country, and it’s a misnomer: there is nothing deep about it.
Dark State is a better term which described the seat of power that remains regardless of who is elected. George Carlin has a great skit in which he describes how every newly elected president is taken into a dark room and shown the “real” Zapruda film, which explains why every president who campaigned on ending wars always goes back om his word
2) “What about Iraq’s supposed WMD?” Yes, case in point. The US didn’t lie about the evidence; they misinterpreted it.
That’s called lying. And the propaganda didn’t turn out to be wrong, it was fabricated from the onset. That is why no one has ever lost their job over it.
That’s evidence that they have a limited, primitive capability. Larger, more sophisticated attacks have to be the state.
But the scale of the attacks have all been small, limited and largely ineffective, which means the rebels could certainly have carried them out, especially given that the rebels were in control of those areas in every case
This is not a great analysis: it’s shallow and raises more questions than it answers, and doesn’t relate well to known facts.
Your rambling. What questions does it raise? It is a fact that the US government has had a policy of regime change in Syria since the run up to the Iraq war. See Christian Amanpour’s interview with Assad in 2005
The result were Sunni protests, which Assad tried to repress with Sunni military units.
You left out the part about how the West and Saudi Allies were arming the opposition and that the protests were sabotaged by foreign backed jihadists waiting to take advantage of such unrest
“advance U.N. security team for the OPCW visited Douma on Tuesday: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-un-inquiry/syria-u-n-envoy-says-u-n-security-team-visited-douma-on-tuesday-idUSKBN1HO3EK
There are still mines and arms caches in Douma that could be very dangerous. If these aren’t dealt with, and inspectors die, Syria will be accused of killing inspectors not just delaying their work.
Apparently those mines and arms caches make exceptions for journalists allowed to stroll in Douma on Monday
Journalists have always been willing to go to areas UN personnel have not.
So, the Russians are renewing their bombing of Idlib. They will now be careful about Assad using gas in Idlib and the Axis of evil probably do not have the man power to conquer all of the rebels. They will continue with the bombing and try to reduce every town in Idlib to a pile of rubble, in an attempt to drive all of the rebels out of Syria and into Turkey. Erdogen will not tolerate that and will provide the rebels with weaponry at the very least and probably back them up with Turkish forces. The big problem is Russia’s bombing and Erdogen may attempt to force a NFZ. Europe will not be able to stand by and accept another couple of million refugees so at a minimum France will be encouraged to assist Turkey (and the rebels). If Russia attacks the Turkish forces then how will NATO accept this? The invasion of Syria is reaching a new node and we are about to see some major changes if the Assad gang start advancing quickly into Idlib.
I think you are too optimistic about Erdogan and Turkey. Erdogan is another quasi-nationalist player like Assad, trying to secure his own base with ambitions of being the caliph of the region. Helping out the Syrians in Idlib for their security and their rights is very low on his agenda. If the going gets rough in Idlib, he is the first to jettison that. He will try to hold onto Afrin and Al Bab with more vigour though.
Assad does not need to gas Idlib to take it over. The main reason Assad gasses is because he wants to make that legit in a post-civil war Syria, to suppress future uprisings. He has killed 400,000 and will continue to suppress all uprisings with equal force – because the precedent has been set, and the world did not react to it sufficiently. Sarin is a bonus for him – but not essential.
There is no way Turkey will challenge Russia. And Erdogan has created so much bad blood with the west that he knows NATO is not going to go to bat for him. So forget the NFZ and shield against Russia. He will sell out Idlib in a deal that lets him hold onto Afrin and alBab. It will be the rebels and the Kurds that will end up holding the short end of the stick, with anything that Erdogan gets involved in. He was responsible for Islamicizing the rebellion which was the source of its failure. He has already made sure the rebels and Kurds kill one another.
Scott, do you find it shocking as I have, of the sheer number of reader comments left at news media sites, the BBC, Guardian, etc. who are claiming that the chemical attack was false flag or was not a CW attack, or even that it did not happen? That US is wrong to bomb Syrian military buildings, and Assad does not possess CWs and that Assad is a decent man trying to combat Islamic terrorism?
What is going on? Has the cognoscenti become so clueless, or is it a deep distrust and cynicism about our governments, or is it the effectiveness of the Russian counter-narratives? How do you explain that so many otherwise decent people are actually buying Assad’s alibis and consider Assad to be the victim of superpower hegemony? What do you attribute this inversion of reason and common sense to? Facts are just being dismissed. Is this the postmodern ethos indulged by the left that is coming back to bite us?
Is there anything to indicate that people in 2001 were more informed than those in 2018? I’d say it’s mostly 2, especially when tied to previous interventions in the region, and to a very limited extent 3.
People look at the current state of Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan. They concluded that adding a 4th country to that list isn’t worth the effort. And while it’s definitely true that a place like Libya – the least worst of the bunch – is several orders of magnitude less deadly than Syria, you’ll find that plenty don’t really care much about that particular metric when judging success of interventions abroad.
The case for intervention was much more convincing when people assumed it would result in stable countries resembling ours. By contrast, “we’ll turn this murderous shithole into a somewhat less murderous shithole” doesn’t sound anywhere near as good. I’m not aware of any realistic argument made for post-2013 Syria that promised anything better.
Russia can exploit and amplify sentiments, but they can’t manufacture them. Beware of giving them too much credit.
This is an excellent point. Unlike those other countries you mention, the goal in Syria should be to force a stalemate and negotiate an end to armed conflict. This requires a far more muscular response from ‘the west’, but not one that is aimed at overthrowing Assad.
That said, I can’t imagine Assad playing a role in this scenario. I wonder what it would take for the Russians to go Ngo Dinh Diem on him?
If you find a way to maintain the regime, Assad’s removal wouldn’t be much of a problem with the Russians. But simultaneously removing him, keeping the regime in place with some cosmetic changes, and convincing even a part of the rebellion to get on board with that would be nothing short of a miracle…
the goal in Syria should be to force a stalemate and negotiate an end to armed conflict. This requires a far more muscular response from ‘the west’, but not one that is aimed at overthrowing Assad.
This illustrates the hubris and delusions about US omnipotence. The belief that the US has the power, wisdom and dominance to control and manage the outcome of a civil war even though they have failed at this every time. It’s also incredibly immoral. Forcing a stalemate implies keeping the war going indefinitely, which means continued loss of life.
Sounds like the same bullshit I’ve heard for the entirety of the war. A sorry ass excuse for turning a blind eye to a genocidal tyrant gassing, starving, torturing, and raping his people into submission. “Well at least it’s not like Iraq or Libya”. Bullshit.
I’m not making excuses, Kevin. Rather, it’s an observation as to why so many in our countries oppose any deepened involvement in the civil war. If you have your own theory, feel free to share it with us. We’re all friends here.
Sure sounded like an excuse commonly heard from certain types who give unflinching support to the murderous regime. Not sure if you could be more vague about “people”.
I was referring to anti-interventionists, in reply to Kazemi, who noted how they seem to dominate news comment sections. And while that’s definitely not representative of broad public opinion, polling showed a clear lack of support in the UK, US in 2013, and very narrow support for this month’s very limited strike, which is attributable to Republican partisanship. I think it’s safe to assume that number would go down as you crank up the scale of involvement.
If what I say sounds like an “excuse” people give for not supporting any substantial punitive action against Assad… that’s kind of my point.
A sorry ass excuse for turning a blind eye to a genocidal tyrant gassing, starving, torturing, and raping his people into submission. “Well at least it’s not like Iraq or Libya”. Bullshit.
No it’s just very inconvenient and exposes the sheer magnitude of your hypocrisy, double standards and selective morality. The US is perfectly happy to turn a blind eye to a genocidal tyrant using cluster bombs, starving, torturing, and raping Yemen into submission because Saudi Arabia happen to be allies.
And you are apparently perfectly happy with the equal and opposite hypocrisy. ..
There is just one tiny little difference you always conveniently leave out. 500,000 dead>13,000+ dead. As I said just a tiny difference. So who’s the fucking hypocrite again?
I mean I know it’s another sad ass attempt at diversion and whataboutism since nothing you said changes anything I said. But damn, try thinking for yourself once in a while.
500,000 dead>13,000+ dead. As I said just a tiny difference. So who’s the fucking hypocrite again?
The number of dead is far greater and according to the UN, 20 million are at risk of starvation. Furthermore, the conflict is not a civil war as the Saudis are conducting the war almost entirely from the air
If you want to talk about hypocrisy, you might want a refresher on Madelaine Albright’s view that 1 million dead children was worth keeping Saddam boxed in. Then of course, there are the million dead Iraqis that to Dubya’s cakewalk
Oh God. Good to see you double down on your diversionary tactics. Anything to avoid talking about the horrific atrocities committed by the genocidal maniac you fully support. Piss off with that weak bullshit. But whatabout…..but whatabout……but whatabout. Pathetic.
How many civilians have lost their lives Andre? How many of them were targeted? I suspect your numbers are wildly hyperbolic as usual. Saudi Arabia is another dictatorship. But then it does not gas people, and does not maintain 100,000 political prisoners where children are tortured in front of parents. There is no rebellion in KSA.
How many civilians have lost their lives Andre? How many of them were targeted? I suspect your numbers are wildly hyperbolic as usual.
I suspect the numbers are far greater than are being reported.
Saudi Arabia is another dictatorship. But then it does not gas people, and does not maintain 100,000 political prisoners where children are tortured in front of parents.
Nor does Assad.
There is no rebellion in KSA.
Of course not. the KSA crushes any rebellion before it can take hold.
Good point Kevin. But why do you think otherwise decent people, students, faculty, educated folks, etc. are turning their backs to the genocide and repression that is taking place — and even actively opposing the pathetic peacekeeping activities of the coalition? Why are students on campuses turning a blind eye to gassing and starvation? Surely these victims are not all ISIS terrorists. The only rallies I have seen lately is to condemn the bombing by the coalition to destroy WMD facilities! One day they claim they would have been all for removing Saddam if WMDs were found in Iraq. The next day, where there is proof of WMDs in Syria, they condemn the destruction of WMD facilities.
How can these otherwise decent people betray a genocide taking place right under their noses? It is not like the Rwanda event that within a few days it was over. This has been going on for seven years. I can understand when right wing nationalists support Assad or leftwing Marxist support Assad. But the majority of students, faculty, educated professionals, etc. seem to find something sinister in putting an active stop to this carnage. Result is 400,000 bodies, trickling right under our noses, day in and day out.
But why do you think otherwise decent people, students, faculty, educated folks, etc. are turning their backs to the genocide and repression that is taking place
Who are you trying to kid? The US supports more than 70% of the world’s dictators and not only supports (turns a blind eye) to genocide and repression, it enables it.
Why are students on campuses turning a blind eye to gassing and starvation? Surely these victims are not all ISIS terrorists.
True, nor is the death toll you repeatedly cite the victims of Assad’s forces. Many, if not most, are Assad’s own fighters being killed.
The only rallies I have seen lately is to condemn the bombing by the coalition to destroy WMD facilities!
What WMD facilities? There aren’t any. Use your brain. Do you seriously believe the US and it’s allies have known about these gas producing families all this time and just been sitting on their hands? It’s just the same Iraq WMD BS all over again and you silly lemmings continue to prove that you can indeed fool some of the people all of the time.
The next day, where there is proof of WMDs in Syria, they condemn the destruction of WMD facilities.
What proof? The same proof we were given about WMDs in Iraq in the form of hot air based on alleged intelligence that we are told it much to secret to share with the public.
There is no genocide taking place in Syria. No ethnic group or nationality is being targeted for extermination. In fact with each town and city that has been liberated, we have witnessed Syrians celebrating and life returning to normal.
Tundra, thanks for your insights. Where I may disagree is that the issues we are lamenting has a deeper structure than just Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya going sour. What I have been hearing is as much this, but also that the whole western project of liberal democratization is corrupt to its core and undesirable. A very sinister and nihilistic outtake of current events. What I sense is this anti-westernism is not going to go away even if Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan miraculously turn successful. For example, Iraq has made great strides, but public discourse says nothing about that, and the average joe assumes that Iraq is one big shambles like Somalia. Who is pushing this sort of narrative which eats to the heart of the civilizational and enlightenment project?
We can agree that some will be against involvement no matter what, but those whose anti-interventionism is just an expression of their anti-western animus are a minority in the debate. When 70% of Americans didn’t support US intervention in 2013, it goes way beyond some radical left campus freaks.
It’s not a mystery. We all remember what General Wesley Clarke told us about Washington’s plans to overthrow 7 governments in 5 years. Those included Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan & Iran.
After the lies about Iraq and Libya, the governments of the US/UK/France have lost all credibility. The real shock is that anyone in their right mind takes anything Washington, London or Paris has to say seriously.
False regime claim that inspectors reached Douma on Tuesday, 10 days after chemical attacks
Given that the bombings by F.U.K.U.S. only took place 4 days ago, it’s pretty dishonest to be blaming the Assad regime for any delays. It took the OPCW 2 weeks to get to Salisbury.
Finally, the Assad regime’s UN ambassador Bashar al-Ja’afari walked back the line, saying it was a “UN security team” that had traveled to Douma. He said the inspectors would finally be allowed into the town on Wednesday.
The UN declared a preparatory team entered Douma on Tuesday, but not the experts from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW).
Russia has already limited any inspection by barring attribution of blame, and Russian personnel reportedly removed and disturbed evidence from the sites soon after the regime’s attacks.
How does denying attribution of blame limit inspection? As for the allegations that Russian personnel removed and disturbed evidence, this is more propaganda. We are now being told that if the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons doesn’t find evidence that the Syrian government conducted a chemical weapons attack in Douma last week, it’s because Russia hid the evidence.
The desperation is palpable.
“How does denying attribution of blame limit inspection?”
Hmm, have a good, long think about that. (and about sources, not propaganda, that Russians removed evidence).
If there was no chemical attack, then attribution of blame is pointless. The OPCW is free to collect all the sameples they like to determine if a nerve agent or chlorine was used. The job of the OPCW is not to indict or blame. It is merely to report the scientific facts and verify compliance with the convention on banning chemical weapons. The United States wants it to be used for another agenda.
Yes, but when a chemical attack is established, attribution of responsibility is important.
You know, war crimes and all that…
That is for prosecutors in the international criminal court to look into. The OPCW is simply a scientific testing and verification body as stated in its mission goals. In any case, the OPCW report doesn’t have to point fingers if the all the evidence points in just one direction.
I appreciate you have no knowledge of the Joint Investigative Mechanism.
The JIM is not one of the OPCW’s mission goals. It is a stipulation of UN resolution 2235 that misuses the purpose of the OPCW which is an inspection and verification outfit, not a criminal investigation agency.
The JIM is part of the OPCW, so is therefore part of the OPCW’s mission, even if that has been curbed by the Russian veto.
According to Wikipedia, the “Joint Investigative Mechanism (JIM)” is “a partnership between the United Nations (UN) and the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW)” which suggests it is not part of the OPCW but a separate entity.
Unlike the OPCW, which is a permanent body, the mandate needs to be renewed via UN resolutions. The mandate for JIM expired last year
Yes, but when a chemical attack is established, attribution of responsibility is important.
Of course and the attribution is likely to be self evident on the basis of of the actual evidence provided b the investigation. The point being that non attribution does not hinder the investigation in any way.
Possibly one of the most naive and/or ridiculous arguments I have had heard in the past year — you’ll note that the Russians do not agree with you.
Having had a good long think about it Scott brought me to the same conclusion. Attribution of blame is an asessment based on evidence and does not hinder any gathering of such evidence.
Wrong Andre. The OPCW was not invited to Salisbury until 2 weeks after the event. No one was even sure in the first week what kind of attack this was, if any.
The OPCW was not invited to Salisbury until 2 weeks after the event.
Makes you wonder why? Were the British buying time to plant evidence before the OPCW arrived or remove it?
No.
If there is no mandate to attribute the attack, the inspectors will for example not investigate the munitions and methods of dispersal. This would allow the Russians to remove any such evidence.