web analytics

The How and Why of Syria, from the horse’s mouth

By Patty On April 15th, 2018

I’m not an arm-chair general; I don’t have much information and I have no expertise in this kind of thing. But, I am interested in some real information, not fake news. I thought ATW readers might be interested as well.

Here is the assessment of the Assad regime’s chemical use from the US Department of Defense website.

Some excerpts:

“….The regime’s continued use of chemical weapons threatens to desensitize the world to their use and proliferation, weaken prohibitions against their use, and increase the likelihood that additional states will acquire and use these weapons. To underscore this point, not only has Russia shielded the Assad regime from accountability for its chemical weapons use, but on March 4, 2018, Russia used a nerve agent in an attempted assassination in the United Kingdom, showing an uncommonly brazen disregard for the taboo against chemical weapons…

….This history clearly illustrates the Assad regime’s consistent use of chemical weapons. Such use will continue until the costs to the regime of using these weapons outweigh any idea that they may provide military advantages…”

22 Responses to “The How and Why of Syria, from the horse’s mouth”

  1. Patty, how on earth could the US govt be “the horse’s mouth” with regard to the war in Syria? They are as partisan as anyone else is.

  2. You can certainly differ in your opinion with that of the WH (expressed in this press release) but at least we have the facts as to what the WH opinion is and not a mischaracterization or falsity.

    As regards the WH “why” regarding recent actions , the WH is the “horse’s mouth.”

  3. I am not sure that every new thought on Syria Requires an entirely new post.

    Discipline.

  4. Not every thread requires you chime in with nonsense comment.

    But here you are.

  5. Discipline

    In the absence of editors, strive to edit ones self, once in awhile

    If Sarah Sanders says something on Syria today, that doesn’t require a post of its own

  6. stop criticizing others and write something other than a travel post Phantom…..

    Casting Pearls Patty.

  7. Shush

    When I need your opinion, I’ll give it to you

  8. Apparently, this post bothers Phantom. And I can guess why.

  9. Just say it, Phantom, President Trump is right.

    “….This history clearly illustrates the Assad regime’s consistent use of chemical weapons. Such use will continue until the costs to the regime of using these weapons outweigh any idea that they may provide military advantages…”

  10. not only has Russia shielded the Assad regime from accountability for its chemical weapons use, but on March 4, 2018, Russia used a nerve agent in an attempted assassination in the United Kingdom, showing an uncommonly brazen disregard for the taboo against chemical weapons

    Exactly. Russia is a rogue state, if not a terrorist state. Putin has repeatedly shown that he has no regard for rules and treaties, and yet his useful fools in the West continue to defend him.

  11. Liar Lavrov claims that the gas attack was “staged” by the UK, and there are too many in the west who will believe this bullshit propaganda:

    “Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has said a reported chemical attack in Syria was staged by foreign agents. A spokesman for Russia’s defence ministry accused the UK of being involved in staging the attack.”

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-43747922

  12. //As regards the WH “why” regarding recent actions , the WH is the “horse’s mouth.”//

    It would be the horse’s mouth if it were talking about the missiles it fired etc, because that’s something it’s responsible for. But here it’s talking about the situation on the ground in Syria, and even in England, and in that case it definitely is not an authoritative source. It’s simply an opinion like anyone else’s, except, like all government’s, it’s a very biased one.

    For example: “Russia used a nerve agent in an attempted assassination in the United Kingdom, showing an uncommonly brazen disregard for the taboo against chemical weapons”

    The American defence department simply does not know that “Russia” carried out the attack.
    Even if it somehow knew that the perps were Russians (and it doesn’t, because nobody knows who they were), it still couldn’t be sure that the Russian govt was behind it.

    Of course it may also be right, and of course it may be wrong (if the Russian govt really was responsible and wished to keep it secret, would it really have used a substance that is traced directly back to Russia. The Russians, like every secret service, have access to a whole range of poisons from all over the world. Using the Russian one is like a secret agent leaving his business card.) A wise person simply would not believe them. They have been proven to be brazen liars before and don’t deserve any credence.

  13. By the way, the US Dept of Defence is not in the WH, it’s in the Pentagon. Unless it had to move in with the President to put more orange camouflage on his face and hair.

  14. I have a gripe, and it’s headlines of similar length, in the same case, right next to each other.

    I glance for updates at the “Recent Comments” list on the right. At the moment it’s impossible to make out clearly.

    Edit people, edit!

  15. I think the horse’s ass is more accurate than horse’s mouth when it comes to describing this White House.

  16. from the horses mouth how about the girl in hospital telling her story?
    relevant?
    Syria ‘chemical attack’: Girl seen in hospital video speaks
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-middle-east-43776015/syria-chemical-attack-girl-seen-in-hospital-video-speaks

  17. //from the horses mouth how about the girl in hospital telling her story?
    relevant?//

    Not really. If she was in the basement when it happened, she could hardly tell who dropped or fired it, could she?

    For what it’s worth, I also believe Assad has used chemical weapons in this war. But as regards this latest case, you have to be very certain about something before using it as a reason for military action, and there’s certain circummstantial evidence at least to suggest the Syrian govt wasn’t responsible.

  18. The fact that Trump lies constantly about everything else is something that we need to think about while assessing this

    I trust the American, British, and French intelligence services, but they’re not perfect; and Trump is a bald faced liar And conspiracist

  19. Pete Moore, on April 15th, 2018 at 8:43 PM Said:
    I have a gripe, and it’s headlines of similar length, in the same case, right next to each other.

    I glance for updates at the “Recent Comments” list on the right. At the moment it’s impossible to make out clearly.

    since when have you ever seen ANYTHING clearly ?

  20. “you have to be very certain about something before using it as a reason for military action”. The US Defense Department has access to all US intelligence and, I think, most of the valuable intelligence gathered by others worldwide. This was a time-sensitive situation in which if no action was taken Assad could use even more chemical weapons. In such a situation you use the best intelligence, weigh the plus and minus of conducting a strike and rapidly follow your best judgment. It is not unusual to act without absolute certainty in such circumstances.

  21. // It is not unusual to act without absolute certainty in such circumstances.//

    It’s also not unusual for military to tell lies when they’re about to do something that will kill people.

  22. And let’s not forget that the American commander in chief is a complete and total and constant liar the likes of which the world has never seen

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.