Did Anyone Hear Kerry Speak?

[Gob]

Interesting that none of the war mongers have highlighted the accusations of the use of Sarin by the rebels?

[Gob]

If Assad has been blowing his people to bits using conventional weapons, are they less dead for it?

[Lord Jim]

If Assad has been blowing his people to bits using conventional weapons, are they less dead for it?

Good point.

We should have become engaged much earlier.

[Andrew D]

Nor would they be any less dead had they been struck by lightning.

Using chemical weapons against civilians violates a peremptory international norm. Any country that tolerates it should be a pariah among nations.

[Gob]

Using an unproven excuse of chemical weapons against civilians to attack a country which does not threaten you violates a peremptory international norm. Any country that tolerates it should be a pariah among nations.

[Gob]

[Andrew D]

Interesting that none of the war mongers have highlighted the accusations of the use of Sarin by the rebels?

I am not a warmonger. Unlike some, or at least one, other(s) here, I have no interest in involving the US in Syria's civil war.

[Gob]

[Jarlaxle]

Interesting that none of the war mongers have highlighted the accusations of the use of Sarin by the rebels?

I am not a warmonger. Unlike some, or at least one, other(s) here, I have no interest in involving the US in Syria's civil war.

Liar!

[Andrew D]

That is uncalled for.

[Lord Jim]

Presidents appear to love going to war

It beggars belief to think that Barack Obama has been looking for some reason to get us militarily involved in Syria, since the record is overwhelming that he has bent over backwards to avoid getting involved, despite there being plenty of justification for doing so, long before this attack.

He's used pretty much every excuse he could think of to avoid doing anything; (including making our policy hostage to the Russians and Chinese)

In fact even as recently as yesterday his reluctance has remained obvious; in a really bad performance in an interview on PBS, he said that he still hadn't made a decision...

I have no doubt that his ambivalence and navel gazing over this has damaged our ability to marshal stronger support from our allies...If he doesn't seem ready to fully commit, why should they stick their necks out?

But again, all of that having been said, something is better than nothing, and late is better than never, so if he's finally ready to pull the trigger, he has my full support.

I just hope the action is robust enough to have a real impact; my fear is that he's been so reluctant to do anything about this that he will try to get by with doing as absolutely little as possible, just to put on a show.

I hope I'm wrong.

[Joe Guy]

Nor would they be any less dead had they been struck by lightning.

Using chemical weapons against civilians violates a peremptory international norm. Any country that tolerates it should be a pariah among nations.

Like when the US military used Agent Orange during the Vietnam war? Of course, the goal was to defoliate the forest, but the effect on civilians and the environment is still being felt today.

Or how about when we sold chemical weapons to Iraq? Years later the U.S. military attacked Iraq because it was believed the Iraqi army had chemical weapons. I wonder why they thought there were chemical weapons there?

The U.S. should bomb itself just to remind us that we shouldn't use or sell chemical weapons ever again.

[Andrew D]

But if the evidence is seriously in doubt, I have nothing against the US's waiting for the resolution of whatever evidentiary doubts may exist.

That was too weak a formulation. I should have written:

"But if the evidence is seriously in doubt, the US should wait for the resolution of whatever reasonable evidentiary doubts may exist."

I am not eager for the US to obliterate the Assad regime. As I wrote, "I am taking a position about what the US should do to a regime that has used chemical weapons against civilians."

We should not do that because we want to. We should do it, if the evidence supports it, because we believe ourselves obligated to do it.

[Jarlaxle]

That is uncalled for.

OK, you might not be lying. Have you developed a split personality, perhaps?

[Gob]

As I wrote, "I am taking a position about what the US should do to a regime that has used chemical weapons against civilians."

What if its the rebels who have been using chemical weapons, should the US carry on ignoring that?

[Lord Jim]

What if its the rebels who have been using chemical weapons, should the US carry on ignoring that?

Sure that would make a difference Strop; and if Martians did it that would make a difference too, which is just about as likely:

American intelligence agencies in the three days before the Aug. 21 attack detected signs of activities by the Syrian authorities “associated with preparations for a chemical weapons attack,” the assessment said. Syrian chemical weapons personnel were operating in the suburb of Adra from Aug. 18 until early on the morning of Aug. 21. On that date, it added, a “Syrian regime element prepared for a chemical weapons attack,” including the use of gas masks.

Spy satellites detected rocket launchings from government-controlled territory 90 minutes before the first reports of a chemical weapons attack. The intelligence agencies said they had identified more than 100 videos related to the attack, many showing large numbers of bodies with physical signs consistent with nerve agents, and they added that the Syrian opposition “does not have the capability to fabricate all of the videos.”

The agencies also said they had intercepted the communications of a senior Syrian official who “confirmed that chemical weapons were used by the regime on Aug. 21 and was concerned with the U.N. inspectors obtaining evidence,” the assessment said. It added that on the afternoon of that day, Syrian chemical weapons personnel were directed to cease operations.

The administration has repeatedly said there is no question that the government of Mr. Assad used chemical weapons against its own people in an attack that killed hundreds of people.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/31/world ... .html?_r=0

But by all means, you go on believing Putin's shills since apparently they're saying what you want to hear....

Who has the greater reason to lie here?

Spokesthings for a dictator who has made clear that propping up and saving his dictator ally has been his one and only concern in this since the very beginning? A dictator who doesn't give a rat's ass about what weapons are used or how brutally his dictator pal massacres his population, since push come to shove he'd be perfectly happy to do it to his own people if he felt he had to in order to keep power?

Or a US President who has shown over and over by word and deed for two years that getting involved in this is something he has tried to avoid like the plague?

To me it''s not a close call, but you believe what you want....

[Gob]

There is no proof at all Jim.

[Lord Jim]

Well, I'm sorry, but you're just completely wrong.

Obviously you don't like the proof, so you keep saying there isn't any, but that isn't going to change the reality.

[Gob]

Show me some proof Jim?

The BBC is saying there is no proof, Kerry could not provide proof, and said he was not prepared to wait for UN inspectors (where have we heard that before?)

He's claimed 1400 deaths, when doctors on the ground can only find 335.

Analysis

David Kay

Weapons expert, ex-Iraq Survey Group

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no doubt that a chemical weapons attack took place but not such a compelling case on who did it. The evidence tying this attack directly to the Assad regime was largely circumstantial and asserted - not revealed.

What we would like are the details of the conversations, who carried them out and the background. This is one of the conundrums of intelligence - the reluctance of the people who collect it to reveal in detail what they collected because of the fear of loss of sources and methods.

Another key element missing is why is this important to US national security and important enough where we would consider a military attack because doubts persist in the US about why we should do this. About 100,000 died before from conventional munitions and we did nothing.

And Kerry did not in the same compelling fashion that he laid the chemical attack at the regime's feet explain why he was certain that a US military attack would bring the Syrian regime to the negotiating table.

[Lord Jim]

What do you call the satellite photos of the missile launches?

I guess those were faked...

U.S. Government Assessment of the Syrian Government’s Use of Chemical Weapons on August 21, 2013

The United States Government assesses with high confidence that the Syrian government carried out a chemical weapons attack in the Damascus suburbs on August 21, 2013. We further assessthat the regime used a nerve agent in the attack. These all-source assessments are based onhuman, signals, and geospatial intelligence as well as a significant body of open sourcereporting.

Our classified assessments have been shared with the U.S. Congress and keyinternational partners. To protect sources and methods, we cannot publicly release all availableintelligence – but what follows is an unclassified summary of the U.S. Intelligence Community’sanalysis of what took place.
Syrian Government Use of Chemical Weapons on August 21
A large body of independent sources indicates that a chemical weapons attack took place in theDamascus suburbs on August 21. In addition to U.S. intelligence information, there are accountsfrom international and Syrian medical personnel; videos; witness accounts; thousands of socialmedia reports from at least 12 different locations in the Damascus area; journalist accounts; and reports from highly credible nongovernmental organizations.A preliminary U.S. government assessment determined that 1,429 people were killed in thechemical weapons attack, including at least 426 children, though this assessment will certainlyevolve as we obtain more information.We assess with high confidence that the Syrian government carried out the chemical weaponsattack against opposition elements in the Damascus suburbs on August 21. We assess that thescenario in which the opposition executed the attack on August 21 is highly unlikely. The bodyof information used to make this assessment includes intelligence pertaining to the regime’s preparations for this attack and its means of delivery, multiple streams of intelligence about theattack itself and its effect, our post-attack observations, and the differences between thecapabilities of the regime and the opposition. Our high confidence assessment is the strongest position that the U.S. Intelligence Community can take short of confirmation. We will continueto seek additional information to close gaps in our understanding of what took place.

2
Background:
The Syrian regime maintains a stockpile of numerous chemical agents, including mustard, sarin,and VX and has thousands of munitions that can be used to deliver chemical warfare agents.Syrian President Bashar al-Asad is the ultimate decision maker for the chemical weapons program and members of the program are carefully vetted to ensure security and loyalty. TheSyrian Scientific Studies and Research Center (SSRC) – which is subordinate to the SyrianMinistry of Defense – manages Syria’s chemical weapons program.We assess with high confidence that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons on a smallscale against the opposition multiple times in the last year, including in the Damascus suburbs. This assessment is based on multiple streams of information including reporting of Syrianofficials planning and executing chemical weapons attacks and laboratory analysis of physiological samples obtained from a number of individuals, which revealed exposure to sarin.We assess that the opposition has not used chemical weapons.The Syrian regime has the types of munitions that we assess were used to carry out the attack onAugust 21, and has the ability to strike simultaneously in multiple locations. We have seen noindication that the opposition has carried out a large-scale, coordinated rocket and artillery attack like the one that occurred on August 21.

We assess that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons over the last year primarily to gainthe upper hand or break a stalemate in areas where it has struggled to seize and hold strategicallyvaluable territory. In this regard, we continue to judge that the Syrian regime views chemicalweapons as one of many tools in its arsenal, including air power and ballistic missiles, whichthey indiscriminately use against the opposition.The Syrian regime has initiated an effort to rid the Damascus suburbs of opposition forces usingthe area as a base to stage attacks against regime targets in the capital. The regime has failed toclear dozens of Damascus neighborhoods of opposition elements, including neighborhoodstargeted on August 21, despite employing nearly all of its conventional weapons systems. Weassess that the regime’s frustration with its inability to secure large portions of Damascus mayhave contributed to its decision to use chemical weapons on August 21



3
Preparation:
We have intelligence that leads us to assess that Syrian chemical weapons personnel – including personnel assessed to be associated with the SSRC – were preparing chemical munitions prior tothe attack. In the three days prior to the attack, we collected streams of human, signals and geospatial intelligence that reveal regime activities that we assess were associated with preparations for a chemical weapons attack.Syrian chemical weapons personnel were operating in the Damascus suburb of ‘Adra fromSunday, August 18 until early in the morning on Wednesday, August 21 near an area that theregime uses to mix chemical weapons, including sarin. On August 21, a Syrian regime element prepared for a chemical weapons attack in the Damascus area, including through the utilizationof gas masks. Our intelligence sources in the Damascus area did not detect any indications in thedays prior to the attack that opposition affiliates were planning to use chemical weapons.

The Attack:
Multiple streams of intelligence indicate that the regime executed a rocket and artillery attack against the Damascus suburbs in the early hours of August 21. Satellite detections corroboratethat attacks from a regime-controlled area struck neighborhoods where the chemical attacksreportedly occurred – including Kafr Batna, Jawbar, ‘Ayn Tarma, Darayya, and Mu’addamiyah.This includes the detection of rocket launches from regime controlled territory early in themorning, approximately 90 minutes before the first report of a chemical attack appeared in socialmedia. The lack of flight activity or missile launches also leads us to conclude that the regimeused rockets in the attack.Local social media reports of a chemical attack in the Damascus suburbs began at 2:30 a.m. localtime on August 21. Within the next four hours there were thousands of social media reports onthis attack from at least 12 different locations in the Damascus area. Multiple accounts described chemical-filled rockets impacting opposition-controlled areas.Three hospitals in the Damascus area received approximately 3,600 patients displayingsymptoms consistent with nerve agent exposure in less than three hours on the morning of August 21, according to a highly credible international humanitarian organization. The reported symptoms, and the epidemiological pattern of events – characterized by the massive influx of patients in a short period of time, the origin of the patients, and the contamination of medical and first aid workers – were consistent with mass exposure to a nerve agent. We also received reportsfrom international and Syrian medical personnel on the ground

We have identified one hundred videos attributed to the attack, many of which show largenumbers of bodies exhibiting physical signs consistent with, but not unique to, nerve agentexposure. The reported symptoms of victims included unconsciousness, foaming from the noseand mouth, constricted pupils, rapid heartbeat, and difficulty breathing. Several of the videosshow what appear to be numerous fatalities with no visible injuries, which is consistent withdeath from chemical weapons, and inconsistent with death from small-arms, high-explosivemunitions or blister agents. At least 12 locations are portrayed in the publicly available videos,and a sampling of those videos confirmed that some were shot at the general times and locationsdescribed in the footage.We assess the Syrian opposition does not have the capability to fabricate all of the videos, physical symptoms verified by medical personnel and NGOs, and other information associated with this chemical attack.We have a body of information, including past Syrian practice, that leads us to conclude thatregime officials were witting of and directed the attack on August 21. We intercepted communications involving a senior official intimately familiar with the offensive who confirmed that chemical weapons were used by the regime on August 21 and was concerned with the U.N.inspectors obtaining evidence. On the afternoon of August 21, we have intelligence that Syrianchemical weapons personnel were directed to cease operations. At the same time, the regimeintensified the artillery barrage targeting many of the neighborhoods where chemical attacksoccurred. In the 24 hour period after the attack, we detected indications of artillery and rocketfire at a rate approximately four times higher than the ten preceding days. We continued to seeindications of sustained shelling in the neighborhoods up until the morning of August 26.To conclude, there is a substantial body of information that implicates the Syrian government’sresponsibility in the chemical weapons attack that took place on August 21.

As indicated, there isadditional intelligence that remains classified because of sources and methods concerns that is being provided to Congress and international partners.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/164267580/U-S ... al-Weapons

I guess what you want is for the sources in the Syrian military to be publicly identified and have them interviewed on TV...

There's an enormous amount of proof here, (in fact I want to thank you for challenging me on this because before you did, and I started looking into it. I didn't realize just how much proof there is.)

It's pretty obvious to me at this point that no amount of proof is going to be sufficient for you; you'll continue to claim that there isn't any because that's what you apparently want to believe regardless of the proof.