Syria conflict: 'Chemical attacks kill hundreds'

[MaDef]

Originally Posted by Catfish

Well there's not much talk here of Assad using poison gas any more. Or that he just killed ~13,000 prisoners.

"Assad regime kills so many detainees it amounts to 'extermination' of civilian population, UN says":

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a6860876.html
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...l-says-amnesty

Good man, we should all support him.
Somehow there seems to be some reluctance of just assigning a commando, infiltrate, and get rid of the worst dictators without official war and destroying infrastructure. I wonder why.

It's against international law, or the Geneva convention, either or both I forget which.

I always considered the Syrian civil war an internal matter for the Syrians, I have no idea what the U.S. was thinking when she got involved, as far as I can tell Syria has no strategic or economic value to us. the extent of the U.S. involvement should have been as a third party envoy trying to broker peace, not as an arms supplier for the rebels.

[ikalugin]

We enjoy our Syrian adventure, I mean where else you can do live firing training all day every day without anyone complaining?

[Catfish]

^ A bit cynical today?

[August]

Originally Posted by Oberon

Really? Last I heard there was no more than 500. That's including the 200 that were penned to be sent out back in December:
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/10/u...isis.html?_r=0

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a7466996.html

You're probably right, I looked it up rather hurriedly. That may be what's in Iraq at the moment.

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Catfish

^ A bit cynical today?

Yes, it didn't go unnoticed.

[ikalugin]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

Yes, it didn't go unnoticed.

If you refer to me, I am cynical every day.

[Oberon]

Russia and China veto UN sanctions on Syria over chemical weapons usage:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-39116854

[Jimbuna]

^ No surprises there then

[ikalugin]

Originally Posted by Oberon

Russia and China veto UN sanctions on Syria over chemical weapons usage:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-39116854

over the alleged use of chemical weapons.

alleged=/=proven

Syria agreed to destroy its chemical weapons in 2013 under an agreement

due diligence

[August]

Originally Posted by ikalugin

alleged=/=proven
due diligence

so did they?

https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/09/28/...emical-attacks

Because it sure doesn't look like it.

[ikalugin]

Originally Posted by August

so did they?

https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/09/28/...emical-attacks

Because it sure doesn't look like it.

I quoted the sourced provided (the BBC article).

Regarding that HRW, you would love what they write about Trump:
https://www.hrw.org/blog-feed/trump-...first-100-days

[August]

Originally Posted by ikalugin

I quoted the sourced provided (the BBC article).

Regarding that HRW, they are going to love Trump the same way they love Assad:
https://www.hrw.org/blog-feed/trump-...first-100-days

That's fine. Doesn't answer why the Russians haven't put the muzzle on their boy Assad though.

[ikalugin]

Originally Posted by August

That's fine. Doesn't answer why the Russians haven't put the muzzle on their boy Assad though.

To avoid another Lybia amongst other things.

As to the HRW - I sort of bundle them with Greenpeace.

[August]

Originally Posted by ikalugin

To avoid another Lybia amongst other things.

As to the HRW - I sort of bundle them with Greenpeace.

So you're saying that there was no chlorine attack?

[ikalugin]

Originally Posted by August

So you're saying that there was no chlorine attack?

I am saying that sanctions are not the way to proceed because:
- Assad's Goverment responsibility (for any crimes alleged) is not proven in court with due process.
- Assad is the lesser evil.

p.s. remember Saddam and how he allegedly gassed the Kurds using US supplied chemical weapons? I wonder if the same countries were trying to sanction him back then.