There are 180 videos so far of the nerve agent release.

[joshcryer]

Almost all of them posted on August 21 by first responders / doctors / helpers. 18 days ago. The ones shown on MSNBC / CNN / by the government appear to be carefully selected. A girl, a boy, a young man. I'm not saying they're the worst videos out there (indeed, they're heavily edited down because at least one of those videos has a far more gruesome ending).

But I do think they're the worst ones of what they felt could actually be shown to a national audience. Had they shown the worst or had they not edited it down then people might have actually had a negative response. "Why would you show that?" Some here on DU even are saying that and they haven't seen the 180 videos (I have).

It's obviously being "released" (even though the videos are publicly available and I posted them here) to appeal to peoples emotions, but it's being done very selectively. Some of the videos are fairly tame and some are extremely beyond anything you could ever see in your life, but the ones released? Right in the middle.

[morningfog]

1. It does nothing but inflame emotion. It adds nothing new to the debate.

[backscatter712]

4. It's the A/V version of "If you don't support war, you're a heartless bastard!" talking point.

They're trying to guilt-trip us into shutting up.

[blm]

7. Apparently, many Americans don't even KNOW what chemical weapons

do and why the human race came together and agreed to ban them after WW1.

They can watch Evil Dead and eat popcorn, but, not learn WHY the world has a ban on chemical weapons?

[Harmony Blue]

16. Times change and it was a different era

chemical weapons like White Phosphorus, Agent Orange, and DU have all been used. So to suggest Americans don't understand chemical warfare is not true.

[Tx4obama]

23. Don't kid yourself. TONS of Americans do not know much of anything at all...

Haven't you ever seen those videos of where a guy goes out into the street and with a camera asks folks questions like: Who is the Vice-president of the United States? etc...

And most of the dumbasses don't know the answers to any of the questions.

Btw, a poll came out like last week and something like a third of the people thought that Obama was repealed 'a long time ago'.

TONS of Americans do not know SHIT about the important things that they should know about.

[Niceguy1]

34. white phosphorus and du

Are not chemical weapons ... wp is classified as an incindiary weapon and du is neither

[blm]

40. MOST do not know anything about what it looks like and what it entails.

I am surprised you think they do.

Most would have a blank look on their faces at the mere mention of those weapons, let alone if you asked them how any of those chemical weapons affected the human body.

[KittyWampus]

20. The irony of DU's Daily Outrage Brigade complaining about inflaming emotions is almost unbelievable.

[David__77]

2. Hmm...

Perhaps so. I think the end result will be desensitization and incredulity.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

3. People SHOULD see what they are saying yes or no to.

As bad as a gunshot wound or large caliber shelling may be, it is important for people to see how much worse chem weapons and consequences are. People need to see why such wide-area, indiscriminate and horrific death was outlawe by the community of nations.

[morningfog]

6. We are not being asked to say yes or no to chemical weapons.

We are asked to say yes or no to militarily entering a violent and brutal civil war with horrible people on both sides.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

17. It is the former rather than the latter

No matter how many times you want to mis-hear what Obama has said on this.

[morningfog]

25. What Obama says on this is bullshit.

His proposed means do not match his stated objectives.

[KittyWampus]

21. So did you agree with Michael Moore about showing pix of the dead children from Newtown?

[morningfog]

26. What does that have to do with the post you responded to?

[joshcryer]

8. The media should've shown those videos on August 22.

They showed a very very small subset of the videos (which would fall mostly in the tame category), for the aforementioned reason that the media didn't want to show the worst of the worst. It's clear that the administration "released" these videos because they felt the media would sign off on it.

Had the world media shown the videos then and there been an outcry then perhaps Russia's tune would be different. Instead for weeks no one covered the actual effects of what happened, instead it was discussions about who did what or why. And now the videos are being manipulated to push a narrative to back unilateral action.

Russia gets to walk scot free from their moral failing on this issue.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

19. I wouldn't say Russia is walking away scot free

Most people and countries can't stand Russia and trust them about as far as they can throw them.

[Warpy]

5. The video at MSNBC showed people being semi revived by being flushed with water

Had it been Sarin, they would have needed quick doses of Atropine or another antidote. I didn't see that happening, people were semi revived by flushing with water, alone.

These are very odd videos for this and a few other reasons.

Something was used on these people and by someone. What it was is unclear as is who did it to them.

Sarin is nasty and persistent stuff. I can't imagine any dictator whose back wasn't against the wall using it on his own land.

[joshcryer]

10. Water breaks the P-F bond in Sarin.

The people who appear in the videos were not directly hit most likely. You die within minutes. They were likely indirectly exposed, either from the gas seeping into their area or from winds or from being first responders.

[Harmony Blue]

14. Military grade Sarin

is much more stronger. Th P-F bond requires a lot more than just water to break it.

[brooklynite]

9. So you're saying they should only show "tasteful" videos of chemical warfare?

[joshcryer]

13. You did not read my post.

In fact I am arguing that they went for the most "tasteful" videos that they could get.

I know the media had access to the playlist I posted here, because they did use videos, initially, that were very tame (many of the initial videos were of the first responders running around, few of them showed the effects of the gas).

Once the war drums were sounded though they decided to show these more graphic videos (but certainly not the most graphic).

I think the media should've released the most graphic and heartbreaking and insane videos initially. What would Russia do then? Say "oh well"? At the minimum Russia would've been very hard pressed to sign off on sanctions (Syria's current sanctions are a joke).

[quinnox]

11. Its obviously the incubator babies all over again

not in terms of being fake, but in terms of being a purely emotional appeal. Hopefully, it won't work.

[KittyWampus]

22. "not in terms of being fake". In other words, it is NOTHING LIKE INCUBATOR BABIES.

[frazzled]

27. Boom!

Thank you for pointing out the level of cuckoo discourse here. The videos of gassing victims are just like the story of the incubator babies, because one really happened and the other completely did not. So they're the same. You have to wonder.

[Tx4obama]

12. The clips of the videos shown on CNN were the ones that CONGRESS has been given...

... they made the news on TV today due to Congress just now receiving a DVD of the videos.

I do NOT think the media is reporting on the 'news' of the DVDs given to Congress to appeal to emotions.

[joshcryer]

15. Nah, the administration is.

I'm not sure if that was clear or not. I know that the administration released the videos (which are publicly available and which the media knows about; I posted a playlist here, I do not recommend watching it).

The media is just playing along. The media knows about these videos and it knew about them 17-18 days ago.

[markpkessinger]

18. Overwrought, emotinoally-laden decision making is part of what led us down a rabbit hole in Iraq n/t

[Doctor_J]

24. Big Media is in the final push for war

the same people who run CNN and so forth will get even richer if they can turn Syria into another Iraq. I don't know if they've burned through the trillion tax dollars they made off Iraq or just want more. They are a sickening bunch, and so are the war cheerleaders among the masses

[Sand Wind]

28. A lot of people want to normalize the use of CW and give Assad permission slip to kill more syrians.

You will be proud of you soon.

[joshcryer]

30. I think you misunderstand my post.

I condemn all acts of chemical weapon use.

[Sand Wind]

31. I'm not talking about yourself, sorry if I give you that impression. Nt

[leftstreet]

29. Does Congress ever see videos of Americans losing their homes?

Videos of people who can't afford to have their teeth repaired?

Videos of people trying to find work?

Homeless vets?

How about a day in the life of a stressed boomer raising a grandkid and caring for an aging parent and finding out his/her checks are bouncing?

[eridani]

32. None of which offer a clue as to who was actually responsible n/t

[joshcryer]

33. The government is responsible for the security of its citizens.

If the rebels or a rogue element did it the government should make its case. I want to see the actual evidence against the government as the US / EU claims, but by the same token, I want to see the evidence against the rebels or rogue elements. Neither side is providing said evidence and the only thing we have concrete are the videos, the Sarin tests, and the MIT report saying that a very large quantity of the stuff was used and it was high grade. That's all we got.

[eridani]

35. Not easy to do this if you are in a civil war and taking a lot of casualties

43% of all casualties, BTW. The US and its allies actually started this civil war by marginalizing the Syrian National Council, a group formed with the principles of nonviolence; non-sectarianism; and no foreign military intervention, setting up a government-in-exile in Turkey, and recruiting, arming and training violent armed groups to pursue regime change.

If the US and UK actually gave a bloody goddam about chemical weapons, they could just quit selling the ingredients to whatever dipshit they want to manipulate.

[joshcryer]

36. Not easy to do if you're thousands of miles away.

And UN inspectors are being shot at after the area had been shelled for three days.

See how this works?

One shouldn't have a disproportionate expectation of evidence for either side. Both sides need to show their evidence. Not blanket claims, show the evidence. If it was a rogue group then condemn them and have them arrested. If it was the rebels release the data proving it.

[eridani]

37. Given that neither side has evidence according to those standards

--presumably you oppose military action based on current evidence?

[joshcryer]

38. The evidence doesn't instruct my views on military action.

I believe it is irrelevant who did it.

I am of the persuasion, like Elizabeth Warren, that Assad or a rogue element in the regime did do it, and I believe there is a strategic logic to doing it, because it's a no lose situation for the regime. Any military offensive against the regime would give the regime a pretext to crack down even harder.

That being said, I agree it is a civil war and civil wars don't end quick unless some outside observer takes sides with one of the sides. In Syria there are many sides, Sunnis, Shia, Christians, Kurds, Alawites, Druze. Sunnis make up the majority population (about 75%), that would be the obvious "side" to pick, but Sunnis also make up the lions share of the opposition, and the ethnic cleansing that would follow would be a nightmare.

I supported Libya because there were three basic groupings and two of them were highly oppressed by Gaddafi (Eastern Libyans were jailed en masse for their religious views, Western Berbers were oppressed culturally and their language was even banned; the elites in Tripoli and Misrata of course would do whatever the oppressed wanted; up until election time which, btw, is what is causing the unreset there now, the MB was not elected and they've become thugs to get power). It helped that one side had already gone on the offensive and had half the country. Syria is an impossible situation and it will not be resolved peacefully nor will it be resolved any time soon.

My ultimate position is that anything be done, it must be done via the UN. I do not think that air strikes of any kind are a "solution." I think first sanctions must be done (no more arms deals, from any side), then diplomacy to get Syria to sign the Chemical Weapons Convention, then we see where it goes from there. Possibly drones on the border of Syria to hit any clandestine arms dealers who decide to sell Saudi bought arms or something (but Syria could easily shoot them down and it's just an idea).

Eventually the bullets will run out. Just an idea, btw, I'm not thinking about strategic answers to this problem, I just came up with it just now and it's hardly fully thought out at all.

[eridani]

39. All much better ideas than a military strike.

BTW, Libya isn't a really great place to be for black Africans--they've been killed and/or driven out.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/special-report-we-all-thought-libya-had-moved-on--it-has-but-into-lawlessness-and-ruin-8797041.html

A little under two years ago, Philip Hammond, the Defence Secretary, urged British businessmen to begin “packing their suitcases” and to fly to Libya to share in the reconstruction of the country and exploit an anticipated boom in natural resources.

Yet now Libya has almost entirely stopped producing oil as the government loses control of much of the country to militia fighters.

Mutinying security men have taken over oil ports on the Mediterranean and are seeking to sell crude oil on the black market. Ali Zeidan, Libya’s Prime Minister, has threatened to “bomb from the air and the sea” any oil tanker trying to pick up the illicit oil from the oil terminal guards, who are mostly former rebels who overthrew Muammar Gaddafi and have been on strike over low pay and alleged government corruption since July.

As world attention focused on the coup in Egypt and the poison gas attack in Syria over the past two months, Libya has plunged unnoticed into its worst political and economic crisis since the defeat of Gaddafi two years ago. Government authority is disintegrating in all parts of the country putting in doubt claims by American, British and French politicians that Nato’s military action in Libya in 2011 was an outstanding example of a successful foreign military intervention which should be repeated in Syria