Russia Calls for Impartial Investigation of Syria Gas Attack

[Purveyor]

Source: Bloomberg

By Henry Meyer and Ilya Arkhipov - Sep 17, 2013

Russia has “serious grounds” to consider last month’s Syrian chemical attack a “provocation” by rebel forces, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said today, calling for a new inquiry to establish who was responsible.

While United Nations inspectors found that poison sarin gas was used in the Aug. 21 attack near Syria’s capital, Damascus, the investigation had no mandate to identify the perpetrators, Lavrov told reporters in Moscow today after meeting his French counterpart, Laurent Fabius.

“We want an impartial, objective and professional investigation of the Aug. 21 events,” Lavrov said. “We have the most serious grounds to consider it a provocation. Some of our partners said dictatorially that only the regime could use such weapons, but the truth must be established.”

Russia has said it suspects the Syrian opposition staged the attack to provoke Western military intervention in the 2 1/2 year conflict, which has killed more than 100,000 people.

Read more: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-17/russia-calls-for-impartial-investigation-of-syria-gas-attack.html

[The Magistrate]

1. Maybe They Can Get Alex Jones, Sir

If they keep this up the diplomatic effort will collapse, which would not be a good thing.

[MADem]

26. Apparently they need to listen to Kenny Rogers.

[Iliyah]

2. As long as the Syrian government keep their agreement and allow

the International Community to destroy the large chemical weapon's arsenal.

[Benton D Struckcheon]

3. The missiles had freakin cyrillic letters on em

I mean, who do they think they're fooling anymore? Numbnuts.

[dkf]

4. The rebels took an area where the regime had been storing the chemical weapons.

No one knows if they were all removed prior or not.

[The Magistrate]

9. Taken Up The 'False Flag' Flag, Have You, Ma'am?

Why am I not surprised?

[Benton D Struckcheon]

10. I think I've said this before,

but this insistent denial of Assad's culpability reminds me of that moment in the Watergate hearings when some Dem Congressman said that if the Republican elephant walked into the hearing room the Republicans would say "That's not an elephant! That's a mouse with a glandular problem!"
Broke the place up at the time. Had to be there, I guess.

[dkf]

19. It's a fact. With 1200 rebel groups fighting for their own goals, this is complicated.

[The Magistrate]

23. Do Not Waste The Effort Trying To Pretend You Have A Seriously Considered Position On This, Ma'am

There are some people who do arrive by some actual consideration at 'false flag' nonesense; I know they are mistaken, mind, but they do put some thought and effort into the thing. You and I, and just about everyone else here, knows that you pick positions simply by cross-referencing what will provoke heated response and what will present a line possibly damaging to President Obama and the Democratic Party in general.

[arewenotdemo]

29. That seems like rather a personal attack to me.

There are actually quite a few of us that aren't buying the company line on this.

[ConcernedCanuk]

64. "There are actually quite a few of us that aren't buying the company line on this."

.
.
.

and I'm one of them.

Well said.



CC

[arewenotdemo]

114. Right there with you, CC.

[Ash_F]

31. Do we even know if the victims were pro or anti government at this point

Hard to say "false flag" or not without knowing who's side the victims were on.

[The Magistrate]

32. Your Effort At Comedy Is Appreciated, Sir

We can all use a bit of a laugh in these trying times....

[Ash_F]

33. Do you have an answer to that question or not?

I wasn't trying to be funny. I haven't seen much info on that thanks to our useless media.

[The Magistrate]

34. Both Impact Zones, Sir, Are Considered Rebel Controlled Areas

[Ash_F]

35. OK got an investigated source?

That does not mean the victims accepted or supported the rebellion. What was the ethnic/factional make-up? I was hoping the UN report would establish this but it looks like they side-stepped it purposefully.

[The Magistrate]

36. Look At The Map Below In No. 14, Sir

I regret I cannot tell you the name of anyone's grandmother....

[Ash_F]

37. Then you don't have enough info to make that assertion with any level of certainty.

For all you know the victims were people that would not go along with the rebellion, or were of one of the minority groups that have been persecuted by a faction that has become increasingly homogenized.

[The Magistrate]

38. What I Do Not Have, Sir, Is More Time To Feed You Scraps Of The Attention You Crave

I will only comment that people do not usually set out to portray themselves as ignorant and foolish, but I would have to say you make a good job of it....

[Ash_F]

39. That wasn't very constructive. /nt

[Eddie Haskell]

56. Yes Sir!

Sir.

[SunSeeker]

50. LOL. I feel that way about so many posts here.

You've got a way with words, Magistrate.

[karynnj]

53. How do you figure that?

The area was a rebel controlled area - most of the people supported the rebels there. The gas was not targeted to individuals. You could make the assumption that the make up of the victims in a small area are representative of the people in the area.

[leveymg]

14. No. That's the smaller 140mm type. The 333mm improvised rocket killed almost all the victims in a

different neighborhood 16 kms to the east. Those larger improvised rockets are of unidentified origins, and the UN report indicates they were launched from nearly due east, which would be Jobar District, adjacent to the targeted neighborhood where the vast majority of the fatalities occurred.

The smaller 140mm rockets killed about 100 people according HRW. The bigger improvised rockets that hit the eastern suburbs of Zamala and Ein Tarma killed upwards of 700 people. Nobody seems to be able to explain who built them.

The HRW report also has a significant map which shows clearly that there were two target areas, not 12 as the Kerry Report claimed, and that entirely different types of ordinance was used against the neighborhood in the western part of Damascus hit with 140mm standard military rockets.


HRW Report Silent About State Dept. Allegation that All Attacks Launched from Regime-Controlled Territory


1) HRW Map of Targeted Damascus Neighborhoods (highlighted in Red)


One interesting aspect of the HRW report is that while the authors cite witnesses as stating that the smaller, more accurate rockets were observed to have come from the direction of Syrian military bases, the report is silent as to where the larger, deadlier improvised rockets were launched. The UN report now makes it clear that these bigger rockets were launched from a close-in location due-west of that sight, (which is the contested or rebel-controlled Jobar District where government forces found rebel chemical weapons stockpiles in July.)

[Benton D Struckcheon]

17. Quoting from Mr Moses

It was also possible to find the precise location of one of the munitions fired, and deduce it was fired from the north, the location of 155th brigade missile base, and related sites (detailed here).

This is the evidence that the Syrian government was capable of the attack, and had a history of using the munitions linked to the attack. As for evidence of Syrian opposition responsibility, that appears rather thin on the ground. You have claims the attacks were faked, the victims being Alawite hostages from Latakia, that were somehow driven through hundreds of miles of contested and government controlled territory to Damascus. There's claims that this was some sort of accident involving Saudi supplied chemical weapons, which fails to explain how one incident could effect two separate areas. Other claims centre around the opposition having sarin, based off reports in Turkey in May, where it was reported Jabhat al-Nusra members were arrested with sarin. The "sarin" was later reported to be anti-freeze, and only this week some of the members are being prosecuted for trying to make sarin, having only a shopping list of ingredients, rather than actual sarin. It seems to me, that compared to the evidence of government responsibility for the attacks, the evidence of opposition responsibility seems very poor.

The first part is on the rocket - note where he says it was launched from - and the rest is on the "evidence" of rebel responsibility. If you really don't think what he presents is enough - it's quite exhaustive - you can always talk to him, via his blog or on Twitter. He's very responsive.
Nothing will ever be certain. But the preponderance of the evidence is quite conclusive.

[leveymg]

20. No. You are again talking about the smaller 140mm rockets, not the ones that killed most in east

Damascus. Look at the map I just posted. It's clear that Moses is referring to the standard 140mm military rockets that may have come from the military airfield or the 4th Armoured Division base in southwestern Damascus, which is almost due north of the neighborhood of Motamaya targeted with seven or eight 140mm rounds. These smaller Russian-made rockets contain only 2 liters of sarin versus upwards of 50 for the improvised 333mm type.

[Benton D Struckcheon]

21. Stop being obtuse.

Go read his stuff. He calls it an UMLACA: for Unidentified something or other. He is very specifically talking about that 333mm rocket, and he very carefully lays out the details of its construction, and then shows videos of the Syrian army launching that very rocket.

[leveymg]

22. He can call it what he wants, but nowhere does he establish who actually built and launched 333mm

rockets that hit Eastern Damascus that night. I just reread that thread at Brown Moses and neither he, nor the UN, nor HRW, nor the US or France have come up with any real evidence about who built and launched the larger weapons on 8/21.

What you have seen are videos taken by the opposition or some third party that show a test launch of a prototype 333. Judging from the lighting and the cool weather - shirtsleaves down - I would guess the test vidoe with the big red Mercedes transporters and the man in charge in a white shirt and his helpers aboard the launch truck (red and nlue shirts, not military who mostly stayed out of the way) may have been taken in the early morning in late Spring. Those rockets also appear to my eye to be slightly longer than the 6'6" rockets used on 8/21. The High Explosive version does have a longer nose cone.

Also, you should know, al Qaeda among many militia groups have rockets that are virtually identical to those used on 8/21.

al-Qaeda multiple IRAM launcher (a 4 foot long rocket):

The rockets remains recovered in East Damascus are virtually identical to an improvised IRAM, his term, that Brown Moses identified in June as being used and introduced by Hezbollah. See, http://brown-moses.blogspot.com/2013/06/diy-weapons-in-syria-hezbollah-deploys.html It seems to me that Brown Moses appears to be changing his tune about the origins of these things and is perhaps embellishing a bit.

IRAM Used Inside Syria by Militia Prior to 8/21


The HRW report and other new evidence do not support the conclusion drawn that the Syrian regime controlled all the gas rockets launched that night. While video has been presented that the military has tested or had demonstrated this type of rocket, by no means is it established beyond a reasonable doubt that it was units under orders of the civilian authorities that actually carried out the attack on Zamalka using improvised rockets.

It appears, contrary to the assertions made, that a lot of people in the Mideast besides the Syrian military have cobbled together their own IRAMs and could have both the means and motive to have used them in Eastern Damascus that terrible night. Details of the HRW report raise additional questions about the accuracy of key parts of the State Department report, including the location and number of targets, and that the Syrian military, alone, had the means to carry out the 8/21 attacks.

[The Magistrate]

30. This Is What The U.N. Report States On The Ein Tarma Trajectory, Sir

"The munition related to this impact site by observed and measured characteristics indicatively matches a 330mm artillery rocket. The projectile, in the last stages of its trajectory, hit the surface in an area of earthy, relatively soft ground where the shaft/engine of the projectile remained dug in, undisturbed till investigated.

"The said shaft/engine, presenting no form of lateral bending, pointed precisely in a bearing of 285 degrees that, again, represent a reverse azimuth to the trajectory followed by the rocket in its flight. It can be, thus, concluded that the original azimuth of the rocket trajectory had an azimuth of 105 degrees, in an East/Southeast trajectory."

There is nothing about being fired from a close in location due west. In fact, a bearing of 105 degrees is pretty near East by Southeast, nearly equidistant between east and southeast, and far off due west.

On your map above, a line traced on the reciprocal West by Northwest line leads directly to the item labeled 'Republican Guard Base, Brigade 104'. It seems to be situated seven or eight kilometers from the impact zone, at its nearest boundary.

[Douglas Carpenter]

40. I agree that this chemical weapons attack was almost certainly the actions of the Syrian

military. Whether President Bashar al- Assad personally gave the order - is questionable, I suppose. But even if he didn't - the attack would have most likely been carried out by people operating under the umbrella of his his authority with only the construction of plausible deniability to shield the President.

But all of that aside, is it not the case that an out and out military victory for the rebels would almost certainly create a disasterious situation for millions of Syrians - especially from the minority communities and would likely mean either a protracted and extremely violent conflict or a new authoritarian government that would be even more hostile to America's national interest and even more hostile to their Israeli neighbor?

[The Magistrate]

44. My Personal View, Sir

Is that the only real U.S. interest in this is that whichever side emerges victories does not then control large stocks of military grade nerve gas.

I see no reason diplomatic efforts under way now could not produce this result, and am certainly willing to give this a chance to bear fruit. The Russian comment above is certainly discomfiting, but it could well be the usual sort of boiler-plate someone says to seem supportive of a client, and not meant as a serious claim of fact or even of policy.

[Douglas Carpenter]

48. I would interpret the Russian comment as typical political blah, blah blah

a bit like a criminal defense attorney who knows that their client is guilty - they may still throw out claims that attempts to cast even a little bit of doubt on the prosecutors case.

If there is a massive ethnic cleansing following the collapse of the Assad regime - to the extent that regional stability is considered U.S. national interest - I think it is fair to say that it will be destabilizing to the region. On the other hand I cannot envision a scenario where the Assad regime can reconsolidate the rule it once exercised over the whole country only a few years ago. I don't see a pretty solution and I cannot imagine that U.S. involvement will either alleviate humanitarian concerns or be in American national interest except to the extent that with Russian cooperation the concern about chemical weapons can be dealt with.

[The Magistrate]

51. I Am Pretty Close To The 'Hands Off Syria' Camp, Myself, Sir

I do not object to conveyance of arms, particularly not if done with some discretion and plausible deniability, but consider overt action to be most unwise in present circumstances. I expect there will be wholesale massacre whichever side wins, and any outside power who obviously made one side win will own what it does.

[leveymg]

43. The longest observed flight of the 333 is 2 miles.

These things are by all accounts very inaccurate, except at close range. They landed fairly closely grouped in Ein Tamara, so they were launched fairly close to the target. I'm working off of Google Maps, can anyone post a nice detailed map of central Damascus?

[The Magistrate]

45. Hardly Definitive, Sir

[leveymg]

46. But, it's the best circumstantial conclusion we can draw. Try just north of Abbasids Stadium at

the 2 mile mark and work your way east back the next mile along the 105 degree east by south-east line. The launch site will be somewhere in there. Got a map of Damascus (I'm working off of Google maps) that can be posted?

[The Magistrate]

49. Or Perhaps, Sir, A Bit Beyond It

The range data is very, very weak.

[leveymg]

52. The October War Panorama is just north of there, but it's not the right angle. More like 140"

What do you think?

That was identified in initial reports (The Guardian) as a site where rockets were being fired that night. But, again the angle doesn't line up with 105 degrees. But, it's not that far off, either.

[leveymg]

55. Here's the report from The Guardian 8/22, last paragraph:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/22/syria-deaths-strike-sarin-alleged-chemical

Eyewitnesses have described the missiles and rockets launched in the attack as having come from two areas of Damascus which are both under regime control – the Mezze airbase, south-west of central Damascus, and the October War Panorama military museum in the city.

I fold.

[arewenotdemo]

65. Wait a minute.

How, exactly, can "eyewitnesses" to a barrage at night discern the direction of the attack?

And how do they know that the rockets recovered actually contained sarin?

[leveymg]

100. These are rockets that leave a nice bright trail of their line of travel from the launch site to the

point where their fuel is used up. True artillery rockets glide to their terminal destination from that point, but these things are so unaerodynamic that they just tumble and fall nose first to their target. They have a relatively short range and are very inaccurate. The 333s are Improvised Rocket Assisted Munitions (IRAMs), not real artillery rockets like the smaller 140 mm rocket that were allegedly used that night against the other location in the southwestern suburbs.

[joshcryer]

93. Source?

[leveymg]

99. There's only one video that shows one of the 333s launch and impact - the distance was @2 miles

Go to Brown Moses. There is a video of what appears to be one of these rockets fired from the Qadam RR station that impacted at the outskirts of a desert area to the NW of the city about 2 miles away. You can see the hills behind, which are to the NW of the identified launch site. That's posted at the Brown Moses site: http://brown-moses.blogspot.ca/ I calculated the direction of flight from looking at a topographic map of Damascus and the distance from the train station to the edge of town on Googlemaps.

You can also also see the rocket veer to the right shortly after launch which shows how poor its flight characteristics are.



Unfortunately, the video is edited and all we see is the takeoff and what appears to be the impact.

To call them "industrially made," as does HRW, is a stretch - they literally appear to be made of pipes and plumbing fixtures of the type you can buy at Home Depot. The warhead looks like a truck muffler that is bolted on top with a flange. Here's a video of one being disassembled by a rebel group so they can scavenge the solid rocket fuel inside:

Anyway,in the final analysis, while the evidence is hardly conclusive of who built and launched these things, circumstantially -- after exploring the alternatives -- I am ready to acknowledge that it could have been some unit of the Syrian military, without entirely ruling out the possibility that some other party could have replicated these things and/or been responsible for the launch.

There are actually many possibilities for who is responsible, including an unauthorized launch by a faction of the military or a false launch order fed into the system by a party other than the President or Minister of Defense.

[RiverNoord]

58. Um... Some excerpts from a HRW article yesterday...

"The rocket systems identified by the UN as used in the attack – truck-launched 330mm rockets with around 50 to 60 liters of Sarin, as well as 140mm Soviet-produced rockets carrying a smaller Sarin-filled warhead – are both known to be in the arsenal of the Syrian armed forces. They have never been seen in rebel hands. The amount of Sarin used in the attack – hundreds of kilograms, according to Human Rights Watch’s calculations – also indicates government responsibility for the attack, as opposition forces have never been known to be in possession of such significant amounts of Sarin."

http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/09/16/dispatches-yes-it-was-sarin-un-report-says-now-what

Seriously, the conflict is a goddamn mess, but the idea that some rebel group managed to launch numerous 330 mm rockets each filled with up to 50-60 liters of Sarin is absurd. If they had that capability, they would have used the damn things on regime troops. And handling and filling Sarin warheads is not a task that just anyone can perform. It requires the right equipment and training, or else there's a very good chance that those attempting to load or launch will just end up killing themselves and a rather large number of people in their general vicinity.

[azurnoir]

15. Really they did? or did someone claim that?

not to mention if the letters were Cyrillic why weren't the numbers ?

You do realize that Cyrillic numbers are different too, right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrillic_numerals

[Benton D Struckcheon]

18. No one "claimed" anything.

Read the UN report. It has the engravings on one of the missiles used reproduced, some of which are clearly Cyrillic.

[azurnoir]

24. I've seen those pictures

they were too blurry IMO to make out much of the writing, however the numerals were clear enough to make out that they were 'standard' script, not to mention that the UK has already admitted that they sold Syria some CW's

[Benton D Struckcheon]

27. Appendix 5, page 18

Not pictures. The letters themselves, obviously transcribed by someone.

[azurnoir]

42. saw it yesterday n/t

[Turborama]

66. Got a link to UK admitting that they sold Syria some CWs?

Thanks in advance.

[azurnoir]

68. here ya go took me a whole 5 minutes though

Britain sent poison gas chemicals to Assad: Proof that the UK delivered Sarin agent to Syrian regime

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023622082

[Turborama]

69. Except, that's not what happened.

1stly, they weren't "CWs" (chemical weapons), they were chemicals.

2ndly, the company (not "the UK", mind you) may have "sold" these chemicals but they were not "delivered".

On 2 September 2013, the UK Department for Business, Innovation & Skills (BIS) issued the following statement on export licenses for sodium fluoride and potassium fluoride to Syria:

The UK government operates one of the most rigorous arms export control regimes in the world, and has been at the forefront of implementing an international sanctions regime on Syria.

In January 2012, we issued licenses for sodium fluoride and potassium fluoride. The exporter and recipient company demonstrated that the chemicals were for a legitimate civilian end use – which was for metal finishing of aluminium profiles used in making aluminium showers and aluminium window frames.

The licences were revoked following a revision to the sanctions regime which came into force on 17 June 2012 and the chemicals were not exported to Syria . This shows that the system works and reflects changes made by this government to ensure that the system of export controls is robust, responsive and effective in upholding the highest international standards.

http://www.internationaltradecomplianceupdate.com/?entry=938

3rdly, what's that go to do with the discussion upthread about who manufactured the missiles, anyway?

[azurnoir]

71. you asked I replied

sorry thee reply did not suit you, the rest I'm almost sorry to say was predictable entirely predictable

[Turborama]

74. You said that the UK delivered chemical weapons to Syria, and were wrong

This meme that's been created by the media that the UK sent chemical weapons to Syria is as wrong as the incubator story in Kuwait was, and deserves similar demolition.

Not sure why you have to turn it into a personal attack, but there it is.

[azurnoir]

75. you lean too heavily on a technicality which was in part what was predictable

I said the UK, per need you chose in interpret that as the UK government rather than a company, which delivered the kay, I do understand

The links provided showed what IMO was necessary, period

[Turborama]

77. The important "technicality" I'm clarifying is that *nothing* was "delivered" by anyone.

Whatever spin the media has given to what these chemicals could be used for, they were not sent to Syria.

The link you provided says the same thing:

The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills insisted that although the licences were granted to an unnamed UK chemical company in January 2012, the substances were not sent to Syria before the permits were eventually revoked last July in response to tightened European Union sanctions.

The definition of what you meant by "UK" is actually a minor side issue to me.

[azurnoir]

78. They were delivered between 2004 and 2010 as per my link to a DU thread

Between July 2004 and May 2010 the Government issued five export licences to two companies, allowing them to sell Syria sodium fluoride, which is used to make sarin.

The Government last night admitted for the first time that the chemical was delivered to Syria – a clear breach of international protocol on the trade of dangerous substances that has been condemned as ‘grossly irresponsible’.


The sales were made at a time when President Bashar Assad was strongly suspected to be stockpiling the chemical weapons that have caused an international crisis.

The UK firms delivered sodium fluoride to a Syrian cosmetics company for what they claim were legitimate purposes. But intelligence experts believe President Assad’s regime uses such companies to divert chemicals into its weapons programme.

[Turborama]

82. OK, I didn't go to Mail's link, I went to The Independent. However, sodium fluoride is not a "CW"

...it is obviously a chemical.

So, if it can be proved that the provider of the licences and/or the UK companies that sold Sodium Chloride to the Syrian cosmetics company prior to the civil war knew it was likely to be used to make sarin and it actually was then whoever is responsible needs to be held accountable. It would also prove that Assad would do whatever it takes to build his 1,000 metric ton stockpile of chemical weapons.

How are you connecting all this to the rebels?



Editing to add these damning statements in the Mail's article:

Intelligence expert Richard Kemp, a former member of the Government’s COBRA emergency committee, said last night: ‘President Assad would undoubtedly have diverted legitimately exported supplies of sodium fluoride in order to make chemical weapons.

‘He would have absolutely no qualms about doing this, and his practice was well known to British diplomats and our intelligence agencies. In this light, it is grossly irresponsible of BIS to have approved these licences from 2004 to 2010.’

=snip=

Professor Alastair Hay, a toxicology expert at Leeds University, said: ‘The Government’s approval of sodium fluoride sales to Syria during a period when it was widely suspected the regime was stockpiling dangerous substances is deeply disturbing.

'This was a serious mistake on BIS’s part as while sodium fluoride has a multitude of benign uses, such as toothpaste, it remains a key ingredient in the manufacture of sarin. Quite simply, you need fluoride to make sarin.

[azurnoir]

84. the links say the chemicals went to Syria I'm not connecting them to anyone

it was just a point much like my stance on the UN taking Russia up on an investigation

[Turborama]

85. Ok, I'm just asking about why this was brought up in the 1st place

Genuinely curious as to what it has to do with the discussion about the writing on the missiles proving one way or the other who did it?

I've seen those pictures

they were too blurry IMO to make out much of the writing, however the numerals were clear enough to make out that they were 'standard' script, not to mention that the UK has already admitted that they sold Syria some CW's

[azurnoir]

86. It ghas everything to do with entertaining Russia's request for an investigation

which no one on this thread save me seems to want, and why they don't want it, which seems to be because Russia does, when Russia didn't it was the reverse

[Turborama]

87. What does a UK company sending a chemical to Syria between 2004 and 2010 have to do with it?

The discussion was about whether the rockets prove who did it or not, and sales of "CW" from the UK were thrown into the mix.

Regardless, if you really want to link it to the Russian belated request for an investigation, what does a UK company sending a chemical to Syria between 2004 and 2010 have to do with it?


In answer to your other contention, it's very simple...


I imagine everyone here would have wanted it as soon as possible when the evidence was less likely to be compromised - it so happens at that time the Russians and Syrians were saying no.

Now, nearly a month later, the Russians and Syrians are saying yes it is too late and I for one am extremely suspicious considering up until now they were so against it.

[azurnoir]

88. It was part of the initial comment I made you pursued that angle yourself

my comment had to do with why should we pursue the investigation Russia first did not want but now does

[Turborama]

90. I'm trying to understand why you included it in that comment about the writing on the missiles

So, this comment was about why we should pursue the investigation the Russian's want?

I've seen those pictures

they were too blurry IMO to make out much of the writing, however the numerals were clear enough to make out that they were 'standard' script, not to mention that the UK has already admitted that they sold Syria some CW's

You're not answering any of my questions so I might as well stop asking them.

[azurnoir]

91. Is that what your trying to do? I see

that was in answer to a comment about the writing being in Cyrillic.

And now a question from me are you phishing for someway to pin me as supporting Assad? I do not nor do I 100% believe either the Wests side or the Russians

[Turborama]

92. Yes, it is, and I'm going to have to conclude I don't think I'll ever get an answer that makes sense

And no, I'm not trying to "pin" anything on you. I don't care who you support.

(Edited to fix typo)

[azurnoir]

94. I'm sorry I disappointed eta

sorry also that I can not answer in a way that you wish

you've been interrogating me for nearly 4 hours now, I'm not really sure what your digging for

[Turborama]

96. "Interrogating"? LOL, ok then.

[azurnoir]

104. well what do you call when someone questions you?

you've asked question after question including why I answered your questions

[Turborama]

105. When you keep asking the same question and don't get an answer that makes sense?

I call that: 'hitting a brick wall'.

[azurnoir]

106. you asked numerous questions and which I answered

but not with what you had in mind apparently, I did not reach that conclusion for hours shame on me

[Turborama]

108. I'm not talking about anything other than the last remaining question & the answers don't make sense

The question does stem from a post you made at the very beginning of this to and fro, though (as can be seen below in your quote within in the excerpt boxes I provided):


Me: How are you connecting all this to the rebels?


You: the links say the chemicals went to Syria I'm not connecting them to anyone

it was just a point much like my stance on the UN taking Russia up on an investigation


Me: Ok, I'm just asking about why this was brought up in the 1st place

Genuinely curious as to what it has to do with the discussion about the writing on the missiles proving one way or the other who did it?

I've seen those pictures

they were too blurry IMO to make out much of the writing, however the numerals were clear enough to make out that they were 'standard' script, not to mention that the UK has already admitted that they sold Syria some CW's

You: It ghas everything to do with entertaining Russia's request for an investigation

which no one on this thread save me seems to want, and why they don't want it, which seems to be because Russia does, when Russia didn't it was the reverse


Me: What does a UK company sending a chemical to Syria between 2004 and 2010 have to do with it?

The discussion was about whether the rockets prove who did it or not, and sales of "CW" from the UK were thrown into the mix.

Regardless, if you really want to link it to the Russian belated request for an investigation, what does a UK company sending a chemical to Syria between 2004 and 2010 have to do with it?

In answer to your other contention, it's very simple...

I imagine everyone here would have wanted it as soon as possible when the evidence was less likely to be compromised - it so happens at that time the Russians and Syrians were saying no.

Now, nearly a month later, the Russians and Syrians are saying yes it is too late and I for one am extremely suspicious considering up until now they were so against it.


You: It was part of the initial comment I made you pursued that angle yourself

my comment had to do with why should we pursue the investigation Russia first did not want but now does


Me: I'm trying to understand why you included it in that comment about the writing on the missiles

So, this comment was about why we should pursue the investigation the Russian's want?

I've seen those pictures

they were too blurry IMO to make out much of the writing, however the numerals were clear enough to make out that they were 'standard' script, not to mention that the UK has already admitted that they sold Syria some CW's

You're not answering any of my questions so I might as well stop asking them.


You: Is that what your trying to do? I see

that was in answer to a comment about the writing being in Cyrillic.



-------------------------------


As anyone can see, I never got an answer that makes sense to the same question I asked multiple times.


ETA:

One very last time, and as simply as I can put it...


You made this comment in the context of a discussion about whether they were the rebels' missiles or the Assad regime's.

"not to mention that the UK has already admitted that they sold Syria some CW's"

The question is: What has the selling of chemicals from the UK to Syria between 2004 and 2010 got to do with the previous discussion about who made the missiles that were used last month?

Your answer seems to be: (It has something to do with) "why should we pursue the investigation Russia first did not want but now does"

Which does not make sense.

[azurnoir]

116. no my answer is that we should pursue the investigation

which I already said, but the last word is yours of course

and of course Syria could never had made Sarin from chemicals it received 3 years ago or could it have?

you started this out by challenging me to provide a link to the UK's sales of chemicals to Syria and the wording made it quite obvious you thought I could not, you were wrong ay least in part, as as was I, the UK sold the components, which is what led to this

[EX500rider]

118. "Syria sodium fluoride, which is used to make sarin."

Sodium fluoride is used to fluoridate drinking water, toothpaste often contains sodium fluoride to prevent cavities, also sodium fluoride is used as a cleaning agent. Sodium fluoride also finds use in desilylation in organic synthesis.
In medical imaging, sodium fluoride is used in positron emission tomography (PET).



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium_fluoride

[RZM]

70. Russia uses the same numerals as the rest of the world

The old Cyrillic numerals went out centuries ago.

[azurnoir]

72. really okay then

I do understand the extraordinary need for some here for Russia to be evil entire;ly evil athe past 22 years must have been so very hard, now you have both to fill your needs, the old bad guys "Ruskies and the neeew bad guys Muslims Arabs which ever suit your need joined at the hip in convenient package, must be bliss of a sort

[Comrade Grumpy]

5. I'm open to an impartial investigation.

I will concede that the preponderance of the evidence seems to point to regime forces, but this was just too good to be true for the rebels. They desperately wanted US military intervention on their side, and very nearly got it--until the Russians went and screwed things up by coming up with the chemical weapons disarmament plan.

And the US has not, as far as I know, actually presented its evidence, merely asserted it.

And sadly, after a half-century of listening to my government lie about foreign policy matters, I don't trust 'em anymore. Sorry.

[Benton D Struckcheon]

7. Impartial investigation,

done before the UN: http://brown-moses.blogspot.com/2013/09/who-was-responsible-for-august-21st.html

The information is out there, if you care to look for it. If not, not. Your choice.

[Comrade Grumpy]

11. And the results of that impartial investigation?

"This is the evidence that the Syrian government was capable of the attack, and had a history of using the munitions linked to the attack."

He doesn't say the regime did it. He's careful enough not to say that.

[Benton D Struckcheon]

13. He never would.

He simply points out that the evidence the rebels had anything to do with it is very thin. His tweets, if you follow them, show a higher level of annoyance with the people trying to pin it on the rebels, because their "evidence" is crap.

[SunSeeker]

6. If Russia really wanted the perpetrators identified, the investigation would not have been limited..

The only way this investigation got UN approval is that it was just to confirm what everyone already knew, that CW was used, and that they were NOT going to identify who launched it. Yes, it was nice that they confirmed it was sarin, but anyone with eyes could confirm that CW were used. Russia is so full of shit on this. Why did they wait until now to call for identifying the perpetrators, after all the sarin has dissipated? And since when is a UN inspection team not considered "objective." Who the fuck does Russia have in mind as an "objective" investigator?

[Comrade Grumpy]

12. Russia has been blaming the rebels from the beginning.

[SunSeeker]

47. Yes, and never had any evidence to back it up. Now they suddenly want an "objective" investigation.

It's bullshit. They pulled the same thing in Bosnia, claiming the people were massacring themselves. Russia tried to defend Milosevich just like they're doing with Assad. If Russia had just stayed out of it, maybe Milosevish would have given up sooner and the poor civilians of Serbia would not have gotten bombed by Clinton.

[Turborama]

67. ^THIS^

Is exactly what I was thinking when reading the headline and the article.

Russia - Syria's biggest arms dealer, investor and bodyguard - has blocked even watered down condemnations of Assad's war crimes from the get-go. They blocked the UN inspectors from investigating the culprit of the mass murder via gas of over a thousand civilians (including hundreds of children) and now the report has come confirming something which was plainly obvious they want an investigation into the culprit? By an "objective" organization?

They are members of the UN, have access to all the details of everything they do, do not dispute the latest report and consider it objective enough to continue that membership.

Sorry, not buying any of this new desire for an investigation to find the culprit.

The question has to be asked - after decades of human rights violations against civilians and seeing him relentlessly shoot and shell them indiscriminately for 2 years, resulting in over 100,000 deaths and millions of refugees - does anyone really think that Assad would invest so much into owning 1,000 tonnes of chemical weapons if he wasn't prepared to use them?

I think the most likely scenario is those areas on the outskirts of Damascus were proving to be too troublesome for him and he wanted to ”cleanse” them.

As he has got/is getting away with so much for so long plus Russia having his back all that time, and still, he would think he could get away with it even if it was obvious it was him. Sadly, it's looking like he was correct in that assessment.

[azurnoir]

76. well question then

iuf the outcome of such an investigation is so very assured, why not let it happen? What exactly is the problem here, Assad will still be giving up his CW, so where's the harm?

[Turborama]

79. Because, due to Russia's original insistence there should be no such investigation, it's too late?

Enough time has passed for anyone to plant/remove whatever evidence they do/don't want to be found.

Plus Assad shelled the area after the mass murder took place, in a likely attempt to kill remaining witnesses and destroy the evidence. If he wasn't responsible and cares about the victims, why would he shell it instead of letting the Red Cross get in to help the survivors?

[azurnoir]

80. Time had also passed before the UN inspectors arrived

they noted it in their report, myself I don't see the harm, it'll perhaps satisfy the Russians and lend itself towards the appearance of fairness on the part of the West

[Turborama]

83. Sarin residue can remain in soil and clothes for weeks.

Last edited Wed Sep 18, 2013, 04:20 AM - Edit history (1)

Unfortunately, the evidence that could prove who did it will be well gone by now and any "evidence" that is there could have been planted, the whole area has been compromised - hence the air quotes.

[azurnoir]

81. also I would not be in favor of allowing Russia alone to do this investigation

and in fact I would also keep the US and France out of it too, both have an agenda I for one do not believe that the US has completely given up the idea of using military force against Syria and neither has France, Russia is Syria's ally so none of the above are exactly fair arbitrators

[wisteria]

8. BS n/t

[azurnoir]

16. I can see this going well

and judging from the responses here Russia has already been discounted as an arbitrator in this, well as now blamed for being the source of the weapons themselves, interesting indeed

[karynnj]

54. Russia can no more by the arbitrator than the US can - they are as connected

to one side as we are to the other --- and I KNOW you would not trust an American team.

[azurnoir]

60. no I don't trust either side

both sides have an agenda but it seems the is much (p)outrage over Russia asking for an investigation, one wonders exactly what is the problem, Russia did not say we will investigate did they, seems some don't want anything but the US's word, my how things change depending whether it's a D or an R following the POTUS name

[karynnj]

62. The rest of the world wanted an investigation in August

Who do you think blocked it?

[azurnoir]

63. well Russia of course

the US was too busy attempting to promote a military strike

oh and from 8/28

Syria: US sees 'no avenue forward' to 'meaningful action' by UN – as it happened

• US appears ready to act without UN imprimatur
• British parliamentary rift complicates US timeline
• State department cites 'continued Russian opposition'
• Damascus residents stockpile food

http://www.theguardian.com/global/2013/aug/28/syria-weapons-inspectors-resume-investigation-live

[karynnj]

101. where in your bullet points is Russia wanted an investigation?

[azurnoir]

103. go back and read your own comment my subject line was in reply to that

get back to me afterwards okay?

[karynnj]

107. ok - but that defeats your case - you agree that Russia blocked

an investigation. The rest of your post ignores that use of the UN - for all but ascertaining the obvious - that gas was used - was inoperable due to Russia's willingness to block anything.

[azurnoir]

115. The US also was not enthused about the UN which was the point of my addition

[karynnj]

117. What Kerry said was that because the UN was limited to

determining what everyone already knew - that there was a chemical attack - there was nothing in their report that would change the US opinion that there had been an attack. As it is the UN report went further than it was expected to and backs the western view that it was likely to have been Assad.

Kerry actually spoke to Syria's foreign minister the day after the attack - calling for him to help the UN immediately investigate -- instead the UN had to wait and Syria shelled that area for 4 days.

As to going to the UN - of course the US was not enthused - Russia was on record that they would block ANYTHING in response to this - and they denied it even happened.

[another_liberal]

25. Any unbiased person who is concerned about both chemical weapons and avoiding war must agree.

Only those who have vested interest in one side of the Syrian civil war could possibly object to such a much needed investigation. Those who complain and obstruct this effort can only be afraid of the truth being revealed.

Just consider: If Assad is found to be the guilty party, Russia could no longer block Security Council sanctions against Syria without losing all pretense to international influence and standing. Those who are certain Assad ordered the gas attack are being given a gift by this announcement; that is, if they are really so completely certain.

[arewenotdemo]

28. Yeah, it's very interesting that the Russians want ANY investigation....

considering that President Obama has "undeniable" evidence.

Almost like they don't believe him or Kerry!

They just need to LOOK AT THE VIDEOS, like President Obama instructed us!!!

[karynnj]

57. Which countries blocked the UN from having the responsibility to investigate blame?

[another_liberal]

97. Is that a reason to not do an investigation now?

Lets see what they find out. Are you so hot to start bombing that you aren't even curious?

[karynnj]

102. Bombing? The US wants the chemical weapons out - and that is what they

agreed to. Obama put any attack plans on hold to complete the diplomacy -- and the diplomacy has been successful and could potentially accomplish more than a strike would to accomplish Obama's goals.

What you are missing is that the UN report is what triggered Russia's request - because it makes their client state look bad. I think an investiigation of blame would be great - it will be needed if charges are brought to the ICC.

However, the more important path is to continue to work to get the chemical weapons out - and that is just as true no matter who used them.

[arewenotdemo]

110. Is "client state" anything like "ally"?

Or can only the MORAL nations of the West possess actual allies?

[joshcryer]

41. They just don't want anyone using their common sense.

[another_liberal]

98. That anything like a "Gut Feeling?"

That's how the last administration ran its foreign policy. I thought we had left that behind in 2009?

[joshcryer]

113. Nope, simply assess the evidence without bias.

If you don't believe in climate change and conclude that climate change doesn't exist, you are not assessing the available information.

Likewise if you assess that the rebels did it after 350 liters were used and after the targets were wholly in rebel controlled territory and that the area was bombarded indiscriminately, admittedly, by the Syrian regime, for days after the event, then you aren't thinking rationally.

[BlueToTheBone]

59. Wouldn't that be the UN? n/t

[pampango]

95. Yes. It is the UN Commission of Inquiry on Syria. While Assad has not allowed them into Syria,

it was created in 2011 by the Security Council to issue periodic reports on who is guilty of war crimes and human rights abuses in Syria. My guess is they are using the evidence brought back by the weapons inspectors to put together a report as to which party is responsible for the chemical weapons attack on August 21. I don't know what their timetable is for releasing their next report.

[ronnie624]

109. All political power centers operate with ulterior motives, including the UN.

The UN agenda and actions always mesh with that of it's most powerful members, hence the lack of any vociferous outcries and careful investigations of US atrocities, which are a million times worse than anything the Syrian government has ever done.

[arewenotdemo]

111. Agreed. Chomsky detailed some of those atrocities on NPR

in reference to Obama's claim that "for nearly seven decades, the United States has been the anchor of global security".

http://www.democracynow.org/2013/9/11/chomsky_instead_of_illegal_threat_to

Of course, Obama is simply attempting to stabilize Syria.

That is why he just yesterday found it necessary to unilaterally waive the federal law prohibiting the supply of lethal aid to terrorist groups.

http://antiwar.com/blog/2013/09/17/obama-waives-ban-on-arming-terrorists-so-he-can-aid-syrian-rebels/

[ronnie624]

112. Thanks for the links. n/t

[geek tragedy]

61. Just like OJ pursued the real killers of his wife. nt

[SunSeeker]

89. Great analogy.

[azurnoir]

73. Hilarious in cynical way

no one wants an investigation why one must wonder, simply because th Russians want it too?