Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ghostsinthemachine

(3,569 posts)
Fri Apr 7, 2017, 11:21 AM Apr 2017

Syria gas attack and Donald Trumps military response dont add up

Unless Putin Orchestrated it

I detest empty conspiracy theories. If the most straightforward logical explanation for something is well supported by the facts, then it’s probably true most of the time. But here’s the trouble with the events of the past forty-eight hours: none of it makes sense on its face. Not the gas attack in Syria. And certainly not Donald Trump’s response. I hate to say it, but these events only logically make sense if they’ve all been arranged by Vladimir Putin.

Let’s start with the gas attack in Syria. In my view, the rebels lack the motivation and the organization to have been behind it. And ISIS was so weakened during the Obama administration that it now lacks the muscle to have pulled this off (and ISIS would be loudly taking credit if it did). And yet Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, genocidal as he may be, would not have done something like this without the approval of the Kremlin, because he is a longtime Russian puppet in both an economic and military sense.

MORE AT LINK

http://www.palmerreport.com/opinion/syria-gas-attack-and-donald-trumps-military-response-dont-add-up-unless-putin-orchestrated-it/2210/
6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Syria gas attack and Donald Trumps military response dont add up (Original Post) ghostsinthemachine Apr 2017 OP
Didn't Assad turn all his chemical weapons over to Russia doc03 Apr 2017 #1
Yep. Obama didn't attack Syria only because Russia offered a deal to dismantle the chemical weapons dalton99a Apr 2017 #3
With some problems along the way. Igel Apr 2017 #6
I'm perplexed matt819 Apr 2017 #2
As I drifted off to sleep last night my thoughts were along these lines. I don't know if its correct mulsh Apr 2017 #4
I think the other reasoning, and result, ghostsinthemachine Apr 2017 #5

doc03

(35,328 posts)
1. Didn't Assad turn all his chemical weapons over to Russia
Fri Apr 7, 2017, 11:28 AM
Apr 2017

a couple years ago? Did he not turn them over, make new ones or maybe Russia was behind this. I don't think Putin would
have any problems gassing a few people especially to help out his man in the USA.

dalton99a

(81,475 posts)
3. Yep. Obama didn't attack Syria only because Russia offered a deal to dismantle the chemical weapons
Fri Apr 7, 2017, 01:15 PM
Apr 2017

Igel

(35,300 posts)
6. With some problems along the way.
Sat Apr 8, 2017, 11:17 AM
Apr 2017

Unaccounted for crap, undisclosed locations that were identified after the deal was struck.

The narrative at the time wanted us to assume that the unaccounted for stuff was lost or captured or its disposal wasn't properly recorded; locations that weren't identified had been decommissioned and no records survived or were kept.

Then again, the thing about secretive dictatorships is that they're secretive and, well, dictatorships.

Note that chlorine attacks continued. Nobody doubts that.

On the other hand, chlorine's butt-easy to produce. A bit harder to get compressed, but I'd imagine that the only country on Earth lacking the appropriate equipment for this would be South Sudan.

No, people have been saying "sarin" but no tests have been carried out. Problem with sarin is it's either got to be purified and stabilizied or it has a short shelf-life. Alternatively, you can rig the equipment to mix the right chemicals and have its production occur minutes before it's deployed. Seems like a pain to go to all the trouble for an insurgent group to get fresh stockpiles of the chemicals for sarin production. Other munitions would be easier to get.

In the end, what we're left with is a bag full of guesses, hypotheses, and assumptions alloyed with suspicions. That plane from the Russo-Syrian alliance bombed the city is clear; the origin of the gas, the type of gas, those are less clear. Most likely it's Syrian gas, but that can't be stated with 100% confidence unless some informant came forth and said this with some sort of physical evidence.

matt819

(10,749 posts)
2. I'm perplexed
Fri Apr 7, 2017, 11:48 AM
Apr 2017

You know this can't have anything to do with the beautiful babies who died in the gas attack. 45 just doesn't give a fuck about beautiful foreign babies.

Plus, it seems to have an anti Russian component. And the attack killed done Russians. But 45 gives Putin a heads up.

Is the attack intended to distract from the Russian investigations here? Does the attack serve some Russian aim but still give them political cover?

The attack without Congress knowledge or approval should have then up on arms. They are not, further revealing rhrmsrlves to simply be an arm of the WH, not the check and balance it's supposed to be.

Color me skeptical.

mulsh

(2,959 posts)
4. As I drifted off to sleep last night my thoughts were along these lines. I don't know if its correct
Fri Apr 7, 2017, 03:29 PM
Apr 2017

but Palmer's piece echoes what I continued to thing about when I woke up this morning. For my part it's due to the fact that I don't believe anything that comes out of the Kremlin Klan in the White House, especially as it was amplified by the deep thinkers and telegenic people with sonorous voices on the tube last night.

maybe I'm just way too cynical.

I hope I'm wrong.

ghostsinthemachine

(3,569 posts)
5. I think the other reasoning, and result,
Fri Apr 7, 2017, 04:26 PM
Apr 2017

Is far more serious. At least with Putin calling the shots, we aren't going to see bombers filling the skies over Mir A Lago.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»Syria gas attack and Dona...