Sarin gas confirmed as weapon in Syria attack

More than 90 people were killed in the town in Syria's northern Idlib province, the most deadly attack in more than three years.




[size=11]Image:Dozens of children were hurt in the gas attack[/size]


The global chemical weapons watchdog has concluded that sarin gas was used in an attack in Syria in April which killed more than 90 people.

The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons report into the Khan Sheikhoun attack has not been publicly released but two diplomats familiar with it confirmed the key finding. UK Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson said he was "pleased though, I must say, not surprised" that the report had confirmed the use of sarin. OPCW director general Ahmet Uzumcu had said two weeks after the attack that samples from victims and survivors had shown they were exposed to sarin or a sarin-like substance.
Mr Johnson added: "The exact responsibility for dropping the sarin will now go to a joint investigative mechanism to be confirmed but I've got absolutely no doubt that the finger points at the Assad regime."

The report, while establishing chemical weapons were used, did not name the perpetrator.


http://news.sky.com/story/sarin-gas-confirmed-as-weapon-in-khan-sheikhoun-10932066

The sarin was in the hands of the ISIS/rebels and either released as a result of govt forces hitting their arms supplies in an air raid or deliberately released by the isis/rebels to make it look like the govt forces were responsible to try to get other international countries involved on their side.

I dont believe govt forces were responsible at all.

Tommy Monk wrote:The sarin was in the hands of the ISIS/rebels and either released as a result of govt forces hitting their arms supplies in an air raid or deliberately released by the isis/rebels to make it look like the govt forces were responsible to try to get other international countries involved on their side.

I dont believe govt forces were responsible at all.

Really based on what evidence?
The tooth fairy?
Do we have to go through all the facts again to show how in error you are on this?
What gets me is how you continually defend Assad, when he is as bad as ISIS for murdering people.

That is the way i see it...

Do you have any evidence that govt forces were responsible...?


Just like on previous incidents, it will turn out the isis rebel militants were responsible...

Tommy Monk wrote:That is the way i see it...

Do you have any evidence that govt forces were responsible...?


Just like on previous incidents, it will turn out the isis rebel militants were responsible...

Will it be ISIS responsible?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/07/syria-nerve-agent-attack-why-it-made-sense-to-assad

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/05/syria-chemical-weapons-attack-what-we-know-khan-sheikhun

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/06/the-dead-were-wherever-you-looked-inside-syrian-town-after-chemical-attack

Now as far as I am concerned if this was ISIS, they would have ensured maximum usage of such weapons, as they do with many terrorist attacks. A big factor how this never was. The point is Assad is as barbaric as ISIS and as seen its very improbable that this was ISIS based on the latest evidence and expert opinion. Though I would never discount the fact it could have been, no matter how remote.

So I ask again, as to why you defend Assad? Why do you think its impossible he carried out this attack, when he has had no problem killing tens of thousands of civilians?
Through starvation, bombings, shootings etc?

The guardian...!?




And if you read what i said earlier... it may well have been in the hands of the isis rebels when hit by air strike...

Tommy Monk wrote:The guardian...!?




And if you read what i said earlier... it may well have been in the hands of the isis rebels when hit by air strike...

So are you like the Far left that tries to deligitimize a source simple by the name of the media company and not evidence?

Seems to me you are running scared from answering my question

I asked you for evidence... that was not evidence...

Tommy Monk wrote:I asked you for evidence... that was not evidence...

Really?

So experts, are not evidence when they provide why its highly unlikely to be an attack by ISIS?

Now you claimed it was due to the bombs hitting their arms supply and as seen that claim is sheer bollocks Tommy. As we have been here before based off that claim and how most of the sarin would be destroyed if it was a conventional attack by bombers hitting a supply storage of chemical weapons. Now we know from evidence that Islamist groups have only ever got their hands on small amounts of Sarin. Based on evidence again Tommy, so how could such a small amount kill people over a wide area? When if as you claim it was a conventional attack by missiles, when such an attack would have destroyed the vast majority of this small amount of sarin. That was in the hands of ISIS?

I mean where all your argument falls down, is you have no evidence for any of your claim, yet there is mountains of evidence for Assad producing and using these chemicals numerous times.

You have produced zero evidence for your claims and experts easily refute your claims

Now again, why do you defend a mass murderer in Assad, when he has murdered as much and if not more than ISIS?

Both are equally wrong in how they murder people. The only differences is over wrongs they claim people have done.

I suggest you produce evidence for the claims you have made on this thread. That it was a arms supply being hit, that caused this?

In your own time

So you have no evidence then...

Ok...

Tommy Monk wrote:So you have no evidence then...

Ok...

Really?

Was it you making the claims or me on this being an attack by ISIS?

Where is your evidence?

Last chance

Syrian govt have nothing to gain by dropping sarin... but everything to lose...

They know the eyes of the world are on them... and they are not stupid...

There is no evidence they did drop sarin... it is far more likely to be that an air strike caused isis rebel held sarin to escape from a damaged container, or it was deliberately released by the isis rebels so they could blame syrian govt and try to get international involvement on their side against syrian govt...

The isis rebels dont care about the local people... they just use them as human shields and to hide amongst... they murder any who try to get away from the isis rebel held areas... so they wouldnt care about gassing a few if it helped their overall objectives...

Tommy Monk wrote:
Syrian govt have nothing to gain by dropping sarin... but everything to lose...

Thorin wrote:Have they? Is that why they have starved and shot countless people who are Druze, Sunni, Kurds etc? I would think they have everything to gain Tommy. By eliminating the opposition, of which there is many

They know the eyes of the world are on them... and they are not stupid...

Thorin wrote:And yet have been found to have aalready used chemical weapons and even produce them.
So based on the later Tommy, why do they have them?

There is no evidence they did drop sarin... it is far more likely to be that an air strike caused isis rebel held sarin to escape from a damaged container, or it was deliberately released by the isis rebels so they could blame syrian govt and try to get international involvement on their side against syrian govt...

Thorin wrote:Its confirmed it was Sarin and again you speculate and offer zero evidence for your claims.
All experts discount your claim. That sarin escaped from a damaged container. Let alone you offering any evidence on how much sarin they have. Let alone how the vast majority of Sarin could survive a dicrect hit from a missle

The isis rebels dont care about the local people... they just use them as human shields and to hide amongst... they murder any who try to get away from the isis rebel held areas... so they wouldnt care about gassing a few if it helped their overall objectives...

Both ISIS and Assad do not care, its why half a million are dead and 9 million displaced. So why would 9 million leave Syria Tommy. Many to Europe and not to areas controlled by Assad? If as you claim they support him?

Take your time

As seen your blame ISIS argument has failed and is thus debunked. Unless you prove evidence. As its based on Tinkerbell logic, thus no evidence.

A container held by isis/rebels could easily be damaged by an air strike blast if it was being stored in close proximity... causing gas to escape...

It is also possible that isis/rebels released the gas for reasons given...


Your argument on people leaving is also waffle...

Tommy Monk wrote:A container held by isis/rebels could easily be damaged by an air strike blast if it was being stored in close proximity... causing gas to escape...

Thorin wrote:Easily? Based on what evidence?

It is also possible that isis/rebels released the gas for reasons given...

Thorin wrote:So where ISIS who have no qualms about causing maximum fatalities. That they are now incompetent and only released this gas to funnily enough coincide with an air strike by Assad on the same position. I have to laugh at how dumb this argument is.
ISIS according to you, are in control of an area and attacked by warplanes of Assad. That they decided to during this attack. Release Sarin gas, off which you have no evidence over the quantities they have. Over an area they have control over supposedly?
So why would ISIS release this gas Tommy on areas they control? Then not even be effected themselves?
Did they have biochemical warfare suits Tommy?

Your argument on people leaving is also waffle...

I think most people can see you are an absolute idiot Tommy

Oh and remind me how ISIS take credit for just about every terrorist attack that ever happens Tommy all over the the world and yet somehow, Are coy and shy over this attack by Assad? Which we know was caused by Sarin?

Explain that to me Tommy?

There is no evidence that govt forces dropped sarin...


Explosions normally cause a shock wave, as well as flying shrapnel and bits of glass and debris etc... as well as flying/falling rubble from structural damage to surrounding buildings that can also cause collapse...

Any sarin container being stored there would have a high likelyhood of being damaged and releasing contents...


And it is not beyond belief that isis/rebels deliberately released the gas for reasons i gave... it could have been set up already as booby trap for if govt forces got too close to their hold up there, to be set off remotely or maybe it went off accidentally because of govt air strike somehow...


All possible!!!

Tommy Monk wrote:There is no evidence that govt forces dropped sarin...

Thorin wrote:There is countless evidence that sarin was used

Explosions normally cause a shock wave, as well as flying shrapnel and bits of glass and debris etc... as well as flying/falling rubble from structural damage to surrounding buildings that can also cause collapse...

Thorin wrote:Do they Tommy? This should be interesting as are what you are talking about incendiary?

Any sarin container being stored there would have a high likelihood of being damaged and releasing contents...

Thorin wrote:It would be mainly destroyed by a missile strike and would have to in massive quantities to even kill only those within  a few meters Tommy of an airstrike

And it is not beyond belief that isis/rebels deliberately released the gas for reasons i gave... it could have been set up already as booby trap for if govt forces got too close to their hold up there, to be set off remotely or maybe it went off accidentally because of govt air strike somehow...


All possible!!!

Its not beyond belief that Santa Claus might exists and how and why missiles would not incinerate the vast majority of this Sarin?

Does anyone notice how Tommy has not a clue what he is talking about and hopes people will buy his bullshit?

He now claims an accident?

WYF?


Where is either ISIS or Assad claiming this on Sarin gas.

Again

Remind me how ISIS take credit for just about every terrorist attack that ever happens Tommy all over the the world and yet somehow, Are coy and shy over this attack by Assad? Which we know was caused by Sarin?

Explain that to me Tommy?

It is clear that you dont know what you are talking about...

Tommy Monk wrote:It is clear that you dont know what you are talking about...

Is that why you failed to answer every single one of my points?

Seriously, stop wasting my time with your idiocy

Now i am going to bed Tommy. 

I think, I have  proven, you constantly talk bullshit.   

Now either counter my points with evidence or continue your sulk

I am happy either way



Night

I will end on one note

Tommy is like a Holocaust denier

He denies crimes by Assad and his regime

We all know ISIS commits crimes as well, but there is nothing worse than an apologist who excuses crimes off ISIS, When Assad has been murdering for years. 

its the same pattern of Holocaust denial.

Night everyone

Same old dodgy didge style... a wall of waffle, followed by the claim that 'none of the points have been countered'...

I have been clear with the likely possibilities...

Whereas you cant even make up your mind whether govt air strikes used incendiary devices or explosive ones... but flip flop between the two depending on which fits your contrived argument best...

One minute its incendiary that wouldnt cause explosive damage to any surrounding buildings that may have housed a isis/rebel canister of sarin... next minute its a missle strike that would have blown it all up without damaging any surrounding buildings that may have housed a sarin canister and for it to have remained undamaged in the blast...!!!


Ive made my points clear... and both the possibility and likelihood remains...

Tommy Monk wrote:i

And the above shows how much Tommy avoided my points and how much evidence he has produced in this debate.

I never made any claim on differences on explosives or incendiaries. Only that such missiles or bombs would destroy stock piles of sarin Gas. Seems simple enough, except for an Assad supporter in Tommy. Exactly the same as stated by experts. As seen Tommy is desperate. Now has Tommy produce any evidence for his claims here? Nope, only his hero worship of Assad here?

Syria’s military has “categorically denied” responsibility for the attack. Russia, which is heavily backing the Assad government, said a Syrian government airstrike had hit a “terrorist warehouse” holding “toxic substances”.

That claim does not fit with facts on the ground, for several reasons. An airstrike on a weapons depot with high explosives would have destroyed much of the sarin immediately, and distributed any that survived over a much smaller area.

“The pattern of casualties isn’t right for the distribution of materials that you would get if you had a location with toxic materials breached by an airstrike. It’s more consistent with canisters that have distributed [chemical weapons] over a wider population,” Guthrie said.

While it is impossible to assess the exact amount of chemical agent used immediately, the extent and distribution of the casualties are consistent with the use of hundreds of kilos.

Sarin is too complicated and expensive for rebels to have manufactured themselves, and while they might potentially have obtained some supplies of stolen nerve agents or other gas, it is very unlikely to be more than a few kilos.

“If they have [sarin], it would be in minute quantities, maybe a kilo or so,” said De Bretton Gordon. The high numbers of woman and children among the casualties was not consistent with a military depot, he added.

Finally, the Syrian manufacturing process for sarin involves creating and storing two key components, both far more stable than the nerve agent itself. They are mixed to create sarin hours – or at most days – before it is used, said Dan Kaszeta, a chemical weapons expert and former officer in the US Army’s chemical corps.

So an airstrike on a storage facility would be unlikely to release sarin itself. And because one of the two components is highly flammable isopropyl alcohol, or rubbing alcohol, you would expect a fireball, which has not been observed.

Opps

Tommy is like a Holocaust denier

He denies crimes by Assad and his regime

We all know ISIS commits crimes as well, but there is nothing worse than an apologist who excuses crimes off ISIS, When Assad has been murdering for years.

its the same pattern of Holocaust denial.


Try again Tommy
.

What have you posted...?

At best it is just speculation of opinion from a completely biased source without any evidence... at worst it is akin to nazi propaganda...!


Your quote even admits that the isis/rebels are in possession of sarin!

But i dont believe the bullshit that it would only be a little bit or that it would only have been 'unmixed' ether...

Plus it is highly plausible that they have got hold of it from iraq isis... or even manufactured more locally from imported chemicals and equipment etc...

Tommy Monk wrote:What have you posted...?

At best it is just speculation of opinion from a completely biased source without any evidence... at worst it is akin to nazi propaganda...!


Your quote even admits that the isis/rebels are in possession of sarin!

But i dont believe the bullshit that it would only be a little bit or that it would only have been 'unmixed' ether...

Plus it is highly plausible that they have got hold of it from iraq isis... or even manufactured more locally from imported chemicals and equipment etc...

At best?

lol, Experts admits that ISIS are in possession of small amounts not capable of causing what happened at this place?

I love how you ignored that little  snippet

What matters is that you show evidence to prove otherwise.

You have failed to do so throughout

Many things are plausible which is odd really, When you dismiss the most plausible. That the attack was carried out by Assad. Where all the evidence points to this being carried out by Assad, where he has carried out such attacks before.

Khan Sheikhun is a ghost town, its streets deserted and silent as though mourning the victims of the atrocity that occurred here two days earlier.

The only reminder of what happened is a small, blackened, crater near the northern part of town, where a rocket laced with a nerve agent fell, killing more than 70 people in one of the worst mass casualty chemical attacks in the six-year war in Syria.

All that remains of the attack on the town in rebel-held Idlib province is a faint stench that tingles the nostrils and a small green fragment from the rocket. The houses nearby are emptied of the living.

The victims’ symptoms are consistent with sarin, the nerve agent that was dropped on an opposition-held area near Damascus in 2013, killing more than 1,000 people. After that attack the regime supposedly gave up its chemical weapons arsenal.

Moscow, Bashar al-Assad’s principal backer in the war, said the Syrian government had bombed a rebel-run toxic gas manufacturing plant in Khan Sheikhun, and that the gas had subsequently leaked out.

The Guardian, the first western media organisation to visit the site of the attack, examined a warehouse and silos directly next to where the missile had landed, and found nothing but an abandoned space covered in dust and half-destroyed silos reeking of leftover grain and animal manure.

Residents said the silos had been damaged in air raids six months ago, and had stood unused since then.

“You can look at it ; there’s nothing there except maybe some grain and animal dung, and there’s even a dead goat there that suffocated in the attack,” one person said. Residents responded in disbelief to the Russian allegation.

There was no evidence of any building being hit in recent days or weeks near where so many people were killed and wounded by a nerve agent. The homes across the street appeared undamaged from the outside. There was no contamination zone near any building. Instead, the contamination area radiated from a hole in a road.

The Guardian interviewed witnesses, first responders, victims’ relatives and the wounded in an effort to reconstruct the attack. They offered fresh details that shed light on an incident that has prompted worldwide condemnation and refocused attention on the brutality of the Syrian war.

“It was like Judgment Day,” said Hamid Khutainy, a civil defence volunteer in Khan Sheikhun.

Witnesses said the air raids began shortly after 6.30am on Tuesday, with four bombings around the town. Initially they thought it was just another airstrike, until the first responders who arrived at the scene began falling to the ground.

Khutainy said: “They told us ‘HQ, we are losing control’. We had no idea what they were trying to say. Then they said, ‘come save us, we can no longer walk’. So the second and third teams went with just face masks. We could smell it from 500 metres away.”

People described a scene of utter horror at the attack site . The wounded were shaking and convulsing on the ground, foaming at the mouth, their lips blue, passing in and out of consciousness.

“I found children lying on the ground, in their last breaths, their lips going blue,” said Abu al-Baraa, who lives nearby and rushed to help when the full extent of what had happened dawned on him.

Standing across the street from the crater left by the missile, he added: “People on the rooftops and in the basements. People on the ground in the street. Wherever you looked there were dead human beings.”


The suffocating patients and those who had died were taken to the nearby civil defence centre and the adjacent clinic built into the side of a rocky mountainous outcrop to withstand potential airstrikes. The dead were laid in a nearby shed while emergency workers hosed down the injured with water, and administered atropine, a nerve agent antidote.

But while medical workers were trying to come to grips with the crisis, between eight and 10 airstrikes targeted the medical facility and civil defence centre. The shed collapsed on the dead, and the site was put out of service.

“Maybe the pilots heard the myth that you could come back to life 48 hours after dying from sarin, so they decided to bomb them again just in case,” said an official from the Ahrar al-Sham rebel group who was on the scene. “Thank God there is a Day of Judgment in the afterlife.”

The Guardian visited the destroyed medical facility and civil defence centre briefly. Local people said reconnaissance planes had been spotted in the sky earlier and believed the area might be targeted again later in the day.

The site was filled with rubble. Inside, hospital equipment, beds, surgical instruments and small boxes of medicine lay covered in dust or broken on the ground. There were no weapons in sight, and the rooms inside the cave were darkened with the electricity knocked out.


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/06/the-dead-were-wherever-you-looked-inside-syrian-town-after-chemical-attack

And what Tommy failed to do throughout is show that this town was controlled by ISIS. It never was

Bang goes Tommy's Theory of ISIS storing Sarin in this village

Tommy has consistently said "Isis/rebels" though.

Raggamuffin wrote:Tommy has consistently said "Isis/rebels" though.

But its not ISIS controlled is it?

And there is many different Rebel groups

Tommy has been constantly wrong and failed to back up any of his claims

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Tommy has consistently said "Isis/rebels" though.

But its not ISIS controlled is it?

And there is many different Rebel groups

Tommy has been constantly wrong and failed to back up any of his claims

Yes, but you have ignored his use of the word "rebels" and concentrated too much on ISIS.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:


But its not ISIS controlled is it?

And there is many different Rebel groups

Tommy has been constantly wrong and failed to back up any of his claims

Yes, but you have ignored his use of the word "rebels" and concentrated too much on ISIS.

What relevance does that have, when he only specifies one rebel group in ISIS?

ISIS are rebels, so as he has not pointed out any other rebel group, his view is that its ISIS.

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Yes, but you have ignored his use of the word "rebels" and concentrated too much on ISIS.

What relevance does that have, when he only specifies one rebel group in ISIS?

ISIS are rebels, so as he has not pointed out any other rebel group, his view is that its ISIS.

I think he's distinguishing between ISIS and other rebel groups, hence his use of "Isis/rebels". If he only meant ISIS, his wouldn't include "rebels". Others also distinguish between them, as you can see from your map. There are loads of rebel groups, which is probably why he hasn't named one in particular.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:

What relevance does that have, when he only specifies one rebel group in ISIS?

ISIS are rebels, so as he has not pointed out any other rebel group, his view is that its ISIS.

I think he's distinguishing between ISIS and other rebel groups, hence his use of "Isis/rebels". If he only meant ISIS, his wouldn't include "rebels". Others also distinguish between them, as you can see from your map. There are loads of rebel groups, which is probably why he hasn't named one in particular.

Really, then why only mention ISIS, when the area is not controlled by ISIS?
Hence to include ISIS is wrong?
Yes or no?
Is it held by Kurdish Rebel forces?
Yes or No?

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I think he's distinguishing between ISIS and other rebel groups, hence his use of "Isis/rebels". If he only meant ISIS, his wouldn't include "rebels". Others also distinguish between them, as you can see from your map. There are loads of rebel groups, which is probably why he hasn't named one in particular.

Really, then why only mention ISIS, when the area is not controlled by ISIS?
Hence to include ISIS is wrong?
Yes or no?
Is it held by Kurdish Rebel forces?
Yes or No?

I just told you, he didn't just mention ISIS.

The area is not held by Kurdish rebel forces, according to your own map. It is held by a rebel group.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:


Really, then why only mention ISIS, when the area is not controlled by ISIS?
Hence to include ISIS is wrong?
Yes or no?
Is it held by Kurdish Rebel forces?
Yes or No?

I just told you, he didn't just mention ISIS.

The area is not held by Kurdish rebel forces, according to your own map. It is held by a rebel group.

He specified ISIS did he not?
The are is not held by the Kurdish Rebels or ISIS, so to say rebels, when its not held by all Rebel groups is again misleading and as seen wrong to do so. 
I know exactly which group




ilitary situation in the Syrian Civil War as of January 2017.
  Controlled by Ba'athist Syrian forces
  Controlled by Syrian Democratic Forces (Rojava)
  Controlled by ISIL
  Controlled by Tahrir al-Sham (al-Nusra)
  Controlled by Syrian opposition forces

(For a more detailed map, see Cities and towns during the Syrian Civil War)


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_armed_groups_in_the_Syrian_Civil_War

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I just told you, he didn't just mention ISIS.

The area is not held by Kurdish rebel forces, according to your own map. It is held by a rebel group.

He specified ISIS did he not?
The are is not held by the Kurdish Rebels or ISIS, so to say rebels, when its not held by all Rebel groups is again misleading and as seen wrong to do so. 
I know exactly which group




ilitary situation in the Syrian Civil War as of January 2017.
  Controlled by Ba'athist Syrian forces
  Controlled by Syrian Democratic Forces (Rojava)
  Controlled by ISIL
  Controlled by Tahrir al-Sham (al-Nusra)
  Controlled by Syrian opposition forces

(For a more detailed map, see Cities and towns during the Syrian Civil War)


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_armed_groups_in_the_Syrian_Civil_War

No, he didn't specify ISIS. He included ISIS, but he also said "rebels".

So if you know which group is in control there, can you say why it's impossible that they had stores of sarin there, or why the attack could not have come from them?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:


He specified ISIS did he not?
The are is not held by the Kurdish Rebels or ISIS, so to say rebels, when its not held by all Rebel groups is again misleading and as seen wrong to do so. 
I know exactly which group




ilitary situation in the Syrian Civil War as of January 2017.
  Controlled by Ba'athist Syrian forces
  Controlled by Syrian Democratic Forces (Rojava)
  Controlled by ISIL
  Controlled by Tahrir al-Sham (al-Nusra)
  Controlled by Syrian opposition forces

(For a more detailed map, see Cities and towns during the Syrian Civil War)


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_armed_groups_in_the_Syrian_Civil_War

No, he didn't specify ISIS. He included ISIS, but he also said "rebels".

So if you know which group is in control there, can you say why it's impossible that they had stores of sarin there, or why the attack could not have come from them?

Unbelievable, you would argue black was white.
Again this is not ISIS or many other rebel groups, its thus not ISIS and incorrect to state so
Where did I say its impossible that they had stores of Sarin?
Maybe you should read and see what I actually wrote Rags
Maybe you should also read the evidence I presented

This is interesting:



A - As President Macron announced, France considers the use and manufacture of chemical weapons in Syria to be a red line and will not hesitate to retaliate in the event of a documented chemical attack. In this respect, we want to see the full implementation of UNSCR 2118, which provides for the complete dismantlement of the Syrian regime’s chemical arsenal. The Khan Shaykhun chemical attack demonstrates that the Damascus regime is still not complying with its international obligations, as indicated by the national assessment released by France on June 26.




http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/country-files/syria/events/article/syria-chemical-weapons-opcw-fact-finding-mission-report-on-the-attack-in-khan

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

No, he didn't specify ISIS. He included ISIS, but he also said "rebels".

So if you know which group is in control there, can you say why it's impossible that they had stores of sarin there, or why the attack could not have come from them?

Unbelievable, you would argue black was white.
Again this is not ISIS or many other rebel groups, its thus not ISIS and incorrect to state so
Where did I say its impossible that they had stores of Sarin?
Maybe you should read and see what I actually wrote Rags
Maybe you should also read the evidence I presented

You were the one who identified the group in control, even though you brought in the Kurds as a red herring. If you can't answer the question, just say so.

So you agree that it's not definite that Assad carried out the attack.

I see rags is looking for a fight as usual and cannot even bother to read what I have said.

Hey ho, shall await what others say

U.S. says it saw preparations for possible Syria chemical attack.

A U.S. warning to Syria's leadership against staging a chemical weapons attack was based on intelligence about what appeared to be active preparations at a Syrian airfield used for such an attack in April, U.S. officials said on Tuesday.

Russia, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's main international backer, denounced the warning and dismissed White House assertions that a strike was being prepared as "unacceptable," raising the tension between Washington and Moscow over the Syrian civil war.


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-usa-idUSKBN19I083

Thorin wrote:I see rags is looking for a fight as usual and cannot even bother to read what I have said.

Hey ho, shall await what others say

I was just correcting your false posts about what Tommy said, and you got pedantic and belligerent.

Tommy Monk wrote:
Syrian govt have nothing to gain by dropping sarin... but everything to lose...

They know the eyes of the world are on them... and they are not stupid...

There is no evidence they did drop sarin... it is far more likely to be that an air strike caused isis rebel held sarin to escape from a damaged container, or it was deliberately released by the isis rebels so they could blame syrian govt and try to get international involvement on their side against syrian govt...

The isis rebels dont care about the local people... they just use them as human shields and to hide amongst... they murder any who try to get away from the isis rebel held areas... so they wouldnt care about gassing a few if it helped their overall objectives...

This is what I think too. Assad needs all the support he can get, and releasing sarin gas, which would most likely be pinned on him, would be a very foolish thing to do. I don't think he's a fool.

Oh dear - Didge is about to spam the thread because he's losing the debate.

Thorin wrote:U.S. says it saw preparations for possible Syria chemical attack.

A U.S. warning to Syria's leadership against staging a chemical weapons attack was based on intelligence about what appeared to be active preparations at a Syrian airfield used for such an attack in April, U.S. officials said on Tuesday.

Russia, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's main international backer, denounced the warning and dismissed White House assertions that a strike was being prepared as "unacceptable," raising the tension between Washington and Moscow over the Syrian civil war.


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-usa-idUSKBN19I083

Did they say that before the attack or after the attack? If it was before, and Assad knew they knew, he wouldn't have used sarin. If it was after the attack - well they would say that wouldn't they?

And the spamming continues. Didge has wrecked his own thread - again.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:U.S. says it saw preparations for possible Syria chemical attack.

A U.S. warning to Syria's leadership against staging a chemical weapons attack was based on intelligence about what appeared to be active preparations at a Syrian airfield used for such an attack in April, U.S. officials said on Tuesday.

Russia, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's main international backer, denounced the warning and dismissed White House assertions that a strike was being prepared as "unacceptable," raising the tension between Washington and Moscow over the Syrian civil war.


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-usa-idUSKBN19I083

Did they say that before the attack or after the attack? If it was before, and Assad knew they knew, he wouldn't have used sarin. If it was after the attack - well they would say that wouldn't they?

Never laughed so much at such stupidity

Even funnier the belief that dictators who murdered people would have much to lose from continuing to murder people when propped up by Russia.

You cannot make it up and why you are not intelligent enough or worth even debating this with.

So please continue to prattle on as you do.

Again both you and Tommy ignore countless evidence

So its pointless even entertaining two imbeciles

So enjoy

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Did they say that before the attack or after the attack? If it was before, and Assad knew they knew, he wouldn't have used sarin. If it was after the attack - well they would say that wouldn't they?

Never laughed so much at such stupidity

Even funnier the belief that dictators who murdered people would have much to lose from continuing to murder people when propped up by Russia.

You cannot make it up and why you are not intelligent enough or worth even debating this with.

So please continue to prattle on as you do.

Again both you and Tommy ignore countless evidence

So its pointless even entertaining two imbeciles

So enjoy

So you can't answer the question. It's no good claiming things afterwards is it?

You're the one stupidly spamming the thread and getting abusive, so it's you who's too stupid to debate properly.