Gransnet forums

News & politics

Unbiased investigation into Syria chemical attack

(24 Posts)
Azie09 Mon 10-Apr-17 16:39:09

I just spotted this report:

My immediate thoughts are that we are slowly being drawn into a web of completely impossible international communications because no one will be able to define what is truthful/unbiased any longer (and won't that be good with an emotional, unstable US President in power!); and I am living in fear of Syria becoming a flashpoint for the start of another major war. sad

M0nica Tue 11-Apr-17 08:27:37

The physical evidence is there. There was a chemical attack. It is not the first time it has happened. It is just that before the first attack, when Obama had drawn a line in the sand but then just smoothed it out and didn't retaliate.

In this case the Syrians working on the Trump's rhetoric thought he would be the same. They got a shock. Providing Trump sticks at what he said. His attack was an immediate response to chemical warfare, which is banned, and will go no further, then I actually think it will, after a short period of posturing hostility, make Assad and others, tempted to use illegal weapons, think twice.

Abonet Tue 11-Apr-17 08:53:35

I can't work out who we used to reply on for unbiased news, and now we can't, if you see what I mean. Or even, do we just think we can't?

thatbags Tue 11-Apr-17 09:22:02

Read a range of sources then you get all the biases as well as, one hopes, any actual facts there may be.

durhamjen Tue 11-Apr-17 11:40:11

durhamjen Tue 11-Apr-17 12:36:54

I would believe Iran was concerned if they actually freed this woman.

It would be a gesture of goodwill.

rosesarered Tue 11-Apr-17 13:07:57

What Monica says.There is plenty of physical evidence.

Joelsnan Tue 11-Apr-17 13:29:03

M0nica the evidence is not there. The evidence of an air strike and a gas release is there, it could mean that the air strike hit a rebel arms dump where gas was stored and hence the release of gas..very different. This is why an independent investigation needs to occur.

whitewave Tue 11-Apr-17 13:29:47

No chance

Iam64 Tue 11-Apr-17 14:06:17

Just read your post on the other Syria thread Joelsnan . I know Trump is not a forensic, analytical thinker and he may well have reacted, as he said he did, emotionally.
An independent investigation would help, who would do this? There are so many conspiracy theories, so much mutual suspicion between the key protagonists. I'm increasingly worried about the UK falling in behind the USA. It's never worked out well and this situation is so complex.

Azie09 Tue 11-Apr-17 14:09:39

It gives a lot of confidence (not) to read this from the esteemed Daily Telegraph, so good to know the basis for the American response!

Yesterday the Telegraph was reporting that the Russians knew in advance about the attack because a Russian drone hovered over the hospital into which the victims were pouring, followed five hours later by an attack from a Russian made aircraft (which could have been Syrian or Russian). "US officals believed that the jet bombed the hospital in an attempt to cover up the usage of chemical weapons." Seems a somewhat crude manoevre to me?

Meanwhile, the Al Jazeera link posted above reports very interestingly on US, Russian and Israeli jostling for position within Syria while marginalising Iran. The G7 foreign ministers reject the UK call for sanctions against Russia and the Assad regime and stress the need for a proper investigation.

The Trump regime changes its mind every day

I'm amazed that anyone can confidently say they know which news sources to believe. I wonder if this is going to end up in another WMD-type conclusion leading to boots on the ground....with both Russia and the US posturing about red lines in the sand. Alarming, especially with nuclear weapon holding countries who would like to decimate each other in the vicinity.

durhamjen Tue 11-Apr-17 14:11:06

I could believe he reacted emotionally if it wasn't for the fact that his children are using the attack as a reason for him not having been in cahoots with the Russians over his election.

Azie09 Tue 11-Apr-17 14:13:14

I wouldn't believe anything that comes out of the US these days (if I ever did!). Just reflecting that it may not be useful to have two threads running on Syria. I had lost sight of the other thread, maybe we should migrate over there?

Norah Tue 11-Apr-17 15:40:36

It seems as if the strike took out fuel, resupplies, the tower, air defense, and part of Assad's planes.

Seems positive to me. Even as Trump is a squiggy.

Azie09 Tue 11-Apr-17 17:03:44

That's ok then, phew, we can all sleep well in our beds tonight.

Eloethan Tue 11-Apr-17 19:36:47

Not everybody thinks that Assad was behind the chemical attack. Recent news has shown that ISIS has been very weakened within Syria and driven out of many areas. It seems pretty silly to me for Assad to do something which would give the western media even more ammunition against him.

The former UK ambassador to Syria, Peter Ford, has implied that the chemical attack is typical of a 'false flag' operation. He said on the BBC that there is "no proof that the cause of the explosion was what they said it was" and that it simply wouldn't make sense for Assad to launch such an attack as it would be "totally self-defeating."

Ron Paul, a former politician, asked "Who benefits? It doesn’t make any sense for Assad under these conditions to all of a sudden use poison gases – I think there’s zero chance he would have done this deliberately".

In a TV interview last Wednesday a congressman questioned the mainstream assumption that Assad was responsible for the chemical attack. He said: "It’s hard to know exactly what’s happening in Syria right now. I’d like to know specifically how that release of chemical gas, if it did occur — and it looks like it did — how that occurred. Because frankly, I don’t think Assad would have done that. It does not serve his interests. It would tend to draw us into that civil war even further.”

Andrew Wilkie, an Australian independent MP, has also voiced concerns about the presumption of guilt without evidence.

The expression of these doubts is, of course, very unpopular and it takes some guts for anyone to put their head above the parapet and voice these concerns.

We rely entirely on the information the media feeds us and unless you are are a neutral observer actually there on the ground, without a proper investigation I can't see how anyone can say unequivocally what happened and who is responsible.

M0nica Tue 11-Apr-17 20:17:05

Why wouldn't Assad have released the chemicals? He has form. Why would he do it? Because he thought he could get away with it.

Last time Assad used chemical weapons Obama did a lot of posturing but didn't follow through so Assad got away with it. Trump has been preaching the isolationist doctrine that it is not the USA's job to police the world. Assad thought he would get away with it again, so he used chemical weapons again. Providing Trump does not escalate the issue and leaves it as one off. Assad will think very carefully before he uses chemical weapons again.

Clear evidence has been collected that chemical weapons were used. Doctors recognise the symptoms. Victims had no other injuries. Civilians caught up in the attack have been quite explicit that the gas came from a bombing. They should know. They have been bombed often enough.

Jalima1108 Tue 11-Apr-17 20:23:54

So if not Assad - then who?
ISIS has used them in Aleppo to a limited degree but Assad has used them extensively on previous occasions. Russia was presumably complicit and issuing (fake?) newsreel of Syrian jets taking off from the bombed airfield was surely proof, if proof is needed.

durhamjen Tue 11-Apr-17 22:09:48

Spicer is going to be out of a job, then.
He has said that Hitler did not use gas in World War 11.

rosesarered Tue 11-Apr-17 22:21:29

Assad will do anything to get rid of his enemies, so exactly , why wouldn't he do it again, there was no comeback before ( now there is!)

Sean Spicer obviously didn't know ( amazingly) that Hitler and his friends used gas on millions of German and Polish people.What a very uneducated man in a top job.

Azie09 Tue 11-Apr-17 22:56:29

The use of chemical weapons would, and has, built up tensions between the different international factions in the area - Russia, the US, Iran, Israel. ISIS or one of the Syrian rebels groups might carry out an attack as a provocation. It doesn't sound like that but none of us know. I had missed a report of ISIS suicide attacks at the weekend

Those people now have nothing to lose, why wouldn't they foment trouble? I'm glad that caution is being urged and an investigation called for.

durhamjen Tue 11-Apr-17 23:22:50

I hope he doesn't think that he can use North Korea as an example, just to prove he means what he says.
The USS flagship has nuclear missiles.

durhamjen Tue 11-Apr-17 23:30:37

Obviously not unbiased, but from the Russian point of view.

Jalima1108 Tue 11-Apr-17 23:33:47

Well, let's hope that Spicer is going to be out of a job