Stand down: Moscow has ‘irrefutable’ evidence chem attack in Syria’s Douma was staged

[northernladyuk]

You could easily have said the very same thing about Blair before half a million Iraqis were killed. And we voted this thug into power. Seems to me our own government has much more blood on its hands than currently do the Russians, would you not agree? WMD's were 45 minutes away. Just because they did not exist doesn't mean they could not be fired.

The argument now between the West and Russia is dangerous to world stability. Face it, the Russians won the information war, control of the internet better than even the Chinese and the US is pissed.

Stop changing the subject. You were insinuating that there was no potential motive for a chemical attack. I just gave you two.

[scooterscot]

Of course there was a motive, but lets first answer the question. Who? Desperate people reach for desperate tactics, who here is the more desperate - the power hungry over inflated ego that is Bashar or the few crushed Rebel factions?

I'm not changing the subject. If anything that point is more than relevant. Previously we were led into conflict on the basis of a lie and the country seems happy to follow the mistakes of the past without so much as a second thought.

[NotAllThere]

Assad isn't desperate. He just took the opportunity to test his chemical weapons.

[jamesbrown]

or the few crushed Rebel factions?

Right you are, scootie. I'm sure they're currently deciding on which of their several airstrips to warm up their MiGs in preparation for the next airborne assault.

[BR14]

Right you are, scootie. I'm sure they're currently deciding on which of their several airstrips to warm up their MiGs in preparation for the next airborne assault.

mostly SU's, but, hey

[northernladyuk]

Of course there was a motive, but lets first answer the question. Who? Desperate people reach for desperate tactics, who here is the more desperate - the power hungry over inflated ego that is Bashar or the few crushed Rebel factions?

I'm not changing the subject. If anything that point is more than relevant. Previously we were led into conflict on the basis of a lie and the country seems happy to follow the mistakes of the past without so much as a second thought.

Vicious people reach for vicious tactics. But you are changing the subject again.

You are now trying to divert by raising other groups that may have a motive. Previously you were insinuating that there was no potential motive for a chemical attack by Assad. Your intellectual dishonesty only serves to highlight the weakness of your position.

I also happen to think Blair is a war criminal but that has no impact on Assad's culpability.

[BR14]

Of course there was a motive, but lets first answer the question. Who? Desperate people reach for desperate tactics, who here is the more desperate - the power hungry over inflated ego that is Bashar or the few crushed Rebel factions?

I'm not changing the subject. If anything that point is more than relevant. Previously we were led into conflict on the basis of a lie and the country seems happy to follow the mistakes of the past without so much as a second thought.

Not YOUR country, your beloved fatherland opted out

[scooterscot]

Assad isn't desperate. He just took the opportunity to test his chemical weapons.

To what end? To scare off the remaining dying rebels? Fairly certain the Russian people don't wish to be associated with an ally that is complicit in killing children, yet here we are. Russia is a failed state and another problem that can be sorted out later. Syria on the other hand...

Why did France, UK and the US (FUKUS) bomb Syria before the inspectors could get to Douma and find out the facts?

Before Russian went into Syria the West had an opportunity to join forces in coordinated sorties attacking the rebels. Instead Rebels seem to be fighting each other with US / UK equipment. The whole thing stinks.

[PurpleGorilla]

https://www.rt.com/news/424280-russi...attack-staged/

How do you prove a negative?

[clearedforlanding]

How do you prove a negative?

Not sure but if there is no agreeable and adequate proof of evidence to support a claim, the claim is considered an argument from ignorance.