CNBC/Reuters: US says there are signs Syria may be using chemical weapons, warns of quick response
* “Unfortunately, we continue to see signs that the Assad regime may be renewing its use of chemical weapons, including an alleged chlorine attack in northwest Syria on the morning of May 19,” State Department spokeswoman Morgan Ortagus said in a statement.
* Ortagus said the alleged attack was part of a violent campaign by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s forces violating a ceasefire that has protected several million civilians in the greater Idlib area.
* U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration has twice bombed Syria over Assad’s alleged use of chemical weapons.
The United States sees signs the Syrian government may be using chemical weapons, including an alleged chlorine attack on Sunday in northwest Syria, the State Department said on Tuesday, warning that Washington and its allies would respond “quickly and appropriately” if this were proven.
“Unfortunately, we continue to see signs that the Assad regime may be renewing its use of chemical weapons, including an alleged chlorine attack in northwest Syria on the morning of May 19, ” State Department spokeswoman Morgan Ortagus said in a statement.
Read more ....
More News On The U.S. Issuing A Warning To Syria On Chemical Weapons Use
Trump administration warns Assad regime it is investigating 'signs' dictator used chemical weapons in Syria and says it WILL respond if he does -- Daily Mail
U.S. Says Assad May Be Using Chemical Weapons in Syria Again -- The New York Times
US investigating possible Assad chemical attack in Syria -- The Guardian
US warns Syrian regime following allegations of chemical weapons use -- CNN
US warns Syria over suspected chemical weapons attack -- DW
U.S. warns Assad against using chemical weapons -- UPI
US 'sees signs' Damascus 'may' have used chlorine in Idlib, threatens ‘quick & appropriate’ response -- RT
6 comments:
Does this usage, if true, implicate Russia? They control some big strings in Syria.
Chemical weapons in Syria! Shocking,who would have thought,OMG!!!
Hmmm. Deliberate or not, might this be que for the "rebels" many of whom have commonalities with Al Qaeda and ISIS to either launch another chemical attack or to stage another one? I think so and I think it is accidental on our part. Those who make decisions based entirely upon ideology are easily manipulated.
Or assad is incompetent and constantly over estimates his hand.
Fazman,
That is certainly possible. Actually it is a characteristic of a number of US adversaries. They are arrogant which often causes them to misread a situation. As I have pointed out elsewhere, if we had good leadership we could capitalize on tis weakness that our adversaries tend to have. Actually I think to a large extent President Trump has done so.
Now as to the assertion that Assad is "incompetent," I don't think so. The Russians would have replaced him with a more pliant leader if this were the case. Does he "overestimate his hand?" While certainly possible, I don't think this applies in this case. A.)He is winning and his winning was pretty much inevitable from the start. There's simply little to no upside potential along with huge downside risks. B.)He is facing close scrutiny from a number of parties. The Russians would probably like to lock in their gains and such an attack by Assad risks undermining that. As such, they are likely to keep a close lid on such things. C.)Assad is being closely monitored by a number of parties making it very difficult for him to pull something like this off.
In contrast, the "rebels" face no such scrutiny and their main allies often base their foreign policy upon ideology which makes them prone to "leap before the look" essentially meaning they tend to be easy to manipulate. The rebels have both motive and opportunity to either carry out a chemical attack or to stage one. When investigating a crime, detectives look closely at this and Assad has little opportunity to do this and even less motive IMHO.
Essentially a claim of Assad using chemical weapons = extraordinary claim and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Absent extraordinary evidence I would tend to discount such claims as Assad using chemical weapons.
To express this another way, when physicians diagnose a disease they look first for "horses" and once this is ruled out then they start looking for the "zebras." If a chemical weapons attack occurs in Syria, the place to start is with the "horses" (the rebels) and if eliminated as a suspect we can then move to the "zebra" but again an extraordinary claim requires extraordinary evidence.
Trump don't need no proof! Bomb 'em Trumpy!!!!
Post a Comment