"WMD use" in Syria reported

[Comrade Nasser]

http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Sources-Confirmation-of-chemical-weapons-use-in-Syria-309681

Lolwut.

Funny because this was reported in the Jerusalem Post. They never seem to be biased huh?

[Paul Pott]

When will they learn that nobody believes that anymore?

[Anti-Traditional]

Why is it a case of LOLwut? Although Jerusalem Post might be biased it can't be dismissed out of hand. Is it really inconceivable that the Assad regime would use chemical weapons? In any case it doesn't point the figure at either the regime or the rebels.

In any case the story comes from The Times.

[Comrade Nasser]

Why is it a case of LOLwut? Although Jerusalem Post might be biased it can't be dismissed out of hand. Is it really inconceivable that the Assad regime would use chemical weapons? In any case it doesn't point the figure at either the regime or the rebels.

In any case the story comes from The Times.

It's a case of lolwut because I don't know what to believe.

And you're right it could be either. Regime or rebels.

[Paul Pott]

Why is it a case of LOLwut? Although Jerusalem Post might be biased it can't be dismissed out of hand. Is it really inconceivable that the Assad regime would use chemical weapons? In any case it doesn't point the figure at either the regime or the rebels.

In any case the story comes from The Times.

This is literally like the 4th time someone has cried WMD in Syria. Anyone with a brain would be skeptical.

[La Guaneña]

I am rather uninformed on the whole Syria thing.

Does the Syrian State actually have WMDs, or is this some modern invisible WMDs, like the case in Iraq?

[Comrade Nasser]

I am rather uninformed on the whole Syria thing.

Does the Syrian State actually have WMDs, or is this some modern invisible WMDs, like the case in Iraq?

I don't know for a fact, but i'm leaning more to the idea that it's a whole invisible WMD thing like in Iraq.

Funny you mentioned Iraq i'm watching "House of Saddam" and just finished watching "Interrogating Saddam".

House of Saddam is a good series btw if anyone was wondering.

[Brutus]

Yes, it's not inconceivable that the Asad regime wouldn't use 'WMDs'
But this is from a source that is arming the rebels, so it would benefit them to portray Asad as a monster and war criminal.

[Paul Pott]

It's common knowledge that Assad has various chemical weapons.

[Captain Ahab]

It's common knowledge that Assad has various chemical weapons.
He wouldn't dare use them as they would invite NATO intervention. This also why the rebels keep claiming every so often that Gas was used by Assad. Perhaps the West will believe them at some point.

[Sasha]

I have some faint hope British inteligence is embarrassed enough by the while Iraq mess that they wouldn't make up shit out of nothing anymore, that said the soil could maybe have been containemated with chemicals another way or by the rebels who found some of assads WMD's.
But let's be honest, the NATO/UN is going into Syria sooner than later anyway, Assad butchered just too many of his people by now (see the HRW reports about indiscriminate and even targeted bombings of civilians from earlier this week), the "he wouldn't risk it" argument has run its course I think. He would certainly risk it if he thought he could maybe get away with it for a bit or "take some of the fuckers with him".

[Sasha]

also, that the phrase is used "some kind of chemical weapon" is offcourse supiscious, you cant tell me that the soil analysis doesnt answer what kind of chemical weapon so that could point to something more like phosphorous. still a crime assad should be hanged for by his people but something else than a nerve gass and something we found okay when israeli was tossing it on Gaza or the US on iraq.

[garrus]

Why isn't there ever a headline "US, the only country to ever use them, confirmed of possession of WMDs"

[piet11111]

To my knowledge certain more potent variants of tear gas are considered chemical weapons and have been banned in some country's.

[Sasha]

Why isn't there ever a headline "US, the only country to ever use them, confirmed of possession of WMDs"

A WMD is more than a nuke, before Iraq the usual term was CBNR (chemical, biological, nuclear, radiological), and the list of countries that used them is quite long, all sides in the first WW used them (mustardgas etc), same goes for the firebombings on all sides in WW2, the US in Vietnam and Cambodia, Iraq and Iran against each other and against the Kurds etc etc.

[The Douche]

You guys know that there actually did end up being WMDs in Iraq, right?

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/10/wikileaks-show-wmd-hunt-continued-in-iraq-with-surprising-results/


The article doesn't mention it, but when I was there, during a mortar attack a round impacted but didn't detonate, some absolute moron walked up to the round and touched it, it turned out to be mustard gas. (since the round did not discharge, and EOD figured it out quickly, the soldier didn't die)


There are WMDs everywhere. Especially because of the war in Iraq, and there are certainly WMDs in Syria, some of which probably came from Iraq during the past few years.

[garrus]

A WMD is more than a nuke, before Iraq the usual term was CBNR (chemical, biological, nuclear, radiological), and the list of countries that used them is quite long, all sides in the first WW used them (mustardgas etc), same goes for the firebombings on all sides in WW2, the US in Vietnam and Cambodia, Iraq and Iran against each other and against the Kurds etc etc.

Well yeah for example when Bush said "we need to invade iraq cause of WMDs" , he did mean nukes, and that's what (i assume) most people consider the term to mean.

[Sasha]

You guys know that there actually did end up being WMDs in Iraq, right?

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/10/wikileaks-show-wmd-hunt-continued-in-iraq-with-surprising-results/


The article doesn't mention it, but when I was there, during a mortar attack a round impacted but didn't detonate, some absolute moron walked up to the round and touched it, it turned out to be mustard gas. (since the round did not discharge, and EOD figured it out quickly, the soldier didn't die)


There are WMDs everywhere. Especially because of the war in Iraq, and there are certainly WMDs in Syria, some of which probably came from Iraq during the past few years.

Of topic (kinda) question, did you and the rest in Iraq always cary a gasmask with you? What was the feeling under the soldiers/brass, did ppl really expect a possibility to be confronted with cbnr's? And did you feel you where aduquatly trained for it?

[Sasha]

Well yeah for example when Bush said "we need to invade iraq cause of WMDs" , he did mean nukes, and that's what (i assume) most people consider the term to mean.

That is the shitty thing with the term, everybody knew Saddam used to have a huge chemical and biological arsenal and at a time nucluar ambitions, which made everyone swallow the yellowcake and mobile centrifuge Bullshit, while if pressed all scientists, intelligence and brass would admit it was mostly likely at most possible for Iraq to construct a dirty bomb next to some hidden stickpiles of nervgass

[Comrade Nasser]

Of topic (kinda) question, did you and the rest in Iraq always cary a gasmask with you? What was the feeling under the soldiers/brass, did ppl really expect a possibility to be confronted with cbnr's? And did you feel you where aduquatly trained for it?

I know during the first gulf war back in 91' (desert storm) every soldier was issued a gas mask. My father fought in this war as he joined the military in 86' he fought with Egypt against Saddam. He was a paratrooper so he didn't see to much action but yes he did say everyone in the coalition force had gas masks. Idk about the 03 invasion of Iraq.

[The Douche]

Of topic (kinda) question, did you and the rest in Iraq always cary a gasmask with you? What was the feeling under the soldiers/brass, did ppl really expect a possibility to be confronted with cbnr's? And did you feel you where aduquatly trained for it?

In the invasion the threat was taken very seriously. I have friends who were there in 03 and they said they were operating in MOPP 2, 3, or 4, depending on whatever intelligence was around. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOPP) So not just gas masks, but full protective suits (which are obviously really, really hot and make it harder to do things).

I was there in 07/08, my unit was required to carry our gas masks to any permanant post (like a guard post or something, or if you worked in the headquarters or an office), but when we went outside the wire, no, we didn't take them. (we were probably supposed to take them, we just didn't because nobody really thought about it at that point in the war, because there had been no widespread use)

As far as adequate training, yes, I know how to don MOPP gear, seal and clear my mask, and have even done training scenarios in full MOPP gear (including road marches, ambushes, and attacks on fixed/hasty positions) and regularly qualified with my rifle while wearing the gas mask. But, I was in an infantry unit, and a relatively high speed one. I imagine the other units get only a basic familiarization with their gear, and they probably only practice with it one day a year.