Who's doing that?Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Who's doing that?Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
If not you guys (as above), most likely Israel or, an outside bet, France.Who's doing that?
Up the French!Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
If the US was involved I would think the major networks would pull away from regular scheduled programs.Some other Tweets going on that I don’t necessarily trust, but this jives from what I’ve heard so far.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Possibly Israel getting strategic targets out of the way at a convenient opportunity.If the US was involved I would think the major networks would pull away from regular scheduled programs.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
That's what its looking like. I would expect Trump and Macron to take action shortly as well.Possibly Israel getting strategic targets out of the way at a convenient opportunity.
Guess who the chemical lab and the chemical weapons belonged to?This week, the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) liberated some Eastern Ghouta farmlands between Shifouniyeh and Douma and discovered a well-equipped chemical laboratory run by Saudi-backed Islamist terrorists. Not a single Western reporter showed up to investigate the facility.
Why on earth does the US always go after Iran? They and the Shias have never done anything when it comes to global terrorism. Terrorism is by the wahhabi/salafi groups. They target Iran and the Shias as well. The US has a bizarre foreign policy. Just because their allies in the sunni Gulf states are obviously anti Iran.Its more likely that they did it. Assad was blamed for it previously also and it was revealed later on that it was actually done by the terrorists. If assad was gassing civilians he would have no problems gassing the terrorists also. However, the victims only happen to be syrian army solders, kurdish soldiers, free syrian army solders (only when they're not getting along with the terrorists, surprise surprise!) and civilians (mostly in areas controlled by the terrorists and when the terrorists are on the back foot).
Its not that im certain assad didn't do it but given the uncertainty and going by recent history i'd put my money on the terrorists.
Because they had the audacity to overthrow our undemocratically appointed Pahlavi puppet regime. (Sarcasm there, but really, we didn’t appreciate that)Why on earth does the US always go after Iran?
4d chess innitit's not
Answer. IsraelWhy on earth does the US always go after Iran?
A brilliantly nuanced answer.Answer. Israel
Got any mainstream sources to corroborate this ?Conveniently this happens just as Trump announced that he would withdraw from Syria, and as Assad is just about to claim victory over the 'rebels' (aka. the terrorists) in Ghouta. I mean, why wouldn't Assad go ahead and gas some of the terrorists human shields? That wouldn't be counterproductive at all.
Even more conveniently it was just women and children killed, not a single terrorist.
Strange how these chemical attacks never happens when the terrorists are in a strong position, but always just as they are losing and being overfaught.
Oh, and look at this (that somehow the Western media forgot to report about):
https://mideastshuffle.com/2018/03/...-laid-bare-in-an-eastern-ghouta-chemical-lab/
Guess who the chemical lab and the chemical weapons belonged to?
..Jaish-Al-Islam - the very same terrorists camped out in Ghouta and using the residents as human shields.
Exactly my point, isn't it? Mainstream sources doesn't touch upon this. You would believe it would have some interest for MSM, even just to debunk it. They've all chosen to ignore it though.Got any mainstream sources to corroborate this ?
Well what you posted was an anonymous, fringe blog who reposted an article that was originally posted on RT - with no quotes and the citations were from Assad's Army. Its basically the Putin/Assad narrative.Exactly my point, isn't it? Mainstream sources doesn't touch upon this. You would believe it would have some interest for MSM, even just to debunk it. They've all chosen to ignore it though.
I got it from a Norwegian journalist I trust though, and tried my darnest to find the most MSM article about it in English, but no luck.
The author of the blog is Sharmine Narwani, an Assadist journalist.Well what you posted was an anonymous, fringe blog who reposted an article that was originally posted on RT - with no quotes and the citations were from Assad's Army. Its basically the Putin/Assad narrative.
None of us has a clue what happened in this case yet. But Assad hasn't actually suffered any meaningful consequences for past instances. In this case, Jaysh al-Islam appear to have folded and completely surrendered within hours of the attack, so if the regime is responsible, that is something they may have gained from it.All things considered, it really is strange for Assad to keep doing this, when he can only gain negatives from it.
That's the most rational approach imo, just like the last times attacks like this happened. Eventually things may clear up further or not, but it's certainly better to wait for it instead of reflexively blaming the party one dislikes the most.Why can't this international chemical weapon organization not enter the scene? If it wasn't Assad then he'd have all the incentives to let them have look. Same goes for the other guys. Only way they wouldn't be able to enter by that theory is if the perpetuator is also in charge of the ground it took place. Personally it just seems wrong to claim to 'know' who it was since the information available is pretty scarce so what we are dealing it is assumptions based on indications.
They were controlling 90% of Eastern Ghouta and had Jaysh al-Islam surrounded, didn't they? In fact, quite a few rebels had already left for Idlib by that time, too.None of us has a clue what happened in this case yet. But Assad hasn't actually suffered any meaningful consequences for past instances. In this case, Jaysh al-Islam appear to have folded and completely surrendered within hours of the attack, so if the regime is responsible, that is something they may have gained from it.
The uncertainty is indeed high. I don't think there are that many people that actually have yet alone comprehend the complete picture of what is happening in Syria.None of us has a clue what happened in this case yet. But Assad hasn't actually suffered any meaningful consequences for past instances. In this case, Jaysh al-Islam appear to have folded and completely surrendered within hours of the attack, so if the regime is responsible, that is something they may have gained from it.
He had Jaysh al-Islam by the scruff of the neck quite a while ago, and they started to negotiate a surrender with Russia before this claimed attack happened.None of us has a clue what happened in this case yet. But Assad hasn't actually suffered any meaningful consequences for past instances. In this case, Jaysh al-Islam appear to have folded and completely surrendered within hours of the attack, so if the regime is responsible, that is something they may have gained from it.
I suppose we should instead believe Sergei Lavrov and the Russians saying that there’s no evidence of a chemical attack at all.Also, please have in mind that the reports you get on the chemical attack from Ghouta is from the Islamist-rebels, and unconfirmed sources - certainly not independent ones.
It is just that the MSM choose to report those, since it is in line with the chosen narrative.
Nah, let us believe the guys in Jaysh al-Islam instead. After all, we never doubt Islamist terrorists here in the West, do we?I suppose we should instead believe Sergei Lavrov and the Russians saying that there’s no evidence of a chemical attack at all.
He’s saying there was no attack at all.Nah, let us believe the guys in Jaysh al-Islam instead. After all, we never doubt Islamist terrorists here in the West, do we?
I also believed MSM when they reported on the WMD's in Iraq btw. Look how that turned out.
I don't know how they died, I wasn't there. And until someone more objective and trustworthy than some terrorists with everything to gain from it prove otherwise, I am not inclined to believe anything.He’s saying there was no attack at all.
I guess these people just died of natural causes.
And the videos from the medical workers showing people suffering from said attack?I don't know how they died, I wasn't there. And until someone more objective and trustworthy than some terrorists with everything to gain from it prove otherwise, I am not inclined to believe anything.