, , , , , , , ,

“Former weapons inspector van Aken remained skeptical. He said there is not one real piece of evidence in Kerry’s report: “That’s the thinnest thing I’ve seen in a long time.” He called it a collection of assumptions and assertions…He also doesn’t believe in the American and French line of reasoning that purports only Assad’s troops had the capacity for a chemical weapons attack.
“There were renegades from the Syrian army who could have taken chemical weapons along,” van Aken said. “Army bases and weapon arsenals were taken by rebels, who then had plenty of opportunities to get their hands on these weapons.”
Using the weapons isn’t hugely complicatedly, according to the Left politician: “Those are artillery grenades, you put them in mortars and you fire them.”

First of all, we have no proof that the Syrian government has used chemical weapons. Even if proofs were provided by Western governments, we have to remain skeptical, remembering the Tonkin Gulf incident and the Vietnam war, the incubator baby massacre in Kuwait and the first Gulf war, the Racak massacre and the Kosovo war, the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and the second Gulf war, the threat of massacre in Benghazi and the Libyan war. All these justifications for previous wars were fabricated or dubious. We may also notice that evidence for the use of chemical weapons was provided to the U.S. by Israeli intelligence  which is not exactly a neutral actor.”

Libya is surely a great place now and a real success story for the US (just like Afghanistan or Iraq):

A year old but very true, written by a jewish Russian “Israel’s Plan for Syria”:

“Israel’s goal is the Somalisation of Syria, following the Somalisation of Iraq,” said Putin, and Netanyahu did not deny his interpretation….
They are ready to accept short term risks for long term gains. And elimination of the Syrian army is certainly a long term gain for Israel.”