The wide consensus is that the rebels lack the ability to deploy chemical weapons on this scale, whether they want to or not. I'm yet to see a convincing case the other way.
I think the scale is the key point as well. If it really was a lot of attacks at once then i agree very unlikely to have been the rebels pointing therefore at someone from the regime but below Assad (because it being Assad is literally unbelievable imo). On the other hand if it was one attack / incident but the casualties scattered to multiple local hospitals leading to *reports* of an attack on multiple locations then that would be something else.
Did anyone notice in the gruesome pictures that there were very few women but lots of children and men ? The attack was in the middle of the night.
It is very simple. Since the Geneva Protocol of 1925, mankind has been quite remarkably succesful in outlwawing, almost entirely, the use of chemical weapons to kill even troops, let alone civilians.
Given that what is going on in Syria is not warfare within the meaning of the Protocol of 1925, you are talking through your hat.
I Only you could miss the point in quite such a spectacular fashion, Life_ina_market_town!
The wide consensus is that the rebels lack the ability to deploy chemical weapons on this scale, whether they want to or not. I'm yet to see a convincing case the other way.
I think the scale is the key point as well. If it really was a lot of attacks at once then i agree very unlikely to have been the rebels pointing therefore at someone from the regime but below Assad (because it being Assad is literally unbelievable imo). On the other hand if it was one attack / incident but the casualties scattered to multiple local hospitals leading to *reports* of an attack on multiple locations then that would be something else.
Did anyone notice in the gruesome pictures that there were very few women but lots of children and men ? The attack was in the middle of the night.
The wide consensus is that the rebels lack the ability to deploy chemical weapons on this scale, whether they want to or not. I'm yet to see a convincing case the other way.
I think the scale is the key point as well. If it really was a lot of attacks at once then i agree very unlikely to have been the rebels pointing therefore at someone from the regime but below Assad (because it being Assad is literally unbelievable imo). On the other hand if it was one attack / incident but the casualties scattered to multiple local hospitals leading to *reports* of an attack on multiple locations then that would be something else.
Did anyone notice in the gruesome pictures that there were very few women but lots of children and men ? The attack was in the middle of the night.
In my trawling through the videos the thing i noticed most were the ones where it was mostly young guys looking very ill indeed having buckets of water thrown over them. I may go through them again though.
The wide consensus is that the rebels lack the ability to deploy chemical weapons on this scale, whether they want to or not. I'm yet to see a convincing case the other way.
Sarin was released by terrorists on the Tokyo Metro in 1995.
Exactly Sunil. Packed Metro, 13 dead (~50 severely injured) compared with the 1,000+ reported in Damascus.
You forgot the 1000 or so with vision problems, so the total casualties are comparable.
Quoteth it:ly 355 died in 3 hospitals (MSF claim)[1] 494 killed (The Damascus Media Office claim)[2] 502 killed (SOHR claim)[3] 588 killed (VDC claim)[4] 635 killed (SRGC claim)[5] 1,222 killed (HRO East Ghouta claim)[6] 1,300 killed (SNC claim)[7] 1,338 killed (LCC claim)[8] 1,429 killed (United States estimate)[9] 1,729 killed (FSA claim)[10]
Whereas on the Tokyo subway there were five separate attacks killing 13, seventeen critically ill, thirty-seven severe and 984 moderately ill with vision problems.
So 1,429 is a disputed figure?
If you take 355, that's still 27 times. If you take the lower median of 635, that's almost 50 times.
Have you stopped to think that your military action might cause as many or even more civilian casualties?
Iraq war casualties-600000 to 1 million
Oh, please, you clearly haven't listened to tim, who assures us that Iraq casualties are in the lower double digits, and including Ethal from Lalesh, who lost her shin when she accidentally hurdled a clusterbomb when cavorting with delight at the advent of Shock & Awe.
Comeon Sean,are you that affected by Tim`s posts that you quote verbatim when he`s not around.Does he come in your dreams?
The wide consensus is that the rebels lack the ability to deploy chemical weapons on this scale, whether they want to or not. I'm yet to see a convincing case the other way.
Sarin was released by terrorists on the Tokyo Metro in 1995.
Exactly Sunil. Packed Metro, 13 dead (~50 severely injured) compared with the 1,000+ reported in Damascus.
You forgot the 1000 or so with vision problems, so the total casualties are comparable.
Quoteth it:ly 355 died in 3 hospitals (MSF claim)[1] 494 killed (The Damascus Media Office claim)[2] 502 killed (SOHR claim)[3] 588 killed (VDC claim)[4] 635 killed (SRGC claim)[5] 1,222 killed (HRO East Ghouta claim)[6] 1,300 killed (SNC claim)[7] 1,338 killed (LCC claim)[8] 1,429 killed (United States estimate)[9] 1,729 killed (FSA claim)[10]
Whereas on the Tokyo subway there were five separate attacks killing 13, seventeen critically ill, thirty-seven severe and 984 moderately ill with vision problems.
So 1,429 is a disputed figure?
If you take 355, that's still 27 times. If you take the lower median of 635, that's almost 50 times.
Have you stopped to think that your military action might cause as many or even more civilian casualties?
Iraq war casualties-600000 to 1 million
Oh, please, you clearly haven't listened to tim, who assures us that Iraq casualties are in the lower double digits, and including Ethal from Lalesh, who lost her shin when she accidentally hurdled a clusterbomb when cavorting with delight at the advent of Shock & Awe.
Comeon Sean,are you that affected by Tim`s posts that you quote verbatim when he`s not around.Does he come in your dreams?
For the sake of my sanity (and other PBers' sanity as well) can you rephrase
I watched Sec. Kerry, Hagel and the General's deposition to the Senate Committee. One point the administration [ and, indeed our government ] struggles with is that it will be a "limited strike" not geared to "tip the balance". How can any strike against Assad not tip the balance ?
The other point was what is meant by "limited". If after missiles rain down on them, Assad will emerge after a few days, heavily "degraded" but still by and large intact. If he then pursues conventional attacks on the rebels, will everything be hunky dory ?
Why are the West lying when it says it is not meant for regime change when it is precisely that ! This is the Syrian lie, when not going for regime change in Iraq, was the Iraqi lie.
The wide consensus is that the rebels lack the ability to deploy chemical weapons on this scale, whether they want to or not. I'm yet to see a convincing case the other way.
Sarin was released by terrorists on the Tokyo Metro in 1995.
Exactly Sunil. Packed Metro, 13 dead (~50 severely injured) compared with the 1,000+ reported in Damascus.
You forgot the 1000 or so with vision problems, so the total casualties are comparable.
Quoteth it: 355 died in 3 hospitals (MSF claim)[1] 494 killed (The Damascus Media Office claim)[2] 502 killed (SOHR claim)[3] 588 killed (VDC claim)[4] 635 killed (SRGC claim)[5] 1,222 killed (HRO East Ghouta claim)[6] 1,300 killed (SNC claim)[7] 1,338 killed (LCC claim)[8] 1,429 killed (United States estimate)[9] 1,729 killed (FSA claim)[10]
Whereas on the Tokyo subway there were five separate attacks killing 13, seventeen critically ill, thirty-seven severe and 984 moderately ill with vision problems.
So 1,429 is a disputed figure?
If you take 355, that's still 27 times. If you take the lower median of 635, that's almost 50 times.
Have you stopped to think that your military action might cause as many or even more civilian casualties?
One argument at a time, Sunil. This time I was merely showing that a mass sarin attack by a unorganised force on this scale seems very unlikely.
The wide consensus is that the rebels lack the ability to deploy chemical weapons on this scale, whether they want to or not. I'm yet to see a convincing case the other way.
Sarin was released by terrorists on the Tokyo Metro in 1995.
Exactly Sunil. Packed Metro, 13 dead (~50 severely injured) compared with the 1,000+ reported in Damascus.
You forgot the 1000 or so with vision problems, so the total casualties are comparable.
Quoteth it:ly 355 died in 3 hospitals (MSF claim)[1] 494 killed (The Damascus Media Office claim)[2] 502 killed (SOHR claim)[3] 588 killed (VDC claim)[4] 635 killed (SRGC claim)[5] 1,222 killed (HRO East Ghouta claim)[6] 1,300 killed (SNC claim)[7] 1,338 killed (LCC claim)[8] 1,429 killed (United States estimate)[9] 1,729 killed (FSA claim)[10]
Whereas on the Tokyo subway there were five separate attacks killing 13, seventeen critically ill, thirty-seven severe and 984 moderately ill with vision problems.
So 1,429 is a disputed figure?
If you take 355, that's still 27 times. If you take the lower median of 635, that's almost 50 times.
Have you stopped to think that your military action might cause as many or even more civilian casualties?
Iraq war casualties-600000 to 1 million
Oh, please, you clearly haven't listened to tim, who assures us that Iraq casualties are in the lower double digits, and including Ethal from Lalesh, who lost her shin when she accidentally hurdled a clusterbomb when cavorting with delight at the advent of Shock & Awe.
Comeon Sean,are you that affected by Tim`s posts that you quote verbatim when he`s not around.Does he come in your dreams?
For the sake of my sanity (and other PBers' sanity as well) can you rephrase
The wide consensus is that the rebels lack the ability to deploy chemical weapons on this scale, whether they want to or not. I'm yet to see a convincing case the other way.
Sarin was released by terrorists on the Tokyo Metro in 1995.
Exactly Sunil. Packed Metro, 13 dead (~50 severely injured) compared with the 1,000+ reported in Damascus.
You forgot the 1000 or so with vision problems, so the total casualties are comparable.
Quoteth it:ly 355 died in 3 hospitals (MSF claim)[1] 494 killed (The Damascus Media Office claim)[2] 502 killed (SOHR claim)[3] 588 killed (VDC claim)[4] 635 killed (SRGC claim)[5] 1,222 killed (HRO East Ghouta claim)[6] 1,300 killed (SNC claim)[7] 1,338 killed (LCC claim)[8] 1,429 killed (United States estimate)[9] 1,729 killed (FSA claim)[10]
Whereas on the Tokyo subway there were five separate attacks killing 13, seventeen critically ill, thirty-seven severe and 984 moderately ill with vision problems.
So 1,429 is a disputed figure?
If you take 355, that's still 27 times. If you take the lower median of 635, that's almost 50 times.
Have you stopped to think that your military action might cause as many or even more civilian casualties?
Iraq war casualties-600000 to 1 million
Oh, please, you clearly haven't listened to tim, who assures us that Iraq casualties are in the lower double digits, and including Ethal from Lalesh, who lost her shin when she accidentally hurdled a clusterbomb when cavorting with delight at the advent of Shock & Awe.
Comeon Sean,are you that affected by Tim`s posts that you quote verbatim when he`s not around.Does he come in your dreams?
For the sake of my sanity (and other PBers' sanity as well) can you rephrase
"Does he come in your dreams"
`Do you dream about him?`There.I preferred the earlier version though!
The wide consensus is that the rebels lack the ability to deploy chemical weapons on this scale, whether they want to or not. I'm yet to see a convincing case the other way.
Sarin was released by terrorists on the Tokyo Metro in 1995.
Exactly Sunil. Packed Metro, 13 dead (~50 severely injured) compared with the 1,000+ reported in Damascus.
You forgot the 1000 or so with vision problems, so the total casualties are comparable.
Quoteth it:ly 355 died in 3 hospitals (MSF claim)[1] 494 killed (The Damascus Media Office claim)[2] 502 killed (SOHR claim)[3] 588 killed (VDC claim)[4] 635 killed (SRGC claim)[5] 1,222 killed (HRO East Ghouta claim)[6] 1,300 killed (SNC claim)[7] 1,338 killed (LCC claim)[8] 1,429 killed (United States estimate)[9] 1,729 killed (FSA claim)[10]
Whereas on the Tokyo subway there were five separate attacks killing 13, seventeen critically ill, thirty-seven severe and 984 moderately ill with vision problems.
So 1,429 is a disputed figure?
If you take 355, that's still 27 times. If you take the lower median of 635, that's almost 50 times.
Have you stopped to think that your military action might cause as many or even more civilian casualties?
Iraq war casualties-600000 to 1 million
Oh, please, you clearly haven't listened to tim, who assures us that Iraq casualties are in the lower double digits, and including Ethal from Lalesh, who lost her shin when she accidentally hurdled a clusterbomb when cavorting with delight at the advent of Shock & Awe.
Comeon Sean,are you that affected by Tim`s posts that you quote verbatim when he`s not around.Does he come in your dreams?
For the sake of my sanity (and other PBers' sanity as well) can you rephrase
"Does he come in your dreams"
`Do you dream about him?`There.I preferred the earlier version though!
"Even before the Syrian crisis, this axis of invective prompted the question: is Ed Miliband the most disliked leader in recent British history? No-hopers ranging from Michael Foot to Iain Duncan Smith failed to attract such odium,"
The trouble with cutting and pasting small sections of an article is that you often miss the point of the story as you have done here. She came not to bury Caesar but to praise him. This next section is a slightly more accurate precis of the substance of what she has written
"Even allowing for the Syrian debacle, the general venom directed at Mr Miliband is unjustified: he is a modest, thoughtful, clever and principled leader who has deftly rebuilt a broken party."
The wide consensus is that the rebels lack the ability to deploy chemical weapons on this scale, whether they want to or not. I'm yet to see a convincing case the other way.
Sarin was released by terrorists on the Tokyo Metro in 1995.
Exactly Sunil. Packed Metro, 13 dead (~50 severely injured) compared with the 1,000+ reported in Damascus.
You forgot the 1000 or so with vision problems, so the total casualties are comparable.
Quoteth it: 355 died in 3 hospitals (MSF claim)[1] 494 killed (The Damascus Media Office claim)[2] 502 killed (SOHR claim)[3] 588 killed (VDC claim)[4] 635 killed (SRGC claim)[5] 1,222 killed (HRO East Ghouta claim)[6] 1,300 killed (SNC claim)[7] 1,338 killed (LCC claim)[8] 1,429 killed (United States estimate)[9] 1,729 killed (FSA claim)[10]
Whereas on the Tokyo subway there were five separate attacks killing 13, seventeen critically ill, thirty-seven severe and 984 moderately ill with vision problems.
So 1,429 is a disputed figure?
If you take 355, that's still 27 times. If you take the lower median of 635, that's almost 50 times.
Have you stopped to think that your military action might cause as many or even more civilian casualties?
One argument at a time, Sunil. This time I was merely showing that a mass sarin attack by a unorganised force on this scale seems very unlikely.
I watched Sec. Kerry, Hagel and the General's deposition to the Senate Committee. One point the administration [ and, indeed our government ] struggles with is that it will be a "limited strike" not geared to "tip the balance". How can any strike against Assad not tip the balance ?
The other point was what is meant by "limited". If after missiles rain down on them, Assad will emerge after a few days, heavily "degraded" but still by and large intact. If he then pursues conventional attacks on the rebels, will everything be hunky dory ?
Why are the West lying when it says it is not meant for regime change when it is precisely that ! This is the Syrian lie, when not going for regime change in Iraq, was the Iraqi lie.
It's all gloriously vague. There will NOT be boots on the ground, but Kerry pleaded with the Senate not to prohibit boots on the ground. It's not for regime change, but they want to 'degrade' his ability to fight. If not to help regime change, why? And - regime change to whom?
What is the problem this is meant to solve? It looks increasingly like it's a vanity project for Obama's ego, to rescue him from his 'red line' comment. I do hope I'm wrong.
The wide consensus is that the rebels lack the ability to deploy chemical weapons on this scale, whether they want to or not. I'm yet to see a convincing case the other way.
Sarin was released by terrorists on the Tokyo Metro in 1995.
Exactly Sunil. Packed Metro, 13 dead (~50 severely injured) compared with the 1,000+ reported in Damascus.
You forgot the 1000 or so with vision problems, so the total casualties are comparable.
Quoteth it:ly 355 died in 3 hospitals (MSF claim)[1] 494 killed (The Damascus Media Office claim)[2] 502 killed (SOHR claim)[3] 588 killed (VDC claim)[4] 635 killed (SRGC claim)[5] 1,222 killed (HRO East Ghouta claim)[6] 1,300 killed (SNC claim)[7] 1,338 killed (LCC claim)[8] 1,429 killed (United States estimate)[9] 1,729 killed (FSA claim)[10]
Whereas on the Tokyo subway there were five separate attacks killing 13, seventeen critically ill, thirty-seven severe and 984 moderately ill with vision problems.
So 1,429 is a disputed figure?
If you take 355, that's still 27 times. If you take the lower median of 635, that's almost 50 times.
Have you stopped to think that your military action might cause as many or even more civilian casualties?
Iraq war casualties-600000 to 1 million
Oh, please, you clearly haven't listened to tim, who assures us that Iraq casualties are in the lower double digits, and including Ethal from Lalesh, who lost her shin when she accidentally hurdled a clusterbomb when cavorting with delight at the advent of Shock & Awe.
Comeon Sean,are you that affected by Tim`s posts that you quote verbatim when he`s not around.Does he come in your dreams?
For the sake of my sanity (and other PBers' sanity as well) can you rephrase
Syria Updates: Shadow Armies and Shadow Supporters
Interesting that the US administration has stated that the first batches of US trained insurgents have entered Syria from Jordan. This would verify my posting on here on the 21st that such units had entered Syria and others were to follow. Interesting too that after a post that there seemed to be a lot of Special Operations assets setting up shop recently that the Sunday Times suggested that British SOF were in play. Unconfirmed. Certainly French in-theatre assets are certainly passing on feeds to chosen opposition forces
It also looks like the the question marks over the scale of US forces deployed for what was apparently some missile strikes didn't quite fit. It appears that Administration thinking is to perhaps go for something more concerted even if short. Where many made the error was to look to the Med, it is South and East of Syria where the most devastating kit is. Its whether it would ever get used that is the question.
It is dawning on Assad's government that they are not in the clear yet. Whenever Assad's officials spread out, the estimate was that some wouldn't bother coming back, taking the opportunity in the disjointed situation to bail out. Some , though no one truly notable, have already in recent days, going to ground. Today though we saw the defection of a senior General today after rumours last night. The problem is the guys name, he could be one of two people. One is a General..the other a General who's an even bigger fish. Which one we'll find out soon.
There is a feeling others will follow. Some intelligence assessments are that the finger pointing in the aftermath of the chemical weapons attack may both indicate and develop into rather more severe strains amongst some of Assad's officials & military men. The US for well over a year has been looking for a coup leadership, whether for physically ousting Assad or simply just breaking off. No evidence that they have it yet but there are stresses.
On the special weapons front there are stories that a suggestion has been floated by one of Assad's external allies to ship his stocks out of the country as a way to short circuit any strike plans. This is as yet unconfirmed and, even if it is, it isn't clear if its going to be taken up.
Yokel, thanks as ever for your informative updates. I caught the rumours on twitter last night of an interesting defection from the Assad Regime who might be able to cast some light and confirm that they indeed were responsible for the latest use of chemical weapons. While diplomatically there is a growing narrative of the Obama administration being in some disarray, I also get the impression tonight of a contrasting one of a military operation which is far more advanced, organised and specifically targeted on the ground at this moment in time?
As an aside, are the French working far more closely with their American allies than at any time previously in the last twenty years in a hope of finally allaying the previous distrust that had built up in America about France after the events in the nineties in the former Yugoslavia?
Very interesting Newsnight tonight with regard your point about the Americans looking for coup leadership.
Syria Updates: Shadow Armies and Shadow Supporters
Interesting that the US administration has stated that the first batches of US trained insurgents have entered Syria from Jordan. This would verify my posting on here on the 21st that such units had entered Syria and others were to follow. Interesting too that after a post that there seemed to be a lot of Special Operations assets setting up shop recently that the Sunday Times suggested that British SOF were in play. Unconfirmed. Certainly French in-theatre assets are certainly passing on feeds to chosen opposition forces
It also looks like the the question marks over the scale of US forces deployed for what was apparently some missile strikes didn't quite fit. It appears that Administration thinking is to perhaps go for something more concerted even if short. Where many made the error was to look to the Med, it is South and East of Syria where the most devastating kit is. Its whether it would ever get used that is the question.
It is dawning on Assad's government that they are not in the clear yet. Whenever Assad's officials spread out, the estimate was that some wouldn't bother coming back, taking the opportunity in the disjointed situation to bail out. Some , though no one truly notable, have already in recent days, going to ground. Today though we saw the defection of a senior General today after rumours last night. The problem is the guys name, he could be one of two people. One is a General..the other a General who's an even bigger fish. Which one we'll find out soon.
There is a feeling others will follow. Some intelligence assessments are that the finger pointing in the aftermath of the chemical weapons attack may both indicate and develop into rather more severe strains amongst some of Assad's officials & military men. The US for well over a year has been looking for a coup leadership, whether for physically ousting Assad or simply just breaking off. No evidence that they have it yet but there are stresses.
On the special weapons front there are stories that a suggestion has been floated by one of Assad's external allies to ship his stocks out of the country as a way to short circuit any strike plans. This is as yet unconfirmed and, even if it is, it isn't clear if its going to be taken up.
Comments
Bloody awesome.
I have a special thread going up at 00:01
"Does he come in your dreams"
The other point was what is meant by "limited". If after missiles rain down on them, Assad will emerge after a few days, heavily "degraded" but still by and large intact. If he then pursues conventional attacks on the rebels, will everything be hunky dory ?
Why are the West lying when it says it is not meant for regime change when it is precisely that ! This is the Syrian lie, when not going for regime change in Iraq, was the Iraqi lie.
http://www.pcs.org.uk/en/news_and_events/pcs_comment/index.cfm/pickles-lands-taxpayers-with-90000-bill
"Even before the Syrian crisis, this axis of invective prompted the question: is Ed Miliband the most disliked leader in recent British history? No-hopers ranging from Michael Foot to Iain Duncan Smith failed to attract such odium,"
The trouble with cutting and pasting small sections of an article is that you often miss the point of the story as you have done here. She came not to bury Caesar but to praise him. This next section is a slightly more accurate precis of the substance of what she has written
"Even allowing for the Syrian debacle, the general venom directed at Mr Miliband is unjustified: he is a modest, thoughtful, clever and principled leader who has deftly rebuilt a broken party."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Ghouta_attacks
What is the problem this is meant to solve? It looks increasingly like it's a vanity project for Obama's ego, to rescue him from his 'red line' comment. I do hope I'm wrong.
Sounds more like an episode of Jerry Springer
Interesting that the US administration has stated that the first batches of US trained insurgents have entered Syria from Jordan. This would verify my posting on here on the 21st that such units had entered Syria and others were to follow. Interesting too that after a post that there seemed to be a lot of Special Operations assets setting up shop recently that the Sunday Times suggested that British SOF were in play. Unconfirmed. Certainly French in-theatre assets are certainly passing on feeds to chosen opposition forces
It also looks like the the question marks over the scale of US forces deployed for what was apparently some missile strikes didn't quite fit. It appears that Administration thinking is to perhaps go for something more concerted even if short. Where many made the error was to look to the Med, it is South and East of Syria where the most devastating kit is. Its whether it would ever get used that is the question.
It is dawning on Assad's government that they are not in the clear yet. Whenever Assad's officials spread out, the estimate was that some wouldn't bother coming back, taking the opportunity in the disjointed situation to bail out. Some , though no one truly notable, have already in recent days, going to ground. Today though we saw the defection of a senior General today after rumours last night. The problem is the guys name, he could be one of two people. One is a General..the other a General who's an even bigger fish. Which one we'll find out soon.
There is a feeling others will follow. Some intelligence assessments are that the finger pointing in the aftermath of the chemical weapons attack may both indicate and develop into rather more severe strains amongst some of Assad's officials & military men. The US for well over a year has been looking for a coup leadership, whether for physically ousting Assad or simply just breaking off. No evidence that they have it yet but there are stresses.
On the special weapons front there are stories that a suggestion has been floated by one of Assad's external allies to ship his stocks out of the country as a way to short circuit any strike plans. This is as yet unconfirmed and, even if it is, it isn't clear if its going to be taken up.
As an aside, are the French working far more closely with their American allies than at any time previously in the last twenty years in a hope of finally allaying the previous distrust that had built up in America about France after the events in the nineties in the former Yugoslavia?
Very interesting Newsnight tonight with regard your point about the Americans looking for coup leadership.