Without insinuating anything about your post, your opinions or your beliefs, I have the following hopefully partially objective points to note about your post f

Without insinuating anything about your post, your opinions or your beliefs, I have the following hopefully partially objective points to note about your post for fellow readers of hackernews. You raise suspicions that the OPCW and JIT are biased or influenced by the US and its allies. But offer nothing more than a convoluted, hearsay, appeal to authority to back it up. "Smart people around me also think that <something>". That <something> is a frequent talking point of 'the other side' (ie. not the US and its allies). 'Why use chemical weapons if you're winning and you know the US would crack down': because you didn't know, you've been using them since the start and noticed no significant reaction from the west[0], and because there's more to war than just 'winning'[1]. The instances in which chemical weapon use was suspected were instances where a high attrition for both sides was likely: entrenched enemy combatants in civilian areas. Even if you 'win' there by conventional means, you're likely to have sustained losses that can quite conveniently be avoided if you can just gas your enemies out of their basements. Having cast and fortified your suspicion on the supposedly true, neutral, authority on the subject, but not actually pointing to any concrete points of contention, but keeping it mostly vague using hindsight rationalizations (as if everyone has perfect knowledge of what the other side would do?), you then shift your focus to an implausible scenario that seems calculated to produce a large amount of moral outrage. "What if <contemporary rival of USA> were to invade the USA and then <suddenly[0]> use chemical weapons while casting blame on the USA?". Of course, we have already established that it is perfectly rational to use chemical weapons when you can get away with it: it's effective, it didn't cause much ruckus until now and, looking at what was actually achieved: you've definitely come out on top[2]. Not to say that the USA is always blameless, but this false-flag-poison-gas operation just doesn't cut it. We all know the US doesn't need much to start assassinating people with drones. [0]: https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/Timeline-of-Syrian-Chemical-Weapons-Activity https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/Timeline-of-Syrian-Ch... [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrrhic_victory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrrhic_victory [2]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/09/douma-inhabitants-prepare-leave-deadly-syria-chemical-attack https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/09/douma-inhabita...