4 ms·
I said theories. As in "Russia stands to gain from Skripal poisoning, only they had the method, it was a state operation, approved by Putin, during election cam
by guilhas 8y ago
I said theories. As in "Russia stands to gain from Skripal poisoning, only they had the method, it was a state operation, approved by Putin, during election campaign and FIFA2018" And "Assad gassing his people while wining the war". But you also have reports from UN/OPCW that the rebeles were the ones to chemical weapons, or that there were no chemical weapons used in Douma.
I don't see how FUD of Russia damages western intervention. Also the disaster of previous western interventions, and the current in Syria supporting the terrorists speaks for itself.
Russia vetoed a US UN resolution to determine responsibles without an FFM, just relying on the civil society and media reports.
Other Russia delaying news were already almost 10 days in, including after US bombings. They say it was for security reasons, and there were shotings while the investigators were there. Also if there were journalists parading how could they interfere with the evidence?
They bombed in Douma area also. Which was strange since investigators were on their way. Also taking action before the investigation does not sound very credible.
- megous 8y agoAll you said was that chemical use theories are weak. Yet they are not weak. Chemical weapons are used in Syria almost since the beginning of the uprising. For example, OPCW determined Sarin was used several times in 2017. So chemical weapons are used in Syria. There are almost no reports of other parties than ISIS and Assad using chemical weapons. Quantity matters. It's like 1:100. I can think of one incident near Aleppo, that's always used in these conversations. It's actually one of the ways Russian propaganda works. There's no proportionality involved. It's just Assad does this. Oh no, other people do it too, so... presumably it's ok? or it's messy, so presumably we should all give Putin free hand to do what he likes? Yes, corrupt rebels are no better in principle than Assad, but amount of damage they did and can do is very limited, compared to actual damage done by the regime to people who protested against it. And it's not just rebel groups vs Assad, there's also much larger civil society, that just dislikes all corrupt leaders and wants to have a peaceful life for once. And these people have much better chance organizing against local warlords, if Assad would not constantly attack them. > Which was strange since investigators were on their way. Also taking action before the investigation does not sound very credible. Perhaps, but it turned out to be right, according to preliminary report.