U.S. warns Assad over 'undeniable' chemical weapons attack

What evidence did they find exactly that the Assad regime perpetrated the attack, and not some other force operating within Syria? I think the US taxpayers have a right to know.

In Cluedo, you can't win the game if you only guess the location and the murder weapon. You'd want evidence directly linking the attack back to the Assad chain of command. I see no mention of this.

The warmongers logic goes like this; people who oppose wars and interventions are anti-US and unpatriotic.

That couldn't be further from the truth. I support the troops; they should be home with their families, not invading foreign lands.

Syria, like the long list of other military adventures, is none of Americans concern.

Stop being global-busybodies!

Well, here we disagree. We will not be sending US boots to Syria, but at least we can begin surgical strikes to remove chemical weapons from the hands of Assad and the Rebels. Neither of them will have no chemical weapons, and we should leave them alone.

How will this be achieved through surgical strikes? What do you think the Syrians have all their arsenal and stockpoli of weapons in one big shed with neon signs on it? Brainwashed and naive...

CIA already has a solid lead where these stockpiles are. Cleaning up the chemical spill after the airstrike is another issue and concern.

Does it? Where is the evidence of this? They don't even have evidence on who is at fault for these chemical attacks. The US could even be responsible for them.

Didn't the CIA also think Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Remember those grainy satellite photos? How embarrassing. That shows you just how effective - or ineffective - CIA intelligence gathering can be.

Look I'll let you in on something here - the US don't care about those chemical weapons. What they care about is the destruction of Assad's military - communication lines, artillery, planes, tanks, supply convoys - things like that. That is what the surgical strikes will be for. Once that objective is acheived they will allow the Islamic fundamentalists to over run government held positions and let them take over. And when they start causing the US a few problems they'll bomb them too - that is unless Iran or other groups who are ideologically opposed to these Syrian rebels don't hit them first.

The US has to provide concrete proof of this otherwise I'll be outside the US consulate demonstrating if force is used.....

That won't topple Assad

Words are cheap when you are Kerry calling news conferences and standing a a podium building a theoretical humanitarian and legal case for military action against Syria, but the effects of any real action are so unpredictable and if we strike and these countries feel free to start carrying out threats to invade Israel or whatever...God have mercy on the Syrian people but the effects around the world could be staggering.

"With his international credibility seen increasingly on the line, Obama could opt for limited measures..."

What credibility? Were he really credible, Assad would not have done this in the first place. Were he credible, Putin would not be so adversarial. What a joke.

As for "limited measures", Iraq and Afghanistan are both glaring examples of the failure of limited measures. If you are going to fight, you go in 100%, or not at all.

This situation is a set-up, and neither Obama nor Kerry, who are both out of control, have any intention of providing real evidence or backing down.

Can we expect a speech from John Kerry with a gas mask at United Nations Security Council? He can borrow the old vial from Colin Powell, american people will buy the story.

The US is a hypocritical nation

See link below

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6105726.stm

The US under the guise of protecting freedom has been involved in resource grabbing in the Middle East.

If defenders of US aggression can explain these double standards then they are welcome to try

And once again there is no proof that Assad has poisoned anyone just as Saddam had no WMDs nor any links to Al-Qaeda

Don't do it Obama.

"Many hundreds of people died in Damascus suburbs in what appears to have been the worst chemical weapons attack since Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein fatally gassed thousands of Kurds in 1988."

It's worthwhile remembering with humility (if like me you are a US citizen) that the US sold biological and chemical weapons to Saddam Hussein during the Iran Iraq war. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_support_for_Iraq_during_the_Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_war#Chemical_and_biological_exports

The US can have no better allies than honesty and humility while facing the current crisis in Syria.

Iraq Redux. Another failure in the making.

"Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said any intervention in Syria without a Security Council resolution would be a grave violation of international law."

But your country and China will veto any such Security Council resolution, Mr. Lavrov.

And aren't you already intervening in Syria's war by supplying Assad's regime?

" You have been aware that the chemical weapon use is a clear violation of International rules."

Yes, and US gov supported Saddam's use of chemweap against Iran in the 80's.

US gov is rushing headlong into another military adventure. Stupid and shameful.

" I believe you are not told the truth. You meant that Saddam's brother used chemical weapons against Kurds?"

No, that's not what I said. It is you who is misinformed. Look it up.

Complicated? Not at all. Then what do you want US and UN to do? Just sit around and allow these killings by chemical weapons to continue?

Do you feel good about that? If not, what does your moral conscience is telling you to do.

I want the US to do nothing. They have caused enough problems in the region, and especially if they are implicated in this as Russia seems to assert - this chemical attack suspiciously appears to have spread on the internet before it actually happened. This could quite conceivably be another false-flag operation. The US has great expertise at this. As for the UN, they are a useless and irrelevant body. But at least there are a few inspectors on the ground inside Syria now to investigate. Suspiciously again, they have not been seen wearing gas masks or protective suits in the area. Wouldn't there still be high levels of toxicity?

Do I feel good about it? Of course not, but it is a problem that must be solved by the Syrians themselves. As I've said I favour Assad more than I do Islamic Fundamentalists. Islamic Fundamentalists will always come last on a list of any kind of preferences.

Who is killing the civilans with chemcial attack? It may be Syrian rebels or Syrian Government or Hazebollah of Lebanon? No one has credible evidence that Assad is responsible for that. I congratulate the defiant Syria for not becoming like chaotic Irag and Egypt. Arab spring has become Arab nightmare!

Many in west do not realize that middle east is full of sectarian violence, racial tension like kurd and turkish, kurd and Iragi and society are brain washed with the backward medival age mentality. Democracy does not work in middle east right now. Even Saddam and Mubarak were authocratic and corrupted, they can control their society with stability and law and order. West made the mess and chaos and they will run away when it is out of the control.

Unlike Irag, Syiran is backed by Iran, Lebanon Hazebollah and Russia. Intervention means US is facing all of them together. Besides that US supplied weapons may end up with disciples of Bin Laden. Sound like giving weapons to enemy for killing own soldiers.

Thumbs up, Bass.

Really: A pox on both their houses. It is the innocents killed or displaced who are to be mourned.

The US under the guise of protecting freedom has been involved in resource grabbing in the Middle East.

What resources are there to grab? At the current rates of production, the oil in the middle east will be fully consumed by the middle of the century. By the beginning of the next century, life in the middle east may devolve back to the state it enjoyed prior to the discovery of oil. Unless dirt, sand, and camels are valuable resources, the middle east has little to fear from America or anyone else.

America has enough food and energy resources without having to stick it's hand in the middle-eastern wasp's nest. Obama couldn't find his backside with both hands and a flashlight, let alone manage another conflict in the middle east. He knows this, otherwise he would have intervened the first time his "red line" was crossed.

Syria has nothing the US wants, unless the US wants to poke Vladmir Putin in the eye by changing the Syrian regime, and nullifying Russia's Syrian oil contracts. Young Mr Snowden might be more of an influence in drawing America into Syria than Assad's using chemical weapons against innocents.

In May, Turkish police found cylinders of sarin nerve gas in the homes of Syrian militants from the Al-Qaeda-linked Al-Nusra Front who were detained in the south near Syrias northern border. In July, Russian experts submitted reports to the UN detailing how the missiles used in previous chemical weapon attacks were crude and not factory made, and that the chemical components found were not consistent with what the Syrian military has.

The Syrian military has just recently discovered chemical weapons in a rebel tunnel in the Jobar suburb of Damascus, including shells, gasmasks manufactured in the United States, chemical substances of Saudi Arabian origin. Arabic language reports also indicate that a former high-ranking Saudi Arabian member of Al-Nusra Front claimed that the group possessed chemical weapons in a tweet.

Qui bono?

The timing of Kerry's outburst seems strange. Why not wait until the UN inspectors have finished their investigation?

Personally I thank god we have this President instead of the alternatives. People trying to compare this Presidents decisions with the last or even Reagan just sounds ignorant. I don't remember this president going in alone in Lybia, or Egypt for that matter like a lot of these moronic politicians on the right would have liked. I really don't want the US to get involved with Syria just like I wouldn't want us to get involved if something happened between China and Japan... let them handle their own business. From my understanding the Syrian people didn't even like us until their government decided to slaughter them. Why can't their brethren in neighboring countries help them? Maybe it's because they still have the 15th century mentality. However at the same time what other countries are gonna help? China? Russia? Japan? The EU? Get real... Nobody will do a damn thing unless the US does it first. And giving them guns the help keep the killing spree alive doesn't cut it.

I think the President's approach is better then a full on invasion, especially alone. Take out important targets and leave it at that. You're move Assad. Obviously this won't topple the Assad regime, which Jay Carney has already said. We don't trust either side and it wouldn't make since to get rid of Assad only to be replaced by a disorganized group of people infiltrated by Al Qaeda. This also will give the US and UN an idea of Syria's military capabilities. The US shouldn't act unless we have willing partners. And the US Government should give clear evidence that these weapons where in fact used by Assad and not by Al Qaeda. But apparently they government will be declassifying documents to make there case.

@Jean That's a nice thought to try and spread around, but in reality I doubt it. The US people would never put up with Syria becoming another Iraq war and this President is to smart for that, otherwise we would have been in Syria last year. Now if John McCain was President I could see where you're argument could be true, because we'd probably have troops in Libya and definitely would never have left Iraq if he had become President. But if you want to blame someone for a possible reason why Syria is where it is today, blame China and Russia. If they hadn't been obstructionists the UN probably would have slapped sanctions and other things they could have done and we might not be here today. It's their fault...

Proof or no proof, the US/UK are bound and determined to stage an attack reminiscent of the lead-up to the Iraq invasion. Disgusting. Stoking flames of a large, hot war.

As usual, you're jumping ahead of yourself. If you think that boots are going on the ground and this is going to be long and down out, couldn't be further from the truth.

I am on Russia's side in this. The US can't be trusted to correct the region's problems. Have we all forgotten the Iraq war predicated by a blatant lie that it had ties with Al Qaeda. Complete rubbish that most Americans took as fact. And have a look at Iraq now - it is much worse off than when under Saddam Hussein. With the Syria issue, the US/Britain/France are backing Islamic Fundamentalists.If these crazies ever gain control in Syria they will be the cause of much more grief than what has been seen under Assad. I'm suspicious about who organised and funded these chemical attacks to begin with. Could it be the smoking gun America needs to justify itself intervening and convince its people of its actions to come?

This situation is a set-up

Yep. Has the CIA's dirty little fingerprints all over it.

So let's begin with a serious discussion. Why has the Assad government allowed UN inspectors into the country to follow up on these chemical weapons claims by the US? If I were Assad and I was responsible for such heinous crimes I certainly wouldn't allow a third party to enter into the country to verify it.

I guess I am talking to a bottomless pit mistress with no logics. These people love distortion of the truth. I see........

Actually I have sound logic. Firstly chemical weapons use cannot be attributed to the Assad government.. Until it does what grounds are there for an attack on the Assad Government...

The US doesn't want to play the role of world police, we all know that. It intervenes to gain political advantages. If Assad is removed, the alternatives are frightening. Do yourself afavour and do a little research...

Russia supports Assad because they know he is the lesser of the evils. Toppling him will see the country eneter a period of sectarian violence which has no conclusion in the Muslim world...

The US want to appear to be on a moral high horse to win support for their actions. It has certainly fooled you...

The US are more careless, and only care for themselves. Sectarianism is the root cause of all the suffering in the Middle East. What the US will be doing by toppling Assad is effectively empowering that kind of evil...

Is all this too complicated for you to understand? It is quite understandable considering US politics and the Middle Eastern geopolitical situation is quite complicated.

There was a clown on these boards, called NeverSubmit, who stalked the discussion threads not so long ago on the Syrian Civil War and posted the most non-sensical rubbish proclaiming the Assad Regime's innocence in the whole mess.

I'm just wondering where he is now.

"So until the US shows accountability for the lies"

Living proof that you cannot lie to a liar....

The sabre-rattling here is unsettling. This is just like the WMDs and Supergun all over again. We the public need to see undeniable evidence, not 'trust us - we know' type garbage. If they are planning on dragging our country's into another war we need to have 100% proof...

I'd like John Kerry to explain the 'moral obscenity' of Gulf War Syndrome at the same time as castigating Assad......

Off a Russian news site. Hard to argue against;

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/26-08-2013/125496-syria_questions-0/

I hear the Russians are going to continue to supply Assad with weapons and other assistance, and the Chinese aren't going to get involved.

@kurisupisu Can you explain what resources Syria has that the US would want because I must have missed it. It can't be oil because our dependence on foreign oil had dropped. And Russia is already encircled and not much of a threat now anyway. Arab nations are doing a pretty good job disabling their strengths without much help from us. All you have to do is look at the chaos in those countries and how it's effecting their economy.

I wish I could post the link here. The attack made by Assad forces may have been a mistake. I will try and paste it here. http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/171353

In other words, Assad forces used chemical weapons on rebels who were in the underground tunnel system... but miscalculated what the total effect would be on the total population.

In other words, Assad didn't intent to attack Damascus.

Apparently the CIA intercepted a phone call between Syrian army commanders where one asks the other what the @#%&@ is he doing using chemical weapons. So they are sure that the Syrian Army was involved. Now the question is "who authorized it, if anybody?"

Of course you might question the veracity of CIA data; especially after the Iraq WMD fiasco. Just sayin'.

Either way you have to feel sorry for the Syrian people. Talk about being stuck between a rock and a hard place. Tragic.

CraigHicks: It's worthwhile remembering with humility (if like me you are a US citizen) that the US sold biological and chemical weapons to Saddam Hussein during the Iran Iraq war

So did France, Italy, Switzerland, Brazil, The UK, Austria, The Netherlands, Singapore, Egypt, India, Luxembourg, Spain, China, Portugal, and Niger. All are directly linked to providing Iraq with supplies used in creating weapons of mass destruction. If you want to talk about an issue, you should talk about everything.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#Western_help_with_Iraq.27s_WMD_program

And that was a different time and place. The world has evolved since then which is why Syria is an extremely important test for everyone. If the world fails to act then chemical weapons will start appearing on battlefields elsewhere. It's really much bigger than just one country using a small amount.

I don't even think the West will do anything more than some airstrikes on military targets just to send the message that there will be repercussions. They can do that without really changing the tide of the war or giving any real help to the rebels...or getting involved beyond a quick "punishment".

Interesting

I hope Daqmascus people who want to get out their home have enough time to out of Syria/ Hope JAPAN iInc will donate face mask to Syrian people. Even the same type school children had more than 68 years ago is better than nothing. Safety of civilans are more important than politics. Any countries donating food to refugee camps in Turkey? Hope Japan will shift its donation to N. Korea to Syrian refugee camps. I

optikoolAug. 28, 2013 - 07:34AM JST Can you explain what resources Syria has that the US would want because I must have missed it. It can't be oil because our dependence on foreign oil had dropped.

Okay, let's get our facts straight here:

U.S. oil production has been dropping SHARPLY since the 1970's (when it reached its highest point). Yes, in the last year they boosted production by nearly a million barrels, but that's nowhere near what it was in the 1970's. The U.S. currently produces about 6 million barrels a day (nothing to sneeze at! Its an impressive figure) ...

The U.S. consumes more than 10 million barrels a day. That leaves a gap of about 4 million barrels A DAY.

Does this explain the situation to you? If imports are dropping (which they are) and U.S. production hasn't increased (it hasn't in the long-term view) then that means that the U.S. is eating into its strategic reserves. It has about 700 million barrels in reserve... which isn't so much when you think that only presents about a 2 month supply.

This aggression in Syria is part of a broader plan that is public information. The U.S. declared before 9/11 that oil was a strategic issue and that they needed to secure huge stockpiles. Since the U.S. systematically pissed off every Arab country by backing Israel (who I had sympathy for until they started their own little genocide in Palestine) that meant that the ONLY way they'd get good prices on oil was if they threatened force... and having threatened force they had to follow through.

Face it, this war is all about oil. Buy an electric car and save some Syrian kid's life.

Of course, the U.S.A. would never do anything like that!

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2013/08/26/editorials/poisoned-mongooses-in-okinawa/#.UhvYWRaCUZM

They are just itching to lob a few missiles into Syria. Will look good compared to their ongoing debacle in AfPak. Maybe some drones too, to kill civilians. Selceted strikes on Assad and hid cronies. Send in Rambo? Or the Navy Seals who allegedly took out Bin Laden? so many ways to look resolute and man of actionely. Pathetic.

'Undeniable' hahaha what a load of BS He - Assad has already denied doing it. America get a life. Leave the damn world Alone.

So,by continuing to add to the death count is a productive way to settle disagreements?

Global, here's a link.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/08/25/secret_cia_files_prove_america_helped_saddam_as_he_gassed_iran?page=0,0

CIA is at it again, this time in Syria.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/08/25/secretciafilesproveamericahelpedsaddamashegassediran?page=0,0

The requested page could not be found.

Wow, is the CIA stealing home pages now, too?

I think the US would do well to focus on terorirsm at home, such as the Arab terrorist US Army Doctor who killed a lot of innocent fellow solders, and the invasion of Illegals over the border instead of lecturing foreign countries that we have no business telling what to do. The US was never worthy to be the world's police person..and even less so under the joke of Obamanation.

The opposition in Syria has chemically dirty hands.

http://rt.com/news/sarin-gas-turkey-al-nusra-021/

they need to solve their internal problem alone.

"Assad had already denied doing it"

Oh, then he must be innocent!

What I want to know is, when is the rest of the world going to do about all the bloodshed in Syria?

Someone has to bring up the "haters" word, surprised nobody has started going on about good and bad guys and good versus evil yet.

Here's my advice to anyone regarding this matter, don't believe anything you read about this, take it all in and review it with common sense and if you can do so without any political biases you may have. Bloodshed does not end by calling people names and acting in a nationalistic manner.

slumdog, as the RT article states, the evidence by the UN weapons inspector would likely get buried by western media:

" This case being similar to an earlier one, with the findings of UN chemical weapons expert Carla Del Ponte - who had found evidence of their use by the rebels – some think the fallout will be what it was then as well.

Journalist and RT contributor, Afshin Rattansi believes that the same fate will befall this story, as far as media coverage goes. All possible doubts will either be hushed or directed elsewhere, as they were toward Del Ponte’s findings.

“Carla Del Ponte – one of the greatest experts on this from the United Nations – did do an in-depth investigation only a few weeks ago, and of course, the mainstream media tried their best to ignore it and to character-assassinate Del Ponte… she did masses of work on this, and [found] It was the rebels and not the government.”

Down the memory hole.

For the record, I do not hate USA(the land or people aggregate), it's the government that is at present loathesome, the alphabet soup agencies in particular, the neo-cons and socialist-faction of dems. They don't represent the people, IMO.

Rattansi goes on to say that “the news management of the Syria story has been incredibly sophisticated, and I don’t think it will be on the front pages of any newspapers in Britain or the United States – it will quietly disappear like Del Ponte’s case. The big story, of course, will be Russia and the delivery of the S-300.”

"del Ponte said in an interview with the Italian television network RIS:

“According to the testimony we collected, the rebels have used chemical weapons, using sarin gas, although the investigation is far from concluded. Our investigations will have to be further examined, tested and proven through new witnesses but as far as we could determine, at the moment only opponents of the regime have used sarin gas.”

That’s a rough Google translation. The London Independent has her saying this:

“Our investigators have been in neighboring countries interviewing victims, doctors and field hospitals and, according to their report of last week which I have seen, there are strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof of the use of sarin gas, from the way the victims were treated. This was used on the part of the opposition, the rebels, not by the government authorities.”

Del Ponte went on to say that although the UN probe hasn’t seen any similarly direct evidence of sarin gas use by the Syrian government, excluding this possibility would require further investigation."

The evidence surprisingly pointed to rebels and not Assad's forces, though she said that couldn't be ruled out yet. That flies in the face of Washington's position, making her reports the object of White House wrath as it contradicts their narrative.

Who to believe?

Interesting article from the Daily Mail (British Publication) in January which links chemical weapons attack to authorised US false-flag operation. Someone has been censoring this as many sites have taken it down but this one still works;

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=77999

Proof or no proof, the US/UK are bound and determined to stage an attack reminiscent of the lead-up to the Iraq invasion. Disgusting. Stoking flames of a large, hot war.

Jean,

Maybe, but I don't think so. I can't see people in either country agreeing to involvement in another war.

Can you explain what resources Syria has that the US would want because I must have missed it. It can't be oil because our dependence on foreign oil had dropped. And Russia is already encircled and not much of a threat now anyway.

Syria has huge undeveloped oil resources. Russia has a navy base in Syria. You can't get many of the new larger supertankers thru the Suez-Ez canal either. =Pipelines are needed to carry the supertanker oil thru the area.

http://oilandgaslogistics.wordpress.com/2012/09/14/chokepoints-suez-canalsumed-pipeline/

http://www.presstv.com/detail/2013/02/20/289934/iraq-agrees-on-gas-pipeline-deal-with-iran

Syria is a nice piece, but Iran is the ultimate prize. It seems the US (Globalists) have given up on attacking Iran for now and are happy with just attacking Syria who they view as the weaker target. Tried to get their terrorists into Iran and they did blow up a few things -but mostly they failed.

I can't read this sort of news anymore, it's disgusting!

Turkish police found cylinders of sarin nerve gas in the homes of Syrian militants from the Al-Qaeda-linked Al-Nusra Front who were detained in the south near Syrias northern border. In July, Russian experts submitted reports to the UN detailing how the missiles used in previous chemical weapon attacks were crude and not factory made, and that the chemical components found were not consistent with what the Syrian military has.

I checked this I found it originated on an op/ed page by a reporter in Kuala Lumpur. It does not seem to provide any background information or sources at all. How can people who claim that we should not be sheep and believe anything we read in the media then expect us to believe something like an opinion piece as credible evidence?

Qui bono?

Can't tell you as people keep posting stuff that seems to lack crediblity.

@slumdog, first of all, the link was for global's benefit earlier.

As for the other info, has it dawned on you that some things get buried by western media? Into the memory hole things go. Especially when it goes against the approved narrative.

@slumdog,

Since the reports were domestic Turkish, they were likely written in Turkish. Check the Turkish news. Not everything is reported in English or translated. Turkey is aligned with US/UN .

Jean,

I tried to do that, but was unsuccessful. However, you do understand that, as people are pointing out with this very article, just saying something is so is not enough. There has to be solid evidence that can be verified. If you find an article that does that, please let us know.

http://pukhtunkhwatimes.blogspot.com/2013/08/video-82713-white-house-press-briefing.html

White House briefing dated 8/27/13 about an hr. ago. All of you who love to criticize US position may be encourage to see. Assad used the chemical weapons that has been "confirmed".

Jean,

Excerpts from your post:

although the investigation is far from concluded

there are strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof of the use of sarin gas

The evidence surprisingly pointed to rebels and not Assad's forces, though she said that couldn't be ruled out yet.

Which is exactly what I wrote. Nothing conclusive at that time. What has happened since then? Anything conclusive? I realize she suspects the rebels. That is obvious. The UN, US and EU suspect Assad. Neither have proven their cases, yet. Want to try again?

BS

The Del Ponte statement is more conclusive and solid than anything that the US has used in recent decades to attack a country

As shown above, no, it is not. She says this herself. You should consider using the same standards you set for others on yourself when looking at statements and reports. Del Ponte's statements were in the media in May. There have been no further developments in that story since then that I can see. If you have some information conclusive results from some reasonable sources, please present them.

@sangetsu03 So why is the US aching to attack Syria if not for direct or indirect control of resources? Is it to create an area where US military can use missiles and armaments? Disable the strength of the Arab nations? Deny resources to others? Encircle Russia from the south? Or is it a megalomaniacal lust for world dominance?

*All of the above?

Thumbs up from me too bass. I am sick of the American haters and Im not even American. At least they are prepared to get off their butts and DO something.

However - it still worries me. Not that I wouldnt like to see the Assad regime get whats coming to them, but history has shown that whenever a regime is toppled in that region a new equally bad one steps up to take its place AND stability is undermined. Egypt? Libya? Iraq? Afghanistan? Those are just the obvious examples.

The sad truth of the matter is that anything that hurts Assad will only serve to benefit of Al Qaeda and the Islamist rebels.

Why is it that Obama - who never missed an opportunity to criticize his predecessor being a go it alone Cowboy - so willing to start bombing without any international support to speak of? Not even the British want to follow Obama even though there is clear evidence of atrocities by Assad's regime. Obama wants a vote in Congress but the word is out that even if he loses the vote he will bomb anyway. Kind of an ironic situation that Obama finds himself isn't it!

Obama has essentially boxed himself in and wants Republicans to bail him out by giving his go it along bombing campaign legitimacy. I going to love watching Obama clinging to his warmonger buddies McCain and Graham while the Lefties in his party pummel him.

It's likely the West already had covert inspectors, whether direct or thru intermediaries, on site already been collecting evidence even before the official UN inspectors because they had to assume that Assad wouldn't let any inspectors in the first place (or at best, after enough delay to deteriorate the evidence, which is what happened in this case). These are quite strong words, and they wouldn't use it unless they have some good pieces of information analyzed already, especially after the debacle of Iraqi non-WMDs.

Now, there's 2 issues here. The West and a majority of the Americans do not want their soldiers in direct harm's way in this involvement; so save for a vocal minority, there's no political pressure on their leaders to put boots on the ground in Syria. The other issue is that if chemical weapons were indeed used and that the evidence overwhelmingly points towards the Assad government, the UN has to backup that such act is a definite no-no with credible repercussions in this day and age (not like their blind eye during Saddam Hussein's reign in the 80's).

Thus, while there won't be soldiers or even planes in range of Assad's air defense anytime soon, but instead likely a volley of cruise missiles fired off mobile sea vessels. That won't topple Assad --even Western leaders begrudgingly admit the Syrian oppositions aren't ready to run a national government-- but it will send a message and an excuse to weaken Assad's forces, and maybe force an arbitration process.

This US administration does not want to get involved, but this terrible situation does not give them a choice. US does not want to play a role of police in the world, but who else will do that? Russia, China? These countries do not have a moral compass. They are careless. They only care about themselves.

Exactly, given the situation, the US Admin. hands are tied up. They are walking a fine line. But to the point, NO one else cares and that is sad.

The strikes WILL start within days, not weeks, and months. This strike against Assad is well justified.

Which will probably quick, get in precision strikes and then get out, mainly, if they target Assad's air fleet, all of it, would then limit the need of implementing a NO fly zone over the country. Once that capability of Assad is destroyed, that will greatly diminish his power of air dominance and his capability to launch another chemical weapons attack.

I KNEW I could count on all the ANTI-USA bashers on THIS one. Evidence or NO evidence, here you all are, never to disappoint.

Oh, so very true, not to mention, the usual suspects that cry the US enjoy killing innocent women and children, but when we do nothing, we're still blamed, so it doesn't matter what everyone else thinks. By the way, the same people from those same countries that love to criticize the US, my question to all of them is, how is your country contributing to the slaughtering of innocent men, women and children? Where is your outrage, are you guys writing to your local politicians to take some drastic action against this thug? Just because you don't want to see innocent people being murdered doesn't make you a warmonger. I hate war just like everyone else, but I hate it more when OTHER rich nations or 1st world nations take a back seat and secretly hope the US does something to help so they don't have to get dirty and then gleefully turn around when an accident happens, then they can jump on that pedestal and scream at how bad the US is and you guys know who you are. We are talking about people, human beings. I don't want another Iraq or Afghanistan, No Way, but there are other things we can do and other nations that could do some good, think about the innocents first, but as typical and hypocritical as they are towards the US, these other self-righteous nations won't lift a finger. You haters now can thumb me down all you want, but you guys know I'm speaking the truth and if you don't like it...well, you know what you can do with that thought.

http://rt.com/news/sarin-gas-turkey-al-nusra-021/

The sarin gas was found in the homes of suspected Syrian Islamists detained in the southern provinces of Adana and Mersia following a search by Turkish police on Wednesday, reports say.

What reports? Who reported it? No quotes. No references. Don't you find that odd at all?

Turkish authorities are yet to comment on the arrests.

Okay, so we know the Turkish authorities are not behind the 'reports'. So, who is? Certainly can't find out reading this article. Don't you find that odd? If this were a report about the Syrian government with no quotes, no references and no mention of sources, would you believe it?

I really thought you had something, until I read it. I am certainly willing to consider any possibility. However, I think you should demand the same thoroughness in the materials you chose to believe as those of opposing opinions.

I mean, one thing is clear to me. Neither side in this fight is really all that good. The UN and everyone else should not get involved. It would accomplish nothing.

Seriously dude, what is up with you and Israel? You have mentioned the country something like ten or more times in discussions that have absolutely nothing to do with the country. What is your agenda? Cause it certainly seems to have little or nothing to do with Syria.

Again, I will mention to you that it is not only the US who is voicing its concern about the situation in Syria. Members of the EU, particularly France have been even more vocal at times.

"Carla Del Ponte – one of the greatest experts on this from the United Nations – did do an in-depth investigation only a few weeks ago, and of course, the mainstream media tried their best to ignore it and to character-assassinate Del Ponte… she did masses of work on this, and [found] It was the rebels and not the government.”

That is not what Ms Del Ponte said at all. The story was covered quite widely. She said she suspected it was the rebels based on interviews undertaken, but she was extremely clear is saying, not suggesting, that the results were inconclusive and that more interviews and investigations were necessary. What were the final results? I have not seen anything anywhere to indicate that a final result was conclusively toward the rebels. Have you? If so, please share it.

They are the first ones to criticize US, and the first ones to scream for US help.

Are you crazy, bud? Who wanna "help" from top World liars, hypocrites and state-terrorists?

NATO has to act now, no question about it, it might actually even be too late.

If the Opposition kicks out the Syrian government without any foreign intervention, you'll have a sort of genocide of the minorities of Syria who supported the government and an extremely radicalized population that is now probably the most heavily armed on Earth, who also would hate the West from the bottom of their hearts for completely ignoring them for 3 years.

If foreign intervention is taken, then it's possible that only a few of the above come true. Either way any serious action is 1.5 years too late.

“Failure awaits the United States as in all previous wars it has unleashed, starting with Vietnam and up to the present day.”

The man has a point although the US did prevail in Granada.

JeanValJeanAug. 27, 2013 - 01:08PM JST

" I believe you are not told the truth. You meant that Saddam's brother used chemical weapons against Kurds?"

No, that's not what I said. It is you who is misinformed. Look it up.

Then, You need to tell me a full post what is in your mind, so that I can properly respond to you. The Kurds story what I have said is true.

JeanValJeanAug. 27, 2013 - 08:19AM JST

Iraq Redux. Another failure in the making.

Syrian situation is totally different from Iraq If you can carefully analyze it. Many critics would just say "no" to the UN and US action, because they do not have to analyze it.

You have been aware that the chemical weapon use is a clear violation of International rules. And many years of ongoing genocide in Syria has to stop.

This US administration does not want to get involved, but this terrible situation does not give them a choice. US does not want to play a role of police in the world, but who else will do that? Russia, China? These countries do not have a moral compass. They are careless. They only care about themselves.

The strikes WILL start within days, not weeks, and months. This strike against Assad is well justified.

You have been aware that the chemical weapon use is a clear violation of International rules. And many years of ongoing genocide in Syria has to stop.

This US administration does not want to get involved, but this terrible situation does not give them a choice. US does not want to play a role of police in the world, but who else will do that? Russia, China? These countries do not have a moral compass. They are careless. They only care about themselves.

Some supporters go from point A to point Z missing all other steps or necessary logic between them. That is what I have mentioned above. I do not appreciate these lazy and simple answers. You can do better than this. Thanks.

"Were he really credible, Assad would not have done this in the first place."

Saddam did the same thing in 1988, meaning that Reagan wasn't credible, either, according to your logic.

Before Obama came to office, the Mideast was a happy, united and peaceful land. Conflict in the Mideast throughout many centuries is all Obama's fault.

I am no computer expert, but I still managed to find the site in about 10 seconds:

Your link worked, the previous one did not seem to. Thanks. I now see that it has nothing to do with this article or situation at all. Whether or not the US was involved in Iraq or not has nothing to do with Syria.

I wonder if Kerry will say the same things when investigators conclude that the rebels or israel are behind the attacks.

Boy, you sure do have an obsession about Israel. You pretty much stick that country's name in whenever you can. Anyhoo, the 'evidence' you have put forward so far to attempt to back up your claim that it is the rebels that are using the chemical weapons is really poor.

Wanna try again?

Then we should expect WW3.....!

I KNEW I could count on all the ANTI-USA bashers on THIS one. Evidence or NO evidence, here you all are, never to disappoint.

JeanValJeanAug. 27, 2013 - 12:40PM JST

" You have been aware that the chemical weapon use is a clear violation of International rules."

Yes, and US gov supported Saddam's use of chemweap against Iran in the 80's.

US gov is rushing headlong into another military adventure. Stupid and shameful.

I believe you are not told the truth. You meant that Saddam's brother used chemical weapons against Kurds? No, I want you to know when the Kurds escaped to the northern Iraq closer to Turkey border, US indirectly shield them from chemical weapon attacks. As a matter of fact that US tenaciously went after him all over Iraq until we shot him to death. As a matter of fact, you can read about it in history book of Desert Storm Operation.

OzKenAug. 27, 2013 - 12:09PM JST

This situation is a set-up

Yep. Has the CIA's dirty little fingerprints all over it.

kurisupisuAug. 27, 2013 - 12:13PM JST

Then we should expect WW3.....!

Some critics go from point A to point Z and missing all other steps or logics between them. That's what I have mentioned above. I do not appreciate these lazy answers. You can do better than this. Thanks.

hidingoutAug. 27, 2013 - 01:19PM JST

Don't do it Obama.

Courage is not the absence of fear but the judgment that something else is more important than fear. The brave may not live forever but the cautious do not live at all. For now you are traveling the road between who you think you are and who you can be for the right cause in humanity.

OzKenAug. 27, 2013 - 01:31PM JST

Do I feel good about it? Of course not, but it is a problem that must be solved by the Syrians themselves. As I've said I favour Assad more than I do Islamic Fundamentalists. Islamic Fundamentalists will always come last on a list of any kind of preferences

We are on total agreement.

I want the US to do nothing.

Well, here we disagree. We will not be sending US boots to Syria, but at least we can begin surgical strikes to remove chemical weapons from the hands of Assad and the Rebels. Neither of them will have no chemical weapons, and we should leave them alone.

Assad attacked with chemical weapons because the rebels cut off all supply routes to Allapo. The rebels killed 50 Ass-ad soldiers. Allapo is the second most strategic point in Syria.

Timing of the inspectors was coincidental.

OzKenAug. 27, 2013 - 12:39PM JST

I guess I am talking to a bottomless pit mistress with no logics. These people love distortion of the truth. I see........

OzKenAug. 27, 2013 - 01:02PM JST

Is all this too complicated for you to understand? It is quite understandable considering US politics and the Middle Eastern geopolitical situation is quite complicated.

Complicated? Not at all. Then what do you want US and UN to do? Just sit around and allow these killings by chemical weapons to continue?

Do you feel good about that? If not, what does your moral conscience is telling you to do.

How will this be achieved through surgical strikes? What do you think the Syrians have all their arsenal and stockpoli of weapons in one big shed with neon signs on it? Brainwashed and naive...

CIA already has a solid lead where these stockpiles are. Cleaning up the chemical spill after the airstrike is another issue and concern.

Seen nothing but ANTI-USA bashers or critics. They are the first ones to criticize US, and the first ones to scream for US help.

Kurisupisu, you bring up a very good point. The sprinkling of "depleted" uranium all of the middle east is, in my opinion, an even more heinous, indiscriminate, moral obscenity than using chemical weapons.

America has enough food and energy resources without having to stick it's hand in the middle-eastern wasp's nest.

Controlling the oil is more for the purpose of keeping it out of the hands of your competitors. Also, in this case, the pipeline going through Syria competes directly with the one going through israel. If the major export of the Middle East was broccoli, they would be living in peace, because the west would leave them alone.

The Del Ponte statement is more conclusive and solid than anything that the US has used in recent decades to attack a country. She has been attacked for her statement, as she was many years ago when investigating crimes committed in Yugoslavia because she wanted to investigate the crimes committed by both sides.

If investigators say what the US wants to here, their statements will be all over the media; if they say something the US government does not like, we just hear a choir of baseless comments like Kerry's "there is very little doubt in our mind that the Syrian regime is culpable", which is extremely reminiscent of the lead up to the Iraq invasion.

The requested page could not be found. Wow, is the CIA stealing home pages now, too?

I am no computer expert, but I still managed to find the site in about 10 seconds:

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/08/25/secret_cia_files_prove_america_helped_saddam_as_he_gassed_iran

Anyway, I happen to agree with most of what Kerry says:

there must be accountability for those who would use the world’s most heinous weapons against the world’s most vulnerable people,

“What we saw in Syria last week should shock the conscience of the world,

The indiscriminate slaughter of civilians, the killing of women and children and innocent bystanders by chemical weapons is a moral obscenity. By any standard, it is inexcusable.

The only point I disagree with is:

there is very little doubt in our mind that the Syrian regime is culpable.

Sounds very much like the lies that lead the US into Iraq (and Libya and ....). So until the US shows accountability for the lies that lead them to commit inexcusable, obscene, heinous attacks in Iraq, they should be told to keep their baseless accusations to themselves.

I wonder if Kerry will say the same things when investigators conclude that the rebels or israel are behind the attacks.

Syria has an important pipeline project that will compete with an Israel-Turkey one; that might be why Israel and Turkey have both been attacking Syria.

The US wants to make sure all oil is traded in US dollars. Saddam and Gaddafi both started selling their oil in other currencies before they were eliminated.