Posted on 01/06/2016 7:10:49 AM PST by Trumpinator
Russia says ISIS are using chemical weapons in Syria after UN confirm discovery of deadly gases
15:02, 5 Jan 2016
Updated 16:00, 5 Jan 2016\
By Jessica Haworth
The claims come over two years after Assad agreed to hand over Syria's entire arsenal of chemical weapons
ussia has accused terror group ISIS of using chemical weapons in Syria .
Russia's Foreign Ministry claims there is a "high probability" that the deadly weapons are being used by Islamic State terrorists.
RIA news agency reported that Mikhail Ulyanov, the head of the Russian foreign ministry department for non-proliferation and arms control, made the accusation today.
Ulyanov also called for an investigation into possible supplies of sarin components from Turkey to Syria.
This comes after a United Nations report found that some people in Syria have been exposed to deadly sarin gas or a compound like it.
(Excerpt) Read more at mirror.co.uk ...
I don’t think it happened myself. I think people in DC wanted to also invade Syria along with Iraq and them move onto Iran and that was a line they were pushing.
IIRC, there was also an attempted WMD attack in Syria somewhere around 2003 or 2004 that had the potential to kill upwards of 40,000 and those WMDs were found to be from Iraq.
I don’t know about you but it makes me wonder why someone is pushing the Clinton/dem “Bush lied” and there were no WMDs in Iraq.
Bush was president for 8 years - he was the commander in chief of the military. Why did he not state this rather than at the end confirm this rumor?
So explain to me why the Clinton adm had his CIA falsify the reports that there were WMDs in Iraq and how did Bush know Clinton had the reports falsified?
The only one that would have known the Clinton CIA reports were falsified was Hillary, so it was Hillary lying about there being WMDs in Iraq right?
I read your link. First, I really don’t know if WMD went to Syria. But some premises at the link are flawed.
The author makes an assumption that Saddam wouldn’t sent anything to Syria, because Assad is buddy with Iran. Well...during Desert Storm, Hussein had his fighter aircraft fly to Iran itself. So his logic ignores reality.
The author also makes a presumption than Iraq and Syria were foes. Not entirely true. I read a fascinating book title The High Cost of Peace, written by an Israeli, and really meant to be about Clinton’s desperate attempt to get a ‘peace deal’ before he left office, in a quest for a Nobel Peace Prize. But along the way, the author paints a picture of the middle east in the late 1990’s. And he claims that Saddam (with no air force of his own after the first Gulf War) was holding joint military exercises, in western Iraq, with Syria’s air force. In particular, Saddam’s son Uday, and Assad’s son (the one in power now) had become BFFs, and were holding these exercises. So there was some level of cooperation - and this shifting loyalty thing is an aspect of the middle east that we in the west tend to overlook.
The author at your link also seems to put great faith in the international inspections. But what was happening in the last two years of Clinton’s presidency? We saw it on the news constantly - inspector would show up someplace, and be stonewalled and denied access. And Clinton would do nothing. Wash/rinse/repeat. The inspections were meaningless at the end. That’s the whole darned reason Bush used wmd as justification. He demanded unfettered inspections to resume, and Saddam refused, until the 11th hour.
Again, I obviously have no proof wmd made it to Syria. But the author doesn’t provide any useful information on the subject either. A couple of Iraqi generals and ‘unnamed’ US intelligence sources have made the claim though, and I think it is a distinct possibility, rising above the level of mere BS.
At the end of the day why are we speculating. Bush stated he was wrong on Saddam and WMD. I thought that would put an end to the speculation myself.
So Clinton had his CIA falsify the reports, Bush was just wrong about the WMDs because he depended on Clinton’s false reports, and Hillary lied because she obviously knew the reports were false.
They found WMDs in Iraq, and there were US troops exposed—do the research. The rest of them were transported to syria. Bush is an idiot for caving
I was talking about after the fact during the overthrow and occupation - Bush would have stated if the WMD went to Syria. The WMD were moved during the invasion it was said. In any case Bush’s team and Bush himself said there were no WMD so none were on hand to move to Syria.
“They found WMDs in Iraq, and there were US troops exposed—do the research.’
I’m not the one saying they weren’t there.
Reading comprehension is your friend, introduce yourself.
Fact is when ISIS went into Iraq they made a bee-line for a bunker which would have contained Saddam’s really nasty bio weapons.
The military tried to get Obama to authorize the bombing of the bunker to seal it but Obama wouldn’t do it so ISIS might have themselves a nice supply of anthrax and other WMDs.
So why did B Clinton have the CIA falsify the reports to show there were WMDs and why did Hillary lie?
If indeed they did go to Syria why did Bush and or his people state that it did not happen?
IIRC there was an attempted WMD attack in Syria with some of SH’s weapons and again, IIRC, it had the potential of killing upwards of 40,000.
Why didn’t Bush just come right out and say the WMDs went to Syria? I don’t know you will have to ask him.
Why did Hillary lie?
Clintons always lie. But just to be clear - I don’t think Saddam’s WMD ended up in Syria if he had them.
Not all of them ended up in Syria, but some of them did.
Thanks to Obama’s inaction ISIS more than likely has their hands on some of the nastier bio WMDs from Saddam’s arsenal including anthrax.
Not all of them ended up in Syria, but some of them did.
Evidence does not show this. In fact evidence indicates fresh chemicals are coming into ISIS via Turkey and the ISIS is mixing up the brew live.
I said bio not chemical, learn to read.
“why are we speculating”
Because if the rumors were true, that would mean there were literally tons of unaccounted for wmd floating around a lawless civil war zone. That would be bad, and is worth considering as a possibility that we should try to address. And George Bush doesn’t know any more than what intelligence agencies tell him - the same ones that originally told him there were wmd. So his opinion is not a conclusive argument.
I remember before the war, Powell presented a lot of evidence of mobile (and sometimes dual use) facilities in Iraq. These facilities (which were shown in sat photos) have not all been found - so its not unreasonable to believe that they were moved somewhere.
Info before the war seems to have been crap.
PS: When I wrote “why are we speculating” it is to say that the issue was already settled after the fact and we now know what we didn’t. Seems all the Iraq informants were drunks and liars and told their handlers what they wanted to hear for money, etc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.