Ok. Syria has NOT signed on to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction. And the United States HAS signed on to this 1993 Convention.
Syria has the largest stockpile of chemical weapons in the Middle East!
The United States has the largest stockpile of chemical weapons IN THE WORLD!
Question one: Which nation is breaking their signed agreement commitment to the world community on stockpiling chemical weapons?
Now it has been confirmed that Saudi Arabia is providing chemical weapons to their paid mercenary “rebels” jihadist in Syria. Oh yeah, the CIA is involved!
Saudi Arabia signed the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction in 1993.
Question two: Which nation is breaking their signed agreement commitment to the world community on the use of chemical weapons?
Thirteen countries declared chemical weapons production facilities: one of those countries is the United States! Yet the United States has signed the Convention to not Produce Chemical Weapons.
Is it just Tubularsock or do you too notice a preponderance toward hypocrisy here?
THAT is what bothers Tubularsock the most. I don’t think that Assad is a Mister-Nice-Guy but who in the hell are “we” (the U.S.) to call the kettle BLACK?
Now the ONLY thing the world knows FOR SURE is that some type of chemical was used in this recent event in Ghouta, Syria. That is it.
So from Tubularsock’s research this is what Tubularsock believes happened.
The SAUDI PAID JIHADIST REBELS were moving chemical weapons into position for a future operation. This has been confirmed by Yahya Ababneh an on the ground reporter for Mint Press News. He interviewed the rebels, their family members, victims of the chemical weapons attacks and local residents. (EXCLUSIVE: Syrians In Ghouta Claim Saudi-Supplied Rebels Behind Chemical Attack)
Because the “rebel forces” were not trained in or had knowledge of what they were moving and handling caused an “accident” and those weapons went off.
The shelling of the area by Assad’s forces contributed to the further release of the chemical stockpile of weapons in caves in the area.
All in all, disaster!
If you plug in all the different stories and explanations into THIS model it isn’t a deliberate action on either side.
Now again, Tubularsock is not attempting to make Assad out to be some kind of a good guy, he isn’t but you have to ask the question, why would he deliberately attack the SAUDI PAID JIHADIST REBELS with chemical weapons knowing full well that the U.S. would then have the excuse it was looking for to enter this “CIVIL WAR” with more fire power?
Doesn’t make any sense. Assad may not be a good guy but he is not stupid. If you remember the last time chemical weapons were used it was the SAUDI PAID JIHADIST REBELS that used them.
It makes more sense that the SAUDI PAID JIHADIST REBELS were planing to use them to get the U.S. involved more directly but they went off prematurely. Either way it becomes an advantage to the SAUDI PAID JIHADIST REBELS!
All of the U.S. intelligence is being manipulated AGAIN in order to follow the PRE-DECIDED AGENDA rather than what actually occurred.
In fact the CIA’s Office of Weapons Intelligence, Nonproliferation and Arms Control (WINPAC) Center are evaluating the “evidence”. This is the very same center that twisted the 2002 Iraq WMD’s into a pretzel in order to make the case for invasion of Iraq.
It is clear that it is next to impossible to know what actually occurred and the Obama administration say that they can show that samples of blood and hair from medical personnel in eastern Ghouta had been found to contain traces of sarin nerve gas.
BUT NO WHERE IS THERE IS ANY DIRECT EVIDENCE THAT THE ASSAD GOVERNMENT USED THE CHEMICAL WEAPONS IN GHOUTA AS OPPOSED TO THE SAUDI PAID JIHADIST REBELS USING THEM!
What we have here is a pre-planned attack by the United States against the Assad Government and evidence being manipulated to back the pre-planned attack.
John Kerry just happened to mention during his meeting with the Senate Committee on bombing Syria “ . . . that unnamed Arab countries had offered to “cover the cost” of the strikes.” Hmmm, Tubularsock wonders which unnamed Saudi Arabia was he thinking!
And then there is this: “The use of force is lawful only when in exercise of self-defense in accordance with Article 51 of the United Nations charter and/or when the Security Council approves of such action.” That is a firm principle of the United Nations.”
………..UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon
But the bottom line is: Obama said on Saturday he was “comfortable going forward without the approval of a United Nations Security
Council . . .”
Obama also has said that he is comfortable going forward without the House of Representatives approval.
AND WE CAN ASSUME OBAMA IS COMFORTABLE GOING FORWARD WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE’ S APPROVAL WHO AT THE MOMENT ARE POLLING AT 63% AGAINST BOMBING SYRIA!
Hmm. Maybe in an Obama democracy the people AREN’T the government.
SO IF OBAMA DOESN’T SEEM TO THINK THAT HE NEEDS ANY APPROVAL TO BOMB SYRIA AND ALL THOSE WHO DON’T WANT HIM TO BOMB SYRIA DON’T SEEM TO COUNT THEN FOR WHOM IS HE BOMBING SYRIA? THINK ON THAT, MY FRIENDS!
Tubularsock 