Of course, we don't know who carried out the attack, or what weapon was used.
But given the well-documented fact that the U.S. has been planning regime change in Syria for 20 years straight -- and planned to use false ploys for 50 years -- it is worth being skeptical until all of the evidence is in.
Indeed, many are asking whether this is Iraq War 2.0. For example, the Independent writes:
"Pictures showing that the Syrian army used chemical weapons against rebel-held Eastern Ghouta just east of Damascus are ... likely to be viewed sceptically because the claims so much resemble those made about Saddam Hussein's possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) before the US and British invasion of Iraq in 2003.
***
"Like the Iraqi opposition to Saddam, who provided most of the evidence of WMDs, the Syrian opposition has every incentive to show the Syrian government deploying chemical weapons in order to trigger foreign intervention.
***
"But the obvious fact that for the Syrian government to use chemical weapons would be much against their own interests does not prove it did not happen. Governments and armies do stupid things. But it is difficult to imagine any compelling reason why they should do so since they have plenty of other means of killing people in Eastern Ghouta, such as heavy artillery or small arms, which they regularly use.
***
"The evidence so far for the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian army is second-hand and comes from a biased source.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
2
1
1
