Unconfirmed reports of chemical attacks

Reuters: Alleged chemical attack kills 25 in northern Syria

Unconfirmed reports indicate that the Syrian government has used chemical weapons in Northern Aleppo, however this has not been independently verified.

Just yesterday, the US pledged support to British and French plans to arm Syrian Rebels, but had no plans on doing so themselves, according to Secretary of State John Kerry.

With these most recent developments in Syria, what do you think it will mean for US policy in the region? Will the US act on their "red line"? Was this attack legitimate?

Edited to add additional links.

I think we've already used to hear such news. And as usual nothing happens

They have been reporting this for a while now, there are even some cases where the evidence was fairly legitimate. The UN has been writing it off either as a fabrication or an exaggeration of the truth. Basically, until a whole town gets gassed without provocation, no one will do shit.

Blue Wolf II:

They have been reporting this for a while now, there are even some cases where the evidence was fairly legitimate. The UN has been writing it off either as a fabrication or an exaggeration of the truth. Basically, until a whole town gets gassed without provocation, no one will do shit.

Click to expand...

Is that so? Could you share a link to other reports that came out more than 10 hours ago?

To my knowledge, this has been the first such accusation of chemical weapon usage.

As I have discussed with you on IRC, it is possible for these kinds of symptoms to be shown by someone who was affected by some form of tear gas as well. It is also possible that this man was not fit for service.

You also showed me a separate video which seemed to show four or five people suffering from symptoms of exposure in an infirmary. It is possible to fake such things for the camera on a very low budget. So to that extent, these two videos could possibly be bogus, however that is something I'd have to look into.

What is different about this attack, as compared to the two videos you have shown me is that this attack seems to have a far larger number of people affected. This, while possible to fake, is far more difficult. In addition, in this case both sides are being very vocal about pointing the finger at the other guy. Something neither side has done to this point. Finally, this one appears to have attracted international attention, including statements from major international players. Russia outright accuses the rebels of foul play. The US says they'll look into it.

Independent confirmation is most certainly required before any true conclusions can be made.

yawn

Reports like this remind me how lucky I am to be Australian.

King Durk the Awesome:

yawn

Click to expand...

Basically.

Also pretty absurd to focus in on rumored chemical weapons usage when tens of thousands have died perfectly well from conventional weaponry. Feels like missing the point. The US has not found evidence of such attacks, beyond say crowd control ordnance being called chemical weapons by the opposition as Scandigrad pointed out. And I think perhaps the US may have better investigative tools than youtube videos.

Oh, and wasn't it originally the Syrian regime accusing the rebels of having used chemical weapons this time? There was speculation that the regime could use this incident as justification for actual use of chemical weapons in the future

Democratic Donkeys:

Also pretty absurd to focus in on rumored chemical weapons usage when tens of thousands have died perfectly well from conventional weaponry. Feels like missing the point.

Click to expand...

You're assuming the point relates to the number of dead - it doesn't. The real concern over chemical (or biological, or nuclear) weapons is their tendency to find their way into the hands of other actors, to be used in an unknown time and place irrelevant to the current conflict.

Yes, why should the point be the number of syrians killed in revolution? I definitely think our focus should be on what may happen to some weapons that may be used in the undefined future on us Westerners. Any dipshit with an advanced chem/bio degree can manufacture chemical or biological weapons. The only example that comes to mind of a chemical weapon attack by a non-state actor are the attacks of Aum Shinrikyo in Japan, and they manufactured the sarin gas themselves. I don't know what tendency you are talking about.

Yes, why should the point be the number of syrians killed in revolution?

Click to expand...

From a humanitarian perspective, of course it is. From a security perspective, it's not the primary concern.

Any dipshit with an advanced chem/bio degree can manufacture chemical or biological weapons.

Click to expand...

This doesn't square with history. As you point out:

The only example that comes to mind of a chemical weapon attack by a non-state actor are the attacks of Aum Shinrikyo in Japan, and they manufactured the sarin gas themselves.

Click to expand...

Yes, and it took them a large number of scientists, years of work, and due to errors in production it still didn't have the effect they wanted. If they could have walked down the street and bought some instead, there's absolutely no reason to think that they wouldn't have, nor that they wouldn't have put it to use.

I don't know what tendency you are talking about.

Click to expand...

Fair - what I should have said was the concern that they will, and the inability to track lost supplies. There have not, to my knowledge, been cases where a state loses control of large amounts of chemical weapons to non-state actors. If that were to happen here, the outcome would be unprecedented and it is a reasonable thing to fear.