Skip to comments.Could a rebel dropped Chemical Weapon lead to war
Posted on 08/31/2013 12:22:14 PM PDT by Trueblackman
Okay Freeper Family, you know President Obama is itching to pull the trigger on Syria to deflect from his failed policies and train wreak administration, but something about all the evidence of a Syrian Government Chemical Attack just does not pass the smell test.
Many of you know I am a veterans and here is where I need some of my fellow vets to help me understand something. Mr. Kerry in his push for action stated that less than 1,500 people were killed in a government launched chemical attack, now that is a very low number of deaths from a chemical shells or bombs dropped, the amount kinetic energy released in both cases would have lead to a great number of deaths as the surrounding building would have has a fog effect on the agents once released hanging low to the ground.
Now I have seen film of mishandling of weapons from WW2 and peace time accidents, while in the NAVY and this seems to a classic case of just that as the low number of deaths and lack of surrounding damage to the target area.
No doubt. Ruses are common out of D.C. in this day. It was the videos fault after all.
one point point True and then will be gone ... to tell the truth nobody is certain of the death toll. Could be lower than what Americans are being led to believe by those in power and giving out the numbers. Is difficult to trust any of them is my problem and perspective.
He is itching bad, but I think he has shown his hand and the world has said no.
He won’t do a thing.
He has to be most uncomfortable at the moment.
Am always happy to see someone, especially you, on the top of the mountain when it comes to coming in with the moistest of the most in information available. Thank You!
Examiner.com is a multiuser blogging site that presents itself as a news site. Don't be fooled.
Examiner.com pays its writers based (among other things) on pageviews. As a result, a lot of Examiner material tends to be sensationalistic to attract attention positive or negative doesn't matter, it's all clicks. Headlines such as "U.S. to bomb moon on UFO witness John Lennon's birthday" and "Official disclosure of extraterrestrial life is imminent" are par for the course.
You will see enthusiastic Examiner bloggers linkspamming furiously on other sites, often touting their work as "media coverage" (and themselves as "journalists" or "the press") rather than just a blog post they themselves wrote. Not that it pays very well Writers Weekly considers it "just another pay-per-click meat market," exploiting writers to attract people to their site by paying them pennies.
Cranks and those with really bad critical thinking skills will link Examiner articles as if they're edited journalism rather than just some guy blogging. If you use an Examiner page as a reference for anything whatsoever, treat it with great caution. Not all Examiners are rubbish, but it's the way to bet.
The domain name used to be owned by the San Francisco Examiner, a proper (if free and local) newspaper, which now uses sfexaminer.com. It's not clear what they were thinking when giving it up.
I see the mods moved this to “news.” Great!
Thank you for you service and for your observations. I think you are correct. Nobody is ever going to know for sure how this trigger got pulled. But I do want to know from where these weapons came.
Is Mint news part of the examiner?
my apology True ... may be here for a while longer. Thanks for helping ... and believe me ... your post helps.
The truth maybe is Iraq.
Was this gas military grade or home cooked? Was this gas stolen by the
Jihadist rebels and set off intentionally or by a accidental home cooking operation?
Did any missiles Syria lobbed hit a rebel home cooking operation or a stash
of stolen rebel chemicals?
The truth is, we don’t know!
That’s what I suspect as well.
Also to be clear, am forced to agree with tennmountainman.
Thank for your input, now I was trained in NBC as I worked on the flight deck of carriers, but this seems to me that something was mishandled that caused a cook off of a chemical stock pile.
Don’t know if this means anything, but upwards of 10,000 people died in Bhopal and it has a population density that is only about one sixth as great as Damascus proper, according to Wiki. All other things being equal (wind speed and direction, lethality of the agent, amount of the agent, etc.), and they are probably not equal in this case, you would, indeed, expect a greater number of deaths in Damascus.
All I know for certain is Obama is leading and nobody is following.
link was removed but think I can find one. Hold on for about five minutes and I’ll email.
Me too. Especial the last line. “We don’t know” is a bad reason to start shooting at them.
Amen ... if it was assad it should be proved beyond We don’t Know, and I have no doubt zer0 and his crowd do not know either. Maybe there is a chance to stop this insanity or maybe not ... Truth is I do not know but am willing to give sanity a chance. Hope our congress is willing to give sanity a chance. Time is not on our side but perhaps God still is. No doubt ... will soon find out.
The way I see it, a healthy dose of the insanity is on our side of the pond.
email should be there Chode.
Bhopal was a huge leak, it happened noiselessly in the dead of night, and there wasn’t a war going on. I don’t think they can be compared fully. But it is useful to contemplate because of the factors you mention. Also that lake in the Congo that burped and killed a whole village.
And I don’t call what Obastard is doing “leading.” He made a stupid, off-the-script remark as a way to puff himself up during an election (IOW, a typical Obastard lie), and history has a way of turning around and biting you on the duff for that. The purpose of all of this theatre we’re seeing is to backfill that blunder.
back to you ... with an email
My question is, “Who has greater reason(s) to use chemical warfare against civilians and children and why?” ..... the rebels or Assad. “Who would have the most to gain?”
Thank You for running against the wind. Much appreciation for your question.
Follow The Money
Sunni Muslims have been at war with Shiite Muslims for over a thousand years and no one paid attention to them killing each other, so why all of a sudden has our President taken sides in this Muslim domestic disturbance? One thing Ive learned over the years is that when an issue like this just doesnt make any sense, all you have to do is follow the money and it will all come into focus.
The first clue came in when I saw our President publicly bow and scrape before the King of Saudi Arabia (a Sunni Muslim). Could it have been because the King of Saudi Arabia financed Obamas campaign? Remember, there are still large sums of money in Obamas campaign coffers that havent been adequately explained.
If the King of Saudi Arabia now owns our President, it could explain why Obama has sided with the Kings Sunni Muslim rebels against Syrias Shiite government, and it could also explain why Obama has prevented the development of U.S. oil resources and has effectively killed coal in the U.S. in order to keep our country dependent on foreign oil.
Not necessarily mishandling — quite possibly deliberate deployment in a mode which would decrease casualties. Remember that the (Sunni Muslim) Bosniaks shelled their own people in Sarajevo (the conclusion of Japanese investigators who had no axe to grind in the Balkans), knowing that NATO would blame the Serbs and intervene on their behalf. Obama’s “red line” rhetoric set up a situation where the Syrian branch of AQ had the same expectations, provided the atrocity blamed on Assad involved chemical weapons.
That’s a very high number of dead from an obvious nerve gas attack. It is very likely that the gas was delivered from aircraft or trucks and highly unlikely that it came from weapons improvised by guerrillas. Many of the victims were in dwellings separate from each other. It’s not politically expedient, but that’s the truth.
Alex Jones is a nutjob.
If launched from aircraft, the kinetic energy would be relatively mild (compared to, e.g., HE) and expended in the air before reaching the target.
When we find out everything about Benghazi, we’ll find out who was behind the chemical munition attack.
IMHO, Obama is the number one culprit.
"They didnt tell us what these arms were or how to use them, complained a female fighter named K. We didnt know they were chemical weapons. We never imagined they were chemical weapons.
The truth has a certain ring to it.
This story doesn't have that ring.
Another note. Nerve agents aren’t very hazardous for long (after the mist falls or blows away). There’s no indication from news or likelihood, given information published, that mustard or Sarin were used.
WWI was started buy a nut case coming out of a deli armed with a small caliber pistol. It’s not so much the event but the press you can get out of it.
All wars have reasons that are kept super secret and excuses that are created with the willing help of the press and refined to the greatest lie imaginable.
The retards in office want a war. They are looking for an excuse.They will find one or make one. We are in big do do.
Syria is run by and for the Alawis, a minority religious sect. It's not entirely accurate to call them Shiites, as many Sunni and Shia Muslims don't really consider them Muslims at all, though in the last 50 years or so they have probably moved in the direction of more orthodox Muslim beliefs.
The Sunni/Shia split can be compared to Catholic/Protestant. While Catholicism has a good bit of diversity, it also has a great deal of consistency around the world. Meanwhile, the "everything else" nature of Protestantism means it is wildly diverse, with some groups that most Protestants and Catholics would not even classify as Christian.
10-4 Chode. Returned mail. Still seeking the elusive acorn.
Another former NBC type here.
Most chemical bombs or mortars have only a small “bursting charge” and not a full load of high explosive. A chemical round does little damage to buildings or anything else around it, since it goes off with a pop and not a boom.
Once released, chemical agents are affected by atmospheric conditions, i.e. a strong breeze can disperse the agents more quickly than a mild breeze, and there is no telling where the wind currents will create denser concentrations.
By the way, if the nerve agent Sarin was used — a big “if” — then skin contact is just as deadly, though slower, than inhalation. A little drop’ll do ya.