weird argument.
the lack of a reason discernible by you is utterly unrelated to the actual event. he also didn’t ask your permission. that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.
What is not discernible? I don’t believe he used chemical weapons. What did he have to gain from it? He has won the war. He knows there would be a response. It makes no sense.
The action based on “he is a bad guy” is the argument that has no logic.