Syria's government was supposed to have gotten rid of its chemical weapons in 2014. What happened?

LA Times ^ | April 6, 2017 | Matt Pearce

[detective]

Shortened title.

Full title: Syria's government was supposed to have gotten rid of its chemical weapons in 2014. So what happened?

There’s a mystery at the heart of an apparent chemical weapons attack in Syria this week: Syria’s government, suspected of carrying out the attack, was supposed to have gotten rid of all its chemical weapons in 2014.

A year earlier, President Obama said Syria had crossed a “red line” by allegedly using sarin gas near Damascus and Aleppo, killing at least 100 to 150 people. But rather than take military action, Obama agreed to a Russian deal to dismantle Syria’s chemical weapons program.

Syria’s foreign minister has denied that the country’s forces use chemical weapons in its battle with opposition rebels and Islamic State militants, both of whom seek the overthrow of President Bashar Assad. But the effectiveness of the Obama deal is now under new examination.

[Little Ray]

Were the targets even worth attacking?

Given what the ‘rebels’ of Islamic Spring did to Daffy before they killed him, I wouldn’t hesitate to gas those same sort of rebels in my country, but you can bet I’d be looking for high value targets or a significant tactical advantage from deploying chemical weapons. It wouldn’t be an terror attack on women and children.

I am of the opinion that it was a false flag operation.

[marktwain]

​“It makes no sense, even if you were totally separate from this and take no sides of this and you were just an analyst, it doesn’t make sense for Assad under these conditions to all of the sudden use poison gasses,” Paul continued. “I think it’s zero chance that he would have done this deliberately.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Except sources say that he has been repeatedly using chemical weapons, has no ground forces in the area, and has never been held to account for using chemical weapons. This was just the latest and most successful, therefore visible, attack.

It makes perfect sense if Assad believed that there would be no repercussions. After all, with the Obama regime, he repeatedly violated agreements with the U.S., and there were no repercussions.

[The Toll]

What agreements?

[JimRed]

Obama lied; kids died.

[GOP_Thug_Mom]

You have more details than I, and I don’t deny he’s still a moslem, which by pure definition is anti-western society and anti-Christian, with barbarianism in his blood. However, he has kept an overall stability in his country, which has allowed Christians to live in “peace”.
Syria has been a hindrance to the pipeline that Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the US have wanted for decades. I believe that has a lot to do with his overthrow, as well.