Problem is, the prior reports debunking reports of Assad’s chem attacks have them themselves been debunked. See, for example, the Assessment’s reference to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW)-UN Joint Investigative Mechanism (JIM) report, last fall, on the sarin attack on Khan Shaykhun in April 2017.
Maybe someone here can find a direct link.
Are OPCW and the UN investigators part of the “haters” too?
Sorry to tell you, but 9 out of 10 reasonable people (huge-conspiracy theorists not being part of that group) who read that Assessment and assess it’s veracity vs. opposing sources will conclude we acted properly, even if any one point is in error. Now, if some significant & previously seemingly trustworthy Trump Administration official resigns in protest over this, presenting credible evidence as reason, I would reconsider. Otherwise, I believe Mattis, Trump, & Co., and find it unreasonable that they ALL have been duped.
FReepers want to look at facts and judge for themselves.
For instance: I would like to introduce this web site: as an example of how to handle these kinds of discussion.
This particular site is about the Ghouta atrocity. There's been plenty of time for the dust to settle, for fresh data to come out and for analyists to add value.
This is a level of analysis that obviously hasn't had a chance to occur since Douma.
Now, obviously I'm introducing the Ghouta page because it backs up my argument. But it's also a model for how to carry out these discussions, and how to introduce and deprecate evidence and argument from both sides.
No more Warren Reports.