The Saudis have barreled bombed indiscriminately killing scores of civilians, the two scenarios are not that much different.

Honestly this whole ordeal makes little sense to me. Assad pretty much won the war. The only realistic threat from US and other western nations was to use chemical weapons...so he goes and uses chemical weapons to kill a few plebs? #Logic

https://www.facebook.com/100010930663885/videos/553314445042906/

live stream from syria
I think...
its arabic

Indiscriminately is a loaded term. People under attack always claim the enemy is bombing indiscriminately, because there's always civilians around and they aren't in the situation room of their enemy.

Using chemical weapons is a bigger deal than simply bombing your enemy. It's been outlawed from lawful warfare, and for good reason. It's a horrible way to die, and we don't want our soldiers to have to face it in the future. If Saudi Arabia used chemical weapons on their enemies, or like Assad, used them on their own civilians, you would have an argument.

This post was edited by IceMage on Apr 13 2018 07:24pm

Dying violently is a horrible way to die. Why pussyfoot about the fucking weapon?

Aaaaand what is Aleppo?

What is the ideal way to die?

Is the bullet more ethical than the flamethrower?

im torn on believing whether there was actually a chemical attack or not
on one hand, its unnecessary and far too convenient: Russia and Assad had Douma surrounded and were about to rout the last of the rebels. They knew they were about to get destroyed, so faking a chemical attack wouldn't be hard, they could even use some of their own chlorine stores to create evidence, and the white helmets have a history of faking atrocities to garner sympathy. For Assad, it would seem like a misstep that he should use chemical weapons when he's going to take the city easily by conventional weapons. Why? And that's the other problem: He had a reason why- same reason they would do a chemical strike when obama made his red line, as a provocation to test Trump's response and send a message to the rebels, knowing that its not enough to just drive them out of the city but they have to crush their will and show the US won't come to save them, with russia and assad making the calculation that they could engage in such an aggression and get away with it. Or, more mundanely, just one syrian general acting out on his own.
one thing is for sure, with the amount of propaganda on both sides, and the total inability to trust either the russian or us intelligence assessments (yellowcake and aluminum tubing?), I can figure we'll never know for sure

imo, Morphine drip

This post was edited by JohnMiller92 on Apr 13 2018 07:31pm

If guns are banned and people use knives instead
I’d rather die a quick death from being shot than slow death from being stabbed