Syrian Rebels Claim Hundreds Killed By Poison-Gas Attack

Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes "Haroon Siddique reports for The Guardian that opposition activists have accused forces loyal to the Assad regime of using chemical weapons in towns in the eastern Ghouta. Accounts of the death toll vary wildly. The British based Syrian Observatory of Human Rights put the number killed at 'dozens.' Others put the figure much higher. The Local Coordination Committees said 'hundreds' were killed, the majority of them civilians. Graphic videos purporting to show the victims of the attack have been posted online (WARNING: graphic) showing chaotic scenes of people, including children, having seizures, being treated, and dead bodies lined up. 'Symptoms of the patients include nausea, hallucinations, suffocation, hard coughing, high blood pressure, seizures etc,' says the Syrian Revolution General Commission (SRGC). 'There is still no clue of the chemical weapon/toxic gas that was used by the regime's forces to target the innocent civilians.' Ake Sellstrom, the Swedish scientist who heads the U.N. inspection team in Syria, told the Swedish media that he had seen only the television images of the alleged attacks. 'But the high number of wounded and dead they are speaking about sounds suspicious,' Sellström told Swedish news agency TT, via telephone from Damascus. 'It sounds like something one should take a look at.'. The official Syrian news agency called the reports 'untrue' and designed to derail a United Nations inquiry into charges of chemical weapons in the conflict."

Comments

Perfect timing

[Anonymous Coward]

The timing and location of the reported chemical weapons use - just three days after the team of U.N. chemical experts checked in to a Damascus hotel a few km (miles) to the east at the start of their mission - was surprising.

"It would be very peculiar if it was the government to do this at the exact moment the international inspectors come into the country," said Rolf Ekeus, a retired Swedish diplomat who headed a team of UN weapons inspectors in Iraq in the 1990s.

"At the least, it wouldn't be very clever."

Having watched the...

[Assmasher]

...video linked supplied, there's no chaos, and despite the insinuation of more than one person, including children, having seizures - I saw one guy whose legs were trembling. I've seen shock victims trembling worse.

I'm not saying this didn't happen, I am just saying that the video basically shows nothing (and maybe there's something wrong with me, but I didn't think it was 'graphic' in the slightest.)

Maybe they linked the wrong video.

Re:Having watched the...

[Shoten]

...video linked supplied, there's no chaos, and despite the insinuation of more than one person, including children, having seizures - I saw one guy whose legs were trembling. I've seen shock victims trembling worse.

I'm not saying this didn't happen, I am just saying that the video basically shows nothing (and maybe there's something wrong with me, but I didn't think it was 'graphic' in the slightest.)

Maybe they linked the wrong video.

I'll go one step further...but first, let me give context to forestall anyone claiming I'm a fan of Assad and his pals. I most emphatically am not, and never have been. Nor do I support the purposes of Iran, which uses Syria as a fulcrum, most specifically in the Levant (Lebanon and surrounding area). This isn't about me supporting Syria, just about what I see when I look at this one video. In fact, I think that at this point both sides in this conflict have been thoroughly populated with people whose aims are not "good."

I saw a lot of people lying down. Not really indicative of one thing or another. No cyanosis or signs of skin irritation, nor signs of labored breathing or choking really. But hey, the absence of solid proof is not proof of absence and I don't think anyone said what kind of "poison gas" it was, so it's not particularly clear. But then I saw the "convulsing guy." He was twitching from the waist down...but his head was calmly, smoothly lolling from side to side? He was having a convulsion with his lower body, but not anywhere else? Hm. I don't believe that nerve agents turn people into MC Hammer. Nerve agents (cholerinterase inhibitors, specifically) make your whole body go apeshit...that's how you die. And it's not that one half of one person would be trembling and everyone else would look like they were taking a nap...anyone who was dead would look horrific and anyone who wasn't dead would not exactly look calm either. I call bullshit on this.

The rebels have made disproven claims in the past about chemical warfare attacks. They know that the Obama administration has stated that use of chemical weapons would result in direct US involvement, and they have a decided incentive to report on any that do happen, but also to fabricate evidence of one if they think they can pull it off. Furthermore, there's less of a penalty for a false claim than there is benefit from successfully pulling off a hoax. Hell, they even know how one person...one single source...lying about WMD got us to invade Iraq and demolish an entire nation.

And as stated above, UN chemical weapon inspectors had JUST shown up a few kilometers nearby. I find it incredibly difficult to believe that Assad would deploy such a weapon within easy reach of the very people who would be there to investigate.

And yes, the user name of the guy I'm quoting/responding to is "Assmasher," but that doesn't mean he's wrong. Let's stick to discussing this based the merits of what's said, guys :)

The US should stay out of it

[walterbyrd]

US meddling in mid-east affairs is a guaranteed disaster for the US.

Help one tribe, and the opposing tribe will hate you forever. Then the tribe you help will soon hate you also. Bottom line: Muslims must hate infidels, it is a key part of their religion.

No matter who the US helps, the US involvement will be called an "invasion." The US will be accused of using the US military to steal mid-east oil. It happens every time.

Sadam, Osama, and the Muslim Brotherhood, were all the good guys, and our buddies, at one point. Now, even Kuwait hates us.

There is no way to win in a mid-east conflict. The only winning move is not to play.

Other than buying oil, the US has no business in the mid-east. Let the crazies kill each other, if that is what they want to do. It is part of their culture, I guess.

Re:The US should stay out of it

[clarkkent09]

Other than buying oil, the US has no business in the mid-east.
 
Naive isolationism has such a weird attraction to Americans. Buying oil is not like going to a supermarket and buying milk. It is the most strategic resource there is and whoever controls it controls the world. US pulling out of the middle east means a free for all, with Saudi and Iran (at least) going nuclear, and all the small oil producing countries aligning themselves with whoever replaces the US. Russia, China and others taking over the oil industry that we built. How would you like us to be a bitch to an oil cartel and whatever major powers (FAR worse than us in every way) are behind them, with power to screw with our economy any time they want? Some day we may not be dependent on the middle east oil, and may that day come soon, but it is not here yet.
 
Btw, the public perception of US military is completely opposite from the truth. It is not a weapon we swing around to intimidate and oppress countries. Our military power is an asset that we trade (with Saudis, Qataris, Emiratis, Kuwaitis, Israelis, Japanese, Koreans, Australians, Europeans, and countless other countries that we protect) just like any other asset. In exchange for it, we get less than we spend on it directly, but indirectly we get far more in terms of stability, free commerce, access to essential resources and allies in the UN and other organizations. It doesn't take much imagination to picture a world in which US pulls out, and the chaos that would result.

Re:Because that makes sense

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone who says "muzzies" is a fucking idiot.