Nobody is more disgusted by the use of chemical agents in warfare than I am. Whether it’s a blistering agent such as mustard gas or a nerve agent like GB (Sarin), they should never be used – not ever.
But isn’t it strange that now Assad has things under control and the Russians have ringed the country with S-300 and S-400 SAM batteries that Assad would launch a chemical attack on a handful of people? 100 people were effected by the gas.  Russia’s defense ministry said on Wednesday (link) that the poisonous gas contamination was the result of gas leaking from a rebel chemical weapons depot after it was hit by Syrian government air strikes. I’m not pro-Russian but applying Ockham’s Razor, their explanation makes a lot more sense.
Now the US is contemplating war in Syria to depose Assad.  Why is that again?  And why would Assad deploy GB against a civilian population to kill or severely injure a mere 100 non-combatant people?
I understand the pitiful photos of children who were gassed. So was it a deliberate strike or was it an accidental release as Russia tells us? I suspect that President Trump is being punked, and I don’t think that it’s the Russians who are doing it. If not them, who?

Who is promoting US war against Syria that will draw Russia in against the United States? Who has been fulminating propaganda against Russia in the United States and for what reason?

I smell a rat.


  1. Weird, isn't it, how the progleft Dems and their friends in the corrupt, elite, venal, lying, pugnacious media seem so keen to start a war with Russia.

  2. Given the current conditions, I agree with your slicing with the razor. Next most likely, in my book, is deployment by ISIS to cast aspersions on Assad, like last time.

  3. I know, but I've seen war and it's an ugly thing. Too many broken men, too many dead babies. I understand that war is necessary, but America has a recent track record of fighting unnecessary wars – for fun and profit.

    My only requirement for a war is that the elected (pussies) who are pining for a war need to have their children there in combat, taking the same risks as the other kids take. Because you never know when the valkyries are coming for YOU.

  4. Oh, but do they. What's behind it, who is behind it. As WSF suggests above, follow the money. Did Soros invest in war armaments?

  5. I know, but they MUST. Or we have sets of false data, and I think that's what we have here. Has President Trump swallowed the baited hook? I hope not.

  6. I don't think that your crystal ball is cloudy. The only other factor this time is the heavy commitment by Russia.

  7. We don't have an ambassador physically present in Syria do we? If we do, God help him. Chances are one side or the other will Benghazi him.

  8. Syria severed diplomatic relations with United States in 2012 in response to its support of the Syrian rebels during the Syrian Civil War. There have been a couple of "special envoys" in Damascus, but I don't think that we have anyone there now. The Russians on the other hand, have quite a few diplomats.

Comments are closed.