Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)

1. Why is it so hard to prove a chemical attack? Why is it always "suspected"?

Reply to Lint Head (Original post)

Fri Apr 13, 2018, 11:11 PM

Apr 2018

To this day is there anything more than suspicion, followed by verdict and execution of sentence...in 5 days while the public is supposed to swallow the conclusion whole...I remember Iraq...the American media is in love with war...that never changes...and very willing to forward any lie other war lovers use to justify killing...evidence or not.

Remember Iraq.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

28 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I will not link to their site but RT.com because it is Russian propaganda. RT is reporting that [View all] Lint Head Apr 2018 OP

Why is it so hard to prove a chemical attack? Why is it always "suspected"? Fred Sanders Apr 2018 #1

It's not like they are letting people in to test the area etc. So that is why it's Kirk Lover Apr 2018 #4

So if it is just suspected, is a decleration of war on the country the proper response? Fred Sanders Apr 2018 #7

Are you saying chemical weapons should not be treated differently than conventional? oberliner Apr 2018 #17

"the White Helmets" are community volunteers in the Syrian Civil Defence procon Apr 2018 #2

Well I also believe if that Assholesad didn't use Chem weapons last week this wouldn't be Kirk Lover Apr 2018 #3

White helmets lunasun Apr 2018 #5

I wouldn't doubt that this was choreographed between Trump and Putin. world wide wally Apr 2018 #6

So because Trump did this, and it seems justified for using chemical weapons on civilians, GulfCoast66 Apr 2018 #8

At least if it's RT we know to expect Russian Propaganda HopeAgain Apr 2018 #9

Why would this be any more or less valid than the shit The_Casual_Observer Apr 2018 #10

Ill believe the French and their incontrovertible proof blake2012 Apr 2018 #11

RT are proven liars Loki Liesmith Apr 2018 #12

Oh boy Russian propaganda 4now Apr 2018 #13

I had hoped the days of breathlessly repeating Codeine Apr 2018 #14

Breathlessly? I think you're breathlessly reacting to my post Lint Head Apr 2018 #19

This is russian propaganda sharedvalues Apr 2018 #15

You need to know what the enemy is doing. Lint Head Apr 2018 #16

If you want to post propaganda, use Lakoff method: Truth first, then note the lie, then truth again. sharedvalues Apr 2018 #21

I do not a lecture or schooling in this regard. Thanks. I'm am very well educated. Lint Head Apr 2018 #22

Lakoff is ALWAYS worth discussing. Lets all try to avoid propaganda for the right. sharedvalues Apr 2018 #25

No shit, eh? RhodeIslandOne Apr 2018 #18

The only person less trustworthy than Trump is Putin./nt DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2018 #20

I would never check out RT...I have no doubt Assad used chemical weapons. Demsrule86 Apr 2018 #23

RT!? LOLOLOL!!!!! Adrahil Apr 2018 #24

more awareness of propaganda is needed sharedvalues Apr 2018 #26

Why does the Kremlin want us to believe there is no proof of a chemical attack? Wwcd Apr 2018 #27

Pentagon reported a 2000% increase in trolling after strikes. Hortensis Apr 2018 #28