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
In reply to the discussion: There has not been ONE reason given for Assad to have used these weapons [View all]muriel_volestrangler
(106,161 posts)35. Juan Cole on why it might have been Assad's forces
Some have asked why the regime would risk using poison gas when it has been making gains against the rebels. But the regimes advances are minor and tenuous. It only took the small town of Qusayr with Hizbullah help! And advances in Homs were just scorched earth destruction of neighborhoods. They were offset by loss of a major air base near Aleppo, key for resupply of troops up there because roads north are insecure. The regime can only advance here or there, but doesnt have manpower to take back substantial territory.
My guess is that rebels in Rif Dimashq in outskirts of the capital were making inroads toward Damascus itself. Defensive troops are off tied down in Homs. Since the capital is the real prize and end game, the regime decided to let them know it wouldnt be allowed. It is the typical behavior of a weak regime facing superior demographic forces (the Alawites are far outnumbered by Sunnis) to deploy unconventional weaponry. Although there was a risk in using the gas, the regime may have felt threatened enough to take the risk, confident that it could muddy the waters afterwards with charges that it was actually the rebels who were behind it.
I dont find the false flag narrative about the gas attack put forward by the Russians plausible. Rebel forces are not disciplined enough to be sure of being able to plot and carry out a mass murder of the families that have been sheltering them in East and West Ghouta and to keep it secret. How could they have been sure no one among them would get cold feet and blow the whistle? Killing hundreds of women and children from your own clans would be objectionable to at least some in any group of fighters. The fighters in Rif Dimashq are not the hardened Jabhat al-Nusra types. Besides, capturing and deploying rocket systems tipped with poison gas is not so easy; even just operating them takes training.
http://www.juancole.com/2013/08/signals-intervention-syria.html
My guess is that rebels in Rif Dimashq in outskirts of the capital were making inroads toward Damascus itself. Defensive troops are off tied down in Homs. Since the capital is the real prize and end game, the regime decided to let them know it wouldnt be allowed. It is the typical behavior of a weak regime facing superior demographic forces (the Alawites are far outnumbered by Sunnis) to deploy unconventional weaponry. Although there was a risk in using the gas, the regime may have felt threatened enough to take the risk, confident that it could muddy the waters afterwards with charges that it was actually the rebels who were behind it.
I dont find the false flag narrative about the gas attack put forward by the Russians plausible. Rebel forces are not disciplined enough to be sure of being able to plot and carry out a mass murder of the families that have been sheltering them in East and West Ghouta and to keep it secret. How could they have been sure no one among them would get cold feet and blow the whistle? Killing hundreds of women and children from your own clans would be objectionable to at least some in any group of fighters. The fighters in Rif Dimashq are not the hardened Jabhat al-Nusra types. Besides, capturing and deploying rocket systems tipped with poison gas is not so easy; even just operating them takes training.
http://www.juancole.com/2013/08/signals-intervention-syria.html
Note that he is sceptical about American intervention; but he does think it's more likely to have been the government forces than rebels.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
35 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
There has not been ONE reason given for Assad to have used these weapons [View all]
Vinnie From Indy
Aug 2013
OP
The French are floating a "desperate attempt to stop 300 Supermen" theory.....
Junkdrawer
Aug 2013
#1
War sells a lot of beer and Cheetos when those dazzling cruise missles blow up stuff.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Aug 2013
#8
the west has not responded , and if he was behind the use of these weapons the last time around
JI7
Aug 2013
#16
I also posted yesterday news from Al Jazeera that rebels have taken north/coastal syrian town
KittyWampus
Aug 2013
#22
Not true, I posted an interview below from an al jazeera analyst. But at this point, DU is an echo
KittyWampus
Aug 2013
#24
I posted an Al Jazeera interview yesterday. So there are potential reasons, you just ignore them
KittyWampus
Aug 2013
#21
It makes no sense to kill your own people to send a message to Israel. this is BS
kelliekat44
Aug 2013
#27
Assad doesn't consider the rebels "his people". And if you read the interview, he goes into why
KittyWampus
Aug 2013
#29
The fallacy here is that people think that Assad is thinking like a Western leader
wild bird
Aug 2013
#31