The Syrian Question

The White House asserted Sunday that a “common-sense test” dictates the Syrian government is responsible for a chemical weapons attack that President Barack Obama says demands a U.S. military response. But Obama’s top aide says the administration lacks “irrefutable, beyond-a-reasonable-doubt evidence” that skeptical Americans, including lawmakers who will start voting on military action this week, are seeking.

“This is not a court of law. And intelligence does not work that way,” White House chief of staff Denis McDonough said during his five-network public relations blitz Sunday to build support for limited strikes against Syrian President Bashar Assad.

[...]

Asked about Assad’s claims there is no evidence he used the weapons, Secretary of State John Kerry told reporters in London: “The evidence speaks for itself.”

  WaPo

Really? So now we have to rely on the common sense of people in the White House as our determination for waging war? Swell.

My own common sense tells me that, having knowledge of the many CIA operations in many countries around the globe for decades, and the US foreign policy protecting (or under the control of) Israel, and the US economic policy which dictates that we must have control over the flow of oil in the Middle East, and the fact that Syria has been a strategic aim of the neocons since before 9/11 “changed everything”, and the fact that Assad’s regime has been utilizing guns and explosives for – how long now? - I should suspect a CIA/Israeli hand in the sudden use of a method (chemical) strictly prohibited by international norms and which was claimed to be Obama’s “red line” for intervention. (Uber-liberal Mother Jones calls that a crazy "conspiracy theory" with no basis in reality.)

But then, I’m not in the White House, so my “common-sense test” won’t be put to use.

The US says it has intercepted conversations involving Syrian officials during which they take responsibility for the attack. However, Washington has not made those conversations public.

  RT

How interesting.  I wonder why.

The Obama administration has also referred to its satellite and signals intelligence, as well as military communications, as proof that the regime was preparing to use poisonous gas just days before the alleged attack took place.

But apparently we can’t see that evidence either. National security.

It is hard to explain why Assad would use chemical weapons on his own people at a time when his troops were doing so well on the ground - especially since UN observers were nearby at the time of the attack – former British military officer Charles Heyman told AP.

But that timing would be important for someone wanting the world to believe the regime was using chemical weapons since the US/UK coalition would like to ahve UN Security Council approval for a Syrian attack, no?

Death toll numbers released by the US were also questioned. The Obama administration said that 1,429 people have died in 12 locations mostly east of Damascus. And although that number closely corresponds with figures from the Western-backed Syrian National Coalition, only 395 names of victims were released by the organization upon request.

The UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said that it counted victims by name and the current total is at 502.

Why did the Obama administration think 1,429 people would be more justifiable for an attack than 502? Is there a minimum number of chemical weapons deaths to be met?  Or do they, themselves, think 502 dead Syrians is no big deal?

At the same time, Bild am Sonntag newspaper reported that German intelligence has evidence that Bashar Assad may not be personally behind the chemical attack. He even blocked requests from his military commanders to use chemical weapons, the German media outlet reported, citing unidentified, high-level national security sources.

German, as in Germany whose president and enterprises have been shown to be spied upon by the NSA? As a diversion from the NSA spying stories, this little chemical weapons dust-up may prove to be a very bad move.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.