General Discussion

panader0

(25,816 posts) Mon Apr 9, 2018, 10:51 AM Apr 2018

What possible benefit does Assad get from a chemical attack?

There seems to be no military benefit to killing civilians.
The international outrage only makes Assad weaker.
There has already been an Israeli attack and there will be an American strike too
I believe.
What's the plus side for Assad?

11 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

What possible benefit does Assad get from a chemical attack? (Original Post) panader0 Apr 2018 OP

Governing by fear MichMary Apr 2018 #1

I can assure you bearsfootball516 Apr 2018 #3

Dont be sure MFM008 Apr 2018 #11

That is a good question. The areas seemed to have already been mostly captured by the Fred Sanders Apr 2018 #2

If he feels somewhat solid in his position. NCTraveler Apr 2018 #4

There's a very obvious benefit from a chemical attack... brooklynite Apr 2018 #5

I think because most of syrians people are anti-assad Clarity2 Apr 2018 #6

This story sure goes to the Hart of the Matter. Wellstone ruled Apr 2018 #8

Nothing, which is probably why he didn't do it eissa Apr 2018 #7

Thats the immediate question Russian trolls flooded FB with Lee-Lee Apr 2018 #9

"The international outrage only makes Assad weaker. " DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2018 #10

MichMary

(1,714 posts)

1. Governing by fear

Reply to panader0 (Original post)

Mon Apr 9, 2018, 10:57 AM

Apr 2018

You can bet none of the citizen want to get on his wrong side.

Coming soon to a country near you??

bearsfootball516

(6,377 posts)

3. I can assure you

Reply to MichMary (Reply #1)

Mon Apr 9, 2018, 11:14 AM

Apr 2018

Trump is not about to start launching chemical attacks on citizens inside the United States.

MFM008

(19,814 posts)

11. Dont be sure

Reply to bearsfootball516 (Reply #3)

Mon Apr 9, 2018, 01:32 PM

Apr 2018

Of anything that concerns that maggot.

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)

2. That is a good question. The areas seemed to have already been mostly captured by the

Reply to panader0 (Original post)

Mon Apr 9, 2018, 11:13 AM

Apr 2018

Syrian army.

Why indeed...just to create fear, as if civilians are not already living in terror?

Any logical explanation? If not Syrian government, then who else might gain by this crime?

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)

4. If he feels somewhat solid in his position.

Reply to panader0 (Original post)

Mon Apr 9, 2018, 11:15 AM

Apr 2018

Fear.

brooklynite

(94,585 posts)

5. There's a very obvious benefit from a chemical attack...

Reply to panader0 (Original post)

Mon Apr 9, 2018, 11:19 AM

Apr 2018

Fear.

Assad is trying to regain control of his country. Using excessive force and imposing harsh conditions on civilians helps to break any support they might be giving to the anti-Government militias.

Clarity2

(1,009 posts)

6. I think because most of syrians people are anti-assad

Reply to panader0 (Original post)

Mon Apr 9, 2018, 11:35 AM

Apr 2018

Everything you wanted to know about Syria’s civil war https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/05/syria-civil-war-explained-160505084119966.html

Wellstone ruled

(34,661 posts)

8. This story sure goes to the Hart of the Matter.

Reply to Clarity2 (Reply #6)

Mon Apr 9, 2018, 12:40 PM

Apr 2018

Assad Family has never recognized certain Tribal Families or their Religions and it vary obvious they are doing Ethnic Cleansing as a way to control Syria.

eissa

(4,238 posts)

7. Nothing, which is probably why he didn't do it

Reply to panader0 (Original post)

Mon Apr 9, 2018, 12:17 PM

Apr 2018

Seems like whenever the Syrian army gets the upper hand, there's some chemical attack to justify outside powers bombing them back and giving the rebels some leverage.

Lee-Lee

(6,324 posts)

9. Thats the immediate question Russian trolls flooded FB with

Reply to panader0 (Original post)

Mon Apr 9, 2018, 01:09 PM

Apr 2018

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,710 posts)

10. "The international outrage only makes Assad weaker. "

Reply to panader0 (Original post)

Mon Apr 9, 2018, 01:11 PM

Apr 2018

To paraphrase Joseph Stalin how many divisions does 'international outrage' have ?

Reply to this discussion