Sarin gas used in Syria attack, Kerry says

[deminks]

Source: Washington Post

Secretary of State John F. Kerry said Sunday that fresh laboratory tests show that Sarin nerve gas was used in an Aug. 21 attack in Syria that killed more than 1,400 people, the first time that U.S. officials have pinpointed what kind of chemical weapon was used.

In an interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Kerry said blood and hair samples from emergency workers in east Damascus had tested positive for Sarin, a highly toxic nerve agent. He said that U.S. officials learned of the lab results in the past 24 hours, citing the evidence as yet another reason for Congress to pass President Obama’s request to authorize the use of military force against the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

“So this case is building and this case will build,” Kerry said, according to a transcript of his remarks provided by NBC. “I don’t believe that my former colleagues in the United States Senate and the House will turn their backs on all of our interests, on the credibility of our country, on the norm with respect to the enforcement of the prohibition against the use of chemical weapons.”

In an unclassified intelligence assessment released Friday, U.S. officials had said they believed that the Syrian government had used “a nerve agent” in the Aug. 21 attack in the Damascus suburbs. But the intelligence report did not specify what kind, and questions have remained about precisely what chemical weapons may have been involved and who ordered their use. Syria is believed to have multiple nerve agents and poison gases in its chemical weapons stockpile.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/sarin-gas-used-in-syria-attack-kerry-says/2013/09/01/4b657cb8-1304-11e3-b18a-e00deecb3b8e_story.html

---

So, sarin is now confirmed.

[David__77]

1. Kerry's talk is despicable.

"Bashar Assad now joins the list of Adolph Hitler and Saddam Hussein [who] have used these weapons in time of war," he said.

...

"I don't believe that my former colleagues in the United States Senate and the House will turn their backs on all of our interests, on the credibility of our country, on the norm with respect to the enforcement of the prohibition against the use of chemical weapons, which has been in place since 1925," he said.

First of all, these statements have nothing to do with the UN investigation.

Most importantly, Kerry fails to explain why "all of our interests" lie in attacking Syria? What is the objective? To facilitate more terrorist training ground for al Qaeda, to expand its scope of control on the ground?

I'm frankly surprised that he didn't need a feinting couch after all of his hyperventilating. For good measure, not only does he bring up Saddam, but even Hitler!

[another_liberal]

4. The term "chemical weapons" includes more than just poison gas.

White phosphorus and Napalm are also classified as "chemical weapons."

That being said, several more national leaders (including some of our own) should be added to Sec. Kerry's list.

[MyNameGoesHere]

12. That would be a stretch since the USA has not signed off on

protocol 3 of the CCW, Certain Conventional Weapons. There use is authorized just not on civilians.
However since you brought it up, which country should punish us for this: http://goo.gl/V1gvJn ?

You ready to take your punishment?

[another_liberal]

14. Being "ready" is of no particular advantage in this context.

Last edited Sun Sep 1, 2013, 07:31 PM - Edit history (1)

And, yes, I realize something of what the fate is which we have earned ourselves.

[Igel]

17. Language is a conventional mapping of signs to referents.

As soon as we start making up our own meanings, we get gibbering. Big rice stylusing graben fig amoeba key felt.

Or, using the usual words for what I meant, we ca not make up our own meanigs. (Even if I do think having negation being a helping verb is a cool idea.)

So what is the convention meaning of "chemical weapon" that you need to accept in order to be intelligible? Let's first look at what *might* be part of the meaning but isn't.

Bullets are made of a mixture of different chemical elements. Bullets are chemical weapons.

Knives are steel alloys with carbon. These are elements. They are chemicals. Knives are chemical weapons.

My fist is a complex combination of proteins, electrolytes in aqueous solution, lipids, and minerals. These are complex chemicals. My fist is a chemical weapon.

Spit is also a complex combination of proteins. When segregationists spit on the black kids being taken to white schools, I guess they were using chemical weapons. Paper is a complex set of chemicals, and when my mother got a nasty note from the IRS that, too, was chemical weapon use that had to be laid at the foot of the IRS.

Even water cannons shoot water--a chemical (typically chlorinated and with numerous trace compounds). Water cannons are chemical weapons.

Had enough?

White phosphorus and napalm are used to burn. They are incendiary weapons. Since we use chemicals in them, they, too, are chemical weapons in sense.

In fact, until you get to energy pulse weapons (like lasers or sound cannons) you're talking chemical weapons. In a trivial, facile, even puerile and demogogic way. To stoke fear without thought, conclusion without thinking, action without understanding.

"Oh my god! My girlfriend's using chemical weapons! Quick! War crimes! She's shedding a frigging tear! Oh, the huge manatee!"

"Chemical weapons" used to produce heat, force and pressure, even to eliminate oxygen needed to breathe aren't chemical weapons. They're not used because of the effect the chemicals have on cell physiology. Chemical weapons are chosen not because they produce force, pressure, or heat. Chemical weapons are chosen because they are toxic and mess chemically with chemical messenging or they poison enzymes. Yes, using a guillotine to severe a spinal column messes with chemical messaging--the same thing sarin does. Yet sarin does it chemically, not mechanically. Sarin is a chemical weapon; the guillotine, alas, for all its chemicality, is not.

[karynnj]

6. You think Assad does not deserve to be labeled as that evil after gassing over

1000 citizens of his own country? Maybe he should have added Pol Pot?

Kerry's comment is NOT based on the UN investigation, nor did he say it was - which has not been completed and won't be for a few weeks. The US is basing it on their intelligence which is what Kerry spoke of. At this point, do you doubt that their was a chemical attack?

This may be one of the few times where referencing Hitler is not ridiculous. It is true that the numbers of people killed by Hitler was higher, but this action is pretty evil.

Kerry listed what are interests are - most seem to come from the loss of credibility if there is no response. He also considers that this is a violation of international norms.

[David__77]

8. The Hitler reference is ludicrous.

My problem isn't calling someone evil. My problem is the evil policy this speech is attempting to promote.

The Syrian government is evil, the insurgents are evil, and the US should stay out.

[karynnj]

20. Then attack the policy!

Not the definition of what happened.

[Igel]

18. I doubt their definitions.

If you don't agree with the definitions, talking about the conclusions is entirely beside the point. It compels you to accept the definitions.

Dictate definitions and you get the right result. If you convince people that "Jew" is defined, in part, as "subhuman," then, well, who's against making sure the subhumans, the non-humans, are treated "properly". The first step in understanding an argument is to understand the definitions.

Obama et al. assume that anything done by any member of his regime, which includes all the military, is the direct responsibility of the regime with Assad as commander in chief.

My previous example is that Nidal Hassan was a member of the US military. An officer. Anything done by any member of Obama's administration, which includes all the military, is the direct responsibility of the administration with Obama as commander in chief. Hassan gunned down soldiers. It doesn't matter if he was acting on his own, our president has set up the analogy for us to infer that he is personally responsible and bears any liability for Hassan's actions.

In Fast and Furious, Obama deflected blame by saying he wasn't told. He couldn't be responsible because he didn't know. Same for the possibly specious IRS scandal earlier this year. Now Obama assigns blame by saying it doesn't matter if Assad was told--he's still responsible, not knowing is utterly meaningless. So has Obama decided he really was responsible for Fast and Furious? He is personally responsible for any problems in the IRS? Or does he hold to the awesome political, albeit immoral or amoral, principle that "I make have the bigger weapons so I make the rules--there's one for me and a different one for others."

I think their definition is wacked. It's trivial to reduce it to an absurdity. It is self-serving. And it makes any discussion about implications of those definitions an utter waste of time. It's like arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin--you pick you definition of 'pinhead, angel, dance' you get your answer. No point arguing over "20" versus "100" or "not even 1."

[NealK]

7. "turn their backs on all of our interests"

Translation: Corporations that spent big bucks on us are expecting a huge return on their investment.

[durablend]

9. Exxon wants that oil, dammit! n/t

[NealK]

30. And BP, don't forget BP! n/t

[jakeXT]

2. Independently from the UN

The evidence -- which was gathered independently of the United Nations -- strengthens President Barack Obama's call for military action, he said.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/01/world/meast/syria-civil-war/

[Ghost Dog]

15. Unreliable evidence if there's no knowing

how, when and where such 'samples' were taken, and if there's no verifiable chain of custody...

[karynnj]

3. This is essentially dotting an "i" - whatever nerve agent was used it was potent

I don't know if this impacts the assignment of blame. There have been articles that seemed to say that there would be signatures that could label the gas as being from a specific place. It could be that the chemicals are generic and anyone who puts the right formula together makes indistinguishable gas.

[another_liberal]

13. The trick with Sarin is that its components need to be mixed just before use.

Sarin gas shells have two compartments inside. When a shell is fired, the membrane separating the components is broken, and they become mixed as the shell spins in flight. Sarin gas rockets must be similar in construction.

[NealK]

5. Kerry says a lot of things:

[durablend]

10. Unless WE do it

Then that's totally different!

[NealK]

31. Yep!

That's totally different when we do it.

[durablend]

11. Did he mention

The mushroom clouds that will cover the United States if we don't bomb Syria into oblivion this minute?

[another_liberal]

22. It might reach that level of hyperbole yet.

There's a week and a half until the House votes.

[GliderGuider]

16. I won't believe him unless...

... he holds up a little vial of some nameless clear fluid.

[Igel]

19. Pointless evidence.

Rather like introducing the corpse in a murder trial to justify the murder trial's being held, even if the picture was in the newspaper and the murdered's family was in the news.

We were pretty sure it was sarin. The simple fact that it was sarin doesn't confirm or disconfirm the assertion that it was Assad's responsibility.

It adds nothing to the debate.

However, it's said to be building the argument against Assad and keeping the momentum and pressure up for the predecided conclusion. For those who don't pause to reflect just hear that the administration continues to lay out evidence proving it's Assad's fault. It's enough for those who believe or those who want to be seen to be following the news.

[daleo]

21. Good points

I have read that the rebels used limited amounts of sarin earlier - I don't know if it is true. We do know that crazies in Japan used sarin in the subway system, so it is possible for non-state actors to produce and use it. Add to that the complex alliances, official and unofficial, that are involved in the Syrian civil war, and there many possibilities as to the use of sarin.

[polynomial]

23. Didn't we sell Sarin to Iraq

This has to be the American hatchet of hate. To be able to sell off chemical weapons at one time in history then bomb someone else for doing it at another time is the most mysterious source of disobedience to life. Was America responsible for the Sarin gas used on the Kurds in 1988? I think so. Iraq bought Sarin gas from America. Yuk. This begs an original question about secret war decisions done over the last fifty years likely show American top level leadership made wrong bad decisions. Kept secret while profiteering from it…

It is an infidelity to be part of a reason like this. This begs the question is this pure Islam? Pure Islam at this stage of a war appears to be a tyranny that must be pure. This leadership are masters of the time right now. When this group in power in Syria decide they want to stay in power they will do what is necessary. Just as the Republican’s and perhaps complicity with the Democratic Party with the full complement of the media keep the war policies going for a profiteering in the Soviet/Persian money laundering system.

What Kerry is talking about is a lot of babble. After looking up America’s commitment to human rights our country is next to China and the Soviets, having no rules people. No rules no honor, the basic secret prescription to tyranny. Again Snowden and Manning opening up the American Pandora political paradox where the one percent are secret conspirators at every turn. Please know I was a very impassioned supporter of John Kerry when he run for president. I voted for him. However at this point in the debate I totally disagree with him. Stand down in Syria get out of Afghanistan commit to a piece time building of the infrastructure and be energy independent is the way to go.

[dipsydoodle]

24. Yes - Kerry's forgotten that.

Loss of memory is quite a serious symptom.

[karynnj]

28. I doubt he did - and he was NEVER for selling it when the Reagan

administration did.

[jessie04]

25. I guess unless he was there in a Haz-mat suit with a spectrophotometer

with video tape and had it notorizid and signed in blood, then obviously Kerry is a warmongering neo-con.

I thought repugs were the only ones who engaged in cannibalism.

[Jon Ace]

26. What if the UN tests come back negative for sarin? (nt)

[Alkene]

27. Don't worry; there's an app for that. n/t

[Zorro]

29. I wonder whether critics will remain so vehemently opposed to US intervention

if Assad lobs a few sarin-loaded shells across the Golan Heights.

That's a more credible possibility if there's no response to the recent attacks.