I don't defend the Syrian government. Is it not possible to say that there is not yet any compelling evidence about who used weapons in Ghouta and what those weapons were without supporting the Syrian government? And likewise to state that the goals of the US are not humanitarian?
And of course there is a conspiracy: These are allies acting for substantial mutual benefit just as Iran, Russia and China are conspiring. We saw similar concerted misinformation in Iraq and Libya, both of which are much worse off after their humanitarian-bombardment.
> Doctors without borders et al have talked about large scale gas attacks.
DWB do not have members in the area. They received second hand reports of fairly non-specific symptoms that they said would be consistent with a chemical attack. Moreover, they were adamant that they could not determine who launched the attack.
> The insurgents just don't have much artillery around Damascus
I know nothing about artillery positions but I as far as I know a method of delivery has not been established.
"Devil's advocates are needed, but you refuse to acknowledge that you defend the devil. [...] you really avoid the point that the Syrian junta is a pack of mass murdering, raping, torturing assholes which the world would do better without."
I just note you missed a third(!) chance to condemn... A member in an Iranian/Syrian "50 cent army" would write just what you write. (Does that make you proud?)
I would like to touch your arguments too, but...
You are certain France, Israel and USA are in a conspiracy and lie (despite all the leaks). And that all the western media are in on the conspiracy and keep the truth away from the "sheeple".
Not much to say, since that isn't falsifiable; it explains every argument anyone can write, you can just stay with the media which write extremist conspiracy theories...
(As an additional note -- the method of delivery might be hard to establish with the large shelling from the Assad artillery after the gas attack. But that is probably just another lie? :-) )
I didn't take the opportunity to condemn because it wasn't relevant to my point which was independent of anyone's feelings on the Syrian government. But to make you happy: I condemn the atrocities committed by the Syrian government. And to make you less happy: Without making a comparison or equivalence, I condemn the atrocities committed by rebel forces and the US government.
I am not certain of anything. Allied forces have strong incentives to mislead, as does the media in those countries, and we have recent historical evidence showing that they have done so in other cases (Iraq, Libya). It is simply not a defensible position to assert that governments don't mislead, even in concert. Your argument seems to boil down to "the government wouldn't lie to me" when we have seen that they would.
And of course whether or not allied governments are lying and cooperating is falsifiable: They can present evidence to show that their claims are supported by compelling evidence.
To be clear the Syrian government may, at a later date, be proved to have used chemical weapons. But that still wouldn't make the fact that, right now, there is no compelling evidence to support such a claim. Unjustified belief is not knowledge.
You also claimed the US involvement is a conspiracy. After Obama has wriggled like an eel for two years to not get involved in another war...
You have no comment on that you are on the side of just the dictators, against democracies?
You have no comment on that if you don't believe three independent intelligence organizations, you won't believe any proof?
>>And of course whether or not allied governments are lying and cooperating is falsifiable: They can present evidence to show that their claims are supported by compelling evidence.
If some general left Syria and witnessed then you, Putin and Assad would only claim it is faked. Because proofs were faked by someone else, somewhere else, some other times...
Let me also note the contrast of how certain you are about the US motivations (a heterogeneous entity if any!) -- and here you write that you are "not certain of anything"!
I am certain of one thing -- you are either confused or you write simple propaganda from the viewpoint of some dictators.
And of course there is a conspiracy: These are allies acting for substantial mutual benefit just as Iran, Russia and China are conspiring. We saw similar concerted misinformation in Iraq and Libya, both of which are much worse off after their humanitarian-bombardment.
> Doctors without borders et al have talked about large scale gas attacks.
DWB do not have members in the area. They received second hand reports of fairly non-specific symptoms that they said would be consistent with a chemical attack. Moreover, they were adamant that they could not determine who launched the attack.
> The insurgents just don't have much artillery around Damascus
I know nothing about artillery positions but I as far as I know a method of delivery has not been established.