Still NO PROOF Assad did it

>still NO PROOF Assad did it

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=rXFBJncdRW0
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Why would he gas his own people?

Exactly. He wouldn't.

Does it matter?

America writes the history.

Y'all just read it.

>be Assad
>winning your civil war
>having a good time with your best mate, Putin
>absolutely dick Obama and his "moderate" rebels in Aleppo
>push back ISIS territory to basically nothing
>enjoy approval from most Syrians even during the war
>the majority of Syrians are willing you to win
>the end is in sight
>decide to use illegal gas on 80 civilians - including 30 children - for the banter

>Y'all

Back to the trailer park, Cletus.

>Oh wow, Trump said he won't overthrow us!
>good, we can get away with using gas
>oh shit, trumps not a pussy like the last guy

Why would he risk all-out war with the world's super power to kill 80 people with illegal weaponry?

That's your logic here. He doesn't benefit from using illegal gas. He has plenty other ways to kill people.

RERERERERERERERERERERERERERE

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

Doesn't matter, the fact that they are being used at all when Syria and Russia are supposed to have shit under control is enough reason to intervene

Not at all outraged as many here are personally about the strike, but it's disheartening to hear conservative radio people like Hannity and Levin totally stand behind the assertion that it was Assad after going through the Iraq debacle. They won't even entertain the idea or theory that it wasn't Assad.

>Assad wants to retake Syria at all costs
>Aleppo retaken, Assad closer than ever
>Idlib Province still controlled by rebels, will take a long and bloody campaign to retake it
>Rebels rely on civilians
>Gas attack terrorizes civilians and weakens rebel support before ground campaign

So why use gas?
>Assad recognizes that American intervention is the biggest threat to his survival
>When he launched the gas attack, he believed it would not result in an American military response
>For months, Trump talked about how Syria was a distraction from fighting ISIS, and we should reconcile with Russia, Syria's main ally
>A week before the gas attack, Secretary of State said Assad's fate would be decided "by the Syrian people"
>The Syrian people are either displaced, living in a police state, or living in ruins, and are completely unable to do anything about Assad
>US Ambassador to the UN says “Our priority is no longer to sit there and focus on getting Assad out.”
>Assad gets a clear message: he can do whatever he wants, America will not intervene, so he gasses his people

This retarded faggot thinks russia should have invaded the US because a few kids died from white phosphorus in the waco siege

If assad really did it, this is just the cost of taking out the trash

If you gas your enemies, they win.

youtube.com/watch?v=rXFBJncdRW0

And honestly the strike probably won't change much. All it did was establish where the line is now. Russia and Iran didn't do anything to defend Assad.

At the same time, the Secretary of State made a statement that the strike does not signal a change in American policy towards Syria, meaning there is no immediate plan to depose Assad, protect opposition or establish safe spaces in Syria.

Assad will continue to terrorize his people, only without the use of chemical weapons.

>israel uses white-phosphorus illegally in built up areas
>nothing to see here, dont forget the holocaust

>still NO PROOF Putin hacked the election

It doesn't matter, Trump made it clear its assads job to keep it from happening again, false flag or not.

christ does anyone have the old original pic with the panels about how theres no proof assad did it and ron paul and the china stronk or whatever

>unironically implying that Russia in its economic shambles can take on a super-power that totally eclipses them
There's a reason why Russia did nothing, faggot. It'd be literal suicide to take on the U.S. because Russia isn't what it used to be.

He did it in Goutha back in 2013 dipshit.

Why does no one remember this?

It's the, for lack of a better phrase "nuclear option" for him. Actually having WMD is the only thing that would have scared off the US before Trump.

> he gassed people for no reason

This is your argument

that was the rebels though

You just miss all the reasons why that he listed or something?

>Reading comprehension

Assad gassed his people to obtain an easier victory in Idlib. Multiple messages from the US through Trump's rhetoric, statements from the Secretary of State, and the UN Ambassador convinced Assad that the US had no interest in getting involved in Syria, and therefore there would be no real consequences to using gas.

Just like the ones in this one.

Fuck off reddit

Gas is largely useless - the cons far outweigh the pros. Why would he even possibly risk the wrath of the international community when conventional bombing would be far more useful and wouldn't attract this much attention?

Gassing civilians would harden them against his regime. It wouldn't weaken rebel support.

see

The international community was already up his ass over what the regime was doing.

>He did it in Goutha back in 2013

You sweet summer child.