As Syria Struggles Under COVID-19 Lockdown, America’s Scorched Earth Policy Ensures Food Insecurity
Infuriated by a failed military campaign to remove Syria’s leadership, the US is now turning the economic screws on a nation that has endured a brutal 10-year war of attrition waged by extremist mercenaries.
https://www.mintpressnews.com/as-syria- ... ty/269376/
wat0n wrote:I don't see why is it so unbelievable that both sides may have carried chemical attacks out.
Anything can be believable if we imagine it hard enough, like what you're doing. The facts remain, as has been pointed out by others, that Syria gave up its stockpile before the war
and it would be illogical for them to attack with chemical weapons their own people, while fighting mercenaries from many countries
. The Syrian people are
the Syrian army, practically every family has somebody conscripted, serving to defend Syria as the war on the country progressed.
Not to mention the fact that Idlib was not controlled by the Syrians at the time the chemical weapons attacks you're talking about took place. It was controlled by jihadists like al-Nusra, which you're going far out to defend here, why is that? Why, to you, is it unlikely that these people who were running around putting people in cages, beheading children etc., wouldn't attack the same people with chemical weapons?
I also don't see why would winning be such a reason not to
Because when the Syrian army was making tons of advances in liberating land and while Western powers continued to threaten further intervention and spoke of chemical weapons being a red line, it makes NO SENSE LOGICALLY for the Syrian army to decide at that very moment, they would attack their own people with chemical weapons that they don't have.
You are basically pushing an argument that is illogical and which you have no evidence for. Maybe stop until you find evidence. I understanding honing your argumentation skills is what you're about, but arguments like yours demand evidence.