A Logical Look into the Syrian Chemical Attack

Give us a Share!

I think it’s pretty clear to anyone who’s seen any one of my posts about the Syrian gas attack what my opinion is on the matter, but I’d like to expand on this a tad. The main points that I’m convinced are true and the explanation for each following:

1. The gas attack on Idlib was a hoax, and was not carried out by the Assad regime.

-Simply put, Assad would either have to want himself dead within the next 3 years or absolutely insane to actually have carried out the sarin gas attack. April 5th was the day the gas attack was supposedly carried out, and just so happened to be the day before peace talks with the UN that would have been a vital step to securing power for Assad in the future. The attack was reported to have happened in the rebel held province of Idlib, a stronghold that hadn’t seen conventional combat since early 2015. This attack had zero tactical gain as Assad is already winning the civil war. Anyone could see that suddenly using WMDs against civilians would turn the entire world community against Assad and certainly end in some sort of action against the Russian allies. If you’re not at least a little suspicious, you should be.

2. Trump used the justification of a WMD attack to make a power play that would increase his negotiating power with contentious nations.

-There are many diplomatic benefits to the gas attack retaliation. For one, Trump now has very real power behind his words against the aggression of nations such as North Korea and Iran. To those who see the gas attack as legitimately the fault of Assad, Trump passed the strength test with flying colors. The world community sees the kind of calculated strength that can only come from tactical tomahawk strikes from Trump today. This attack also dissolved the Russian puppet narrative that has haunted Trump since his election victory. Though there was communication between the US and the Russians before the attack went through, this was standard protocol for all tactical strikes in the past. We have no way to tell what Trump knows or doesn’t know, but his strike against Assad was objectively beneficial to his administration no matter the validity of the reports of gas in Idlib.

3. The gas attack was either perpetrated by or was directly organized with the efforts of the dubiously intentioned Syrian rebel groups.

-The “white helmets” are the pro-rebel activists that filmed themselves aiding victims of the gas attack in Idlib. They are the primary source for all information used by Western media for the Syrian civil war. Anyone who has followed updates regarding the war has seen “the last hospital in Aleppo” destroyed about 7 times in a month, and the same little girl getting rescued by a different family every other week for anyone with an eye for detail. Any one of these propaganda fairytales will always be sourced by “local activists.” Because of the history of propaganda from these groups, every time you see a white helmet in this week’s video about another random attack on civilians you can count on it being manufactured propaganda. I invite everyone to do their own research on the white helmets to see the truth behind the unethical war journalism that happens in Syria.

-Thomas McAngery