why does that even need to be asked? just do a very basic strategic calculus of where his interests are and where those of his enemies are. the conclusion leads to itself.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3577706&forum_id=2#33023805)

who does benefit: all of of Assads enemies

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3577706&forum_id=2#33023857)

but I'm sure Assad miscalculated ex ante and thought he would benefit -- see my post below

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3577706&forum_id=2#33023868)

And you don't seem to be asserting that there is some sort of tactical benefit to using poison gas rather than barrel bombs, do you?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3577706&forum_id=2#33026552)

Also, a lot of Syrian citizens are not "his people" in any real, tribal sense, and "tribe" matters much more than passport for this.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3577706&forum_id=2#33023834)

sure, it isn't the one-nil black and white determinant of everything like that idiot Thomas Friedman has been trying to tell us for 30+ years that it is, but it still matters

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3577706&forum_id=2#33023849)

he may also be an insane psycho torturing kids for fun but i doubt it

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3577706&forum_id=2#33023860)

he obviously miscalculated, but people miscalculate all the time, especially when they are permanently locked in a bunker surrounded by courtiers, and they have the idiot world media screaming at them 24/7 that Trump is destroyed and anyways is Russia's bitch who will roll over for Putin

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3577706&forum_id=2#33023865)

this is a classic false-flag. nothing more.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3577706&forum_id=2#33023885)

Poison gas intimidates so much better than just a few ordinary bombs.

If he calculates that he can get away with it (which I think he did), and he doesn't give two shits about "international human rights norms" (which he obviously doesn't), then it makes perfect sense. It's just that he miscalculated badly. Tell me he isn't saying to himself "holy fuck what just happened!"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3577706&forum_id=2#33023896)

great theory - where's the fucking evidence?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3577706&forum_id=2#33026487)

The idea that we even think for a second that this is what actually happened is peak Orwell.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3577706&forum_id=2#33026521)

I

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3577706&forum_id=2#33026529)

Thank,

Bizzy Assad"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3577706&forum_id=2#33026647)

1) This one off bullshit hand slap reaction intended to take some pressure off of Trump with respect to his relationship with Russia. Nothing more will come of it, and the neocons war boner is slightly satisfied. Enough to justify maintaining military spending. This is the best outcome for all parties sadly.

2) Intended to use Assad as a patsy to get the US mired in another war in the desert and weaken us strategically while Russia increases its influence while we pursue regime change for (((them))). This is the worst possible outcome - other than a real shooting war with Russia.

More likely we are idiotically responding to a false flag or an accident, which hopefully will not happen again and which just makes us look like bloodthirsty idiots - but which does not do much harm if we don't pursue regime change and which actually helps Trump at home. If this is as far as it goes, I can live with this wagging the dog.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3577706&forum_id=2#33026582)

And why would agree to the scenario in 2?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3577706&forum_id=2#33026591)

The question is whether Putin has any interest in helping Trump further along these lines to contribute to #1.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3577706&forum_id=2#33026639)

Clinton did nearly the exact same thing after the embassy bombings in 98. It's to stifle public opinion that we have to "look strong" while at the same time making no real effort.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3577706&forum_id=2#33026676)

1) russia media nonsense.

2) makes trump look forceful.

3) if bannon still has his ear, he knows if he does nothing we see that pic of gassed kids splattered all over news for weeks and we know what the image of one child on a beach can do to the mentality of an entire continent so you nip that in the bud quickly.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3577706&forum_id=2#33026931)

i haven't been paying much attention and the sound was off.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3577706&forum_id=2#33027062)