I suspect I'll get downvoted for this by people who believe our media, but I think with some critical thinking it's possible to at least realize the possibility that the UN JIT/OPCW may be influenced to the point of bias by the US and its allies.
Many smart people around me have asked, what would have been Assad's motivation to bring down the wrath of the US on himself at a point when he's winning the war? What is the US doing in Syria without an invitation by the Syrian government, supposedly "fighting terrorists" but against the government? Why does the US have the right to constantly invade other governments it doesn't like because "they're not legitimate"?
Assuming the US was the size of Connecticut and had no nuclear weapons, it would be easy for a power like China to take the domestic unrest after the Bush, Trump, or any of several other elections to claim that the US has become a dictatorship and they need to occupy large parts of our territory to ensure freedom. Then assume that somehow that tiny US manages to start winning against the China-supported "insurgents". Then suddenly, out of nowhere, with the war turning in favor of the US, the US uses some chemical weapons on civilians and brings down international condemnation on itself. Who wouldn't be skeptical?
But our government has done a great job of making every other country in the world and its government seem suspicious, so it's easy for many of us to think it's perfectly reasonable that Assad is a crazy person who doesn't want to live past next week, and so is perfectly happy to use unnecessary chemical weapons in a war he's already winning, with a major global power backing him.
Some of the people who were even in the video showing the "chemical attack" have said that they were not attacked with chemical weapons. Those witnesses have been dismissed as "Russian propaganda". See for yourself, the "Russian propaganda" and a US-friendly media source denouncing the Russian propaganda.
Many smart people around me have asked, what would have been Assad's motivation to bring down the wrath of the US on himself at a point when he's winning the war? What is the US doing in Syria without an invitation by the Syrian government, supposedly "fighting terrorists" but against the government? Why does the US have the right to constantly invade other governments it doesn't like because "they're not legitimate"?
Assuming the US was the size of Connecticut and had no nuclear weapons, it would be easy for a power like China to take the domestic unrest after the Bush, Trump, or any of several other elections to claim that the US has become a dictatorship and they need to occupy large parts of our territory to ensure freedom. Then assume that somehow that tiny US manages to start winning against the China-supported "insurgents". Then suddenly, out of nowhere, with the war turning in favor of the US, the US uses some chemical weapons on civilians and brings down international condemnation on itself. Who wouldn't be skeptical?
But our government has done a great job of making every other country in the world and its government seem suspicious, so it's easy for many of us to think it's perfectly reasonable that Assad is a crazy person who doesn't want to live past next week, and so is perfectly happy to use unnecessary chemical weapons in a war he's already winning, with a major global power backing him.
Some of the people who were even in the video showing the "chemical attack" have said that they were not attacked with chemical weapons. Those witnesses have been dismissed as "Russian propaganda". See for yourself, the "Russian propaganda" and a US-friendly media source denouncing the Russian propaganda.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-27/russia-presents-allege...
https://www.rt.com/op-ed/428514-douma-civilians-chemical-hoa...
By the way, there are plenty of people in the US who have criticized this overall US strategy for a long time.
https://www.amazon.com/New-Military-Humanism-Lessons-Kosovo/...
But I suppose people on both sides of this debate will think that the other side is just believing the "obviously wrong" propaganda of the other side.