U.S./U.K./France attack on Syria based on social media - mob rule without trial?

[Rx_]

Confirmed: entire U.S./U.K./France attack on Syria over fake chemical weapons attack was based on social media.
The father of the boys on social media confirmed the jihadists lured children into the staged event "They gave dates and cookies to kids at Douma hospital". From fake social media, mob rule lead to immediate actions.

Based on UK and other independent verification, U.S Kentucky Representative tweeted: “In briefing to Congress, DNI, SecDef, and SecState provided zero real evidence. Referenced info circulating online. Which means either they chose not to provide proof to Congress or they don’t have conclusive proof that Assad carried out gas attack. Either way, not good.”

Pro Peace groups claim that F.U.K.U.S. (a.k.a. France, U.K., U.S.) strikes have damaged the chances of achieving peaceful political resolution in Syria.

Robert Fisk’s published first-hand account for the U.K. Independent runs contrary to almost every claim of those willing to execute the attack.
Reality surfaced immediately after Fisk’s report. He is likely the most recognizable names in the last 40 years of Middle East war reporting. He has two British Press Awards’ Journalist of the Year prize and is seven time winner of the British Press Awards’ Foreign Correspondent of the Year.
The New York Times has said he is “probably the most famous foreign correspondent in Britain”. The Guardian has called him “one of the most famous journalists in the world“. An Arabic speaker, Fisk is famous for being among the few reporters in history to interview major figures including three times with Osama bin Laden.

Both Political parties in the US openly "demanded" immediate and violent action and rejected all independent investigations.
China had battleships in the region in case these actions became threats to Russia. A WW III may have been averted.

 

[NauticalGent]

Exactly. Sad, but traditional...

 

[Frothingslosh]

I would be more likely to believe you if your post didn't have outright errors that literally five seconds of research would have fixed.

China could not have 3 battleships in the area for the simple reason that there are no active battleships either in service or in reserve in any navy on the planet. The last battleships in service anywhere in the world were the USS Iowa and the USS Wisconsin, and both were removed from Reserve status on or before 2014, after having been decommissioned in the 1990's. In today's threat environment, the capability and survivability of a battleship is precisely zero.

China did move a carrier group to the Taiwan Straight for drills and to make a point to the US, and they sent their other carrier (Liaoning-CV-16) to Syria with advisors along with a single missile cruiser, but that's a far cry from 'three battleships'.

So if the entire chemical attack was fabricated by ISIS and a few children, then please explain why Russia initially claimed that it happened due to a Russian airstrike on a rebel depot full of chemical munitions, why rescue services found people choking in the street, why multiple relief workers were themselves hospitalized with symptoms indicative of poison gas attacks, and hell, why UN observers were suddenly denied access to the area once Syria and Russia started up their 'nothing happened, nothing to see here' act?

I know you tend to come here straight from InfoWars and paranoia central, but seriously, which is more logical: that a regime known to have used chemical weapons before has done so again and is being protected by a government that considers itself completely opposed to Europe and the US, or that all of the NATO powers conspired with locals, an organization that they also want to get rid of and which wants nothing more than the complete destruction of the West (ISIS), a multitude of neutral relief organizations, and a number of local hospitals to frame the government of Syria so that they could lob a few missiles into the general area and do no lasting damage? (And, let's not forget, that not one single person of the THOUSANDS supposedly involved have leaked a thing!)

This is right up there with your more usual 'The Federal Reserve is the Last Secret Bastion of the Illuminati, AND THEY'RE WINNING' nonsense. And the idea that this somehow prevented World War Three is utterly ludicrous.

 

[AccessBlaster]

This is the best quote

Pro Peace groups claim that F.U.K.U.S. have damaged the chances of achieving peaceful political resolution in Syria.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Unlike the Iraqi chemical weapons incidents, we have seen incontrovertible proof that Assad had used such weapons in the past. I do not know if the most recent incident was in fact a response to a chemical weapons event but in terms of credibility, Assad is already known to have been dirty and there IS that old phrase about leopards not changing their spots.

 

[Steve R.]

"U.S./U.K./France attack on Syria based on social media - mob rule without trial?". Basically, yes. The US seems to blatantly ignore the sovereignty of other countries, meaning that the US has no intrinsic right to attack these countries. Especially when asserting an inflamed mob based moral mandate.

Furthermore, the military actions of the US in Syria, Libya constitute manipulation of the electoral process in these countries. The Obama administration also interfered in the electoral process of BREXIT, and Israel.

Currently the US in the throws of a wasteful convoluted pretzel partisan investigation of supposed Russian manipulation in the US electoral process. Seems that the US has not right to assert electoral purity or fan the flames of moral outrage given US manipulation of the electoral process of other countries.