'War crime': U.N. finds sarin used in Syria chemical weapons attack - CNN.comThe team did identify two types or rockets it said were used to deliver the gas and their trajectories, and international observers have said those weapons are not known to be in the hands of rebels battling the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
Australian U.N. Ambassador Gary Quinlan, who is currently serving as president of the Security Council, said the report bolsters his country's stance. It "confirms, in our view, that there is no remaining doubt that it was the regime that used chemical weapons."
And Samantha Power, the U.S. ambassador, said a preliminary review of the report points toward forces loyal to al-Assad. "The regime possesses sarin, and we have no evidence that the opposition possesses sarin," Power said. "It defies logic" to think members of the opposition would have infiltrated a regime-controlled area to fire on opposition-controlled areas.
Britain, France, and NATO have also said al-Assad's regime was behind the attack. But Russia is Syria's leading ally, and Russian U.N. Ambassador Vitaly Churkin maintained Moscow's stance that Syrian rebels might be to blame.
1. The rebels do not have those rockets.
2. The rebels do not have sarin.
3. The chems were withdrawn from an Assad facility, without resistance. The US claims photo evidence of this.
4. The rockets were prepared, assembled and launched from ~10 different locations within Assad territory, without resistance.
Let's be real.
Why are you making things up? The US report does not say Assad used chemical weapons. They say "high degree of confidence." this generally means about an 8 in 10 chance.
...short of confirmation...We assess with high confidence that the Syrian government carried out the chemical weapons
attack against opposition elements in the Damascus suburbs on August 21. We assess that the
scenario in which the opposition executed the attack on August 21 is highly unlikely. The body
of information used to make this assessment includes intelligence pertaining to the regime's
preparations for this attack and its means of delivery, multiple streams of intelligence about the
attack itself and its effect, our post-attack observations, and the differences between the
capabilities of the regime and the opposition. Our high confidence assessment is the strongest
position that the U.S. Intelligence Community can take short of confirmation. We will continue
to seek additional information to close gaps in our understanding of what took place.
Do you have any honesty in what you say?
OK, you tell me. What percentage do you perceive "high confidence" to mean. as I have learned it, it is the 8 in 10 probability.Originally Posted by Lord of Planar
Very high confidence: At least 9 out of 10 chance
High confidence: 8 out of 10 chance
Medium confidence: About 5 out of 10 chance
Low confidence: 2 out of 10 chance
Very low confidence: Less than 1 out of 10 chance