I find it hard to believe that he has actually used chemical warfare. It is simply not in

his best interests, and doesn't match what he's done before the "civil" (for it isn't) war. Even Saddam, who had been proven to have used them on the Kurds, didn't try it on the West. You know that using them brings condemnation from everywhere, including those you actually need in order to survive.

If they are being used, surely those deploying them are choosing them as a weapon of choice for a reason and as far as I am aware the one difference is, let's face it, pretty disastrous PR. It all smells rather fishy to me.

He's been brutal before (such as killing those responsible for massacres of Christians) but before the war it was mostly aimed at maintaining a secular state from his position as a minority Alewite in a majority Sunni country.

The ethics of arming and training the "freedom fighters" is rarely touched upon - they are largely Al Qaeda and other extremist Islamic groups. The genuine democracy-driven "rebels" were pretty much pushed out of the fight early.

Posted By: Steve in Holland, Apr 11, 13:30:38