Benm
0
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2007
- Messages
- 7,896
- Points
- 113
The thing about the chemical weapons may actually be correct: Having destroyed nearly 90% of what you had 2 decades ago is nice and all that, but if you had a huge supply, the remaining 10% is still a huge supply.
It's like having a billion dollars and giving a way 90% of your money, and then claiming to be "poor" after, with a cool 100 million sitting in your bank account. The fact that the US isn't that likely to actually -use- what chemical weapons are left doesn't negate that they still have the largest stockpile in the world.
As for the missile situation this remains completely unclear. The US claims 100% success and all that, but doesn't back that up with any proof. Even the number of missiles fired cannot be verified from any independent source, since there are simply no independent sources in the region with capabilities of detecting them.
What is interesting though is the wording of the Russian claim: They state that -Syrian- defenses shot down a large percentage of the missiles, not -Russian- interference. They don't deny helping Syria set up those systems, but they deny pushing the button.
I guess we need to accept the fact that we will never know the truth about this, since there are no impartial parties that can make observations:
The US could claim 100 successful hits, but perhaps they launched 500 missiles and 400 of them were actually intercepted. The Russians and Syrians could claim they intercepted 80% of incoming fire, and in that case they'd both be telling the truth to some degree.
There is no one that isn't affiliated with either side that has the technology to make observations though. The EU is capable of detecting and tracking such launches, but since the operation involved France and (the not fully exited) UK that would not be a reliable source. Turkey could have tracked it to some degree, but has not been a reliable partner to anyone in recent years.
So that leaves very few countries that could have observed it: From the ground perhaps Jordan, Isreal and Egypt, which aren't all that neutral in this conflict, and from space perhaps China, which will probably simply deny looking at it at all (not their problem and no need to stir up relations with Russia, the US or the EU).
It's like having a billion dollars and giving a way 90% of your money, and then claiming to be "poor" after, with a cool 100 million sitting in your bank account. The fact that the US isn't that likely to actually -use- what chemical weapons are left doesn't negate that they still have the largest stockpile in the world.
As for the missile situation this remains completely unclear. The US claims 100% success and all that, but doesn't back that up with any proof. Even the number of missiles fired cannot be verified from any independent source, since there are simply no independent sources in the region with capabilities of detecting them.
What is interesting though is the wording of the Russian claim: They state that -Syrian- defenses shot down a large percentage of the missiles, not -Russian- interference. They don't deny helping Syria set up those systems, but they deny pushing the button.
I guess we need to accept the fact that we will never know the truth about this, since there are no impartial parties that can make observations:
The US could claim 100 successful hits, but perhaps they launched 500 missiles and 400 of them were actually intercepted. The Russians and Syrians could claim they intercepted 80% of incoming fire, and in that case they'd both be telling the truth to some degree.
There is no one that isn't affiliated with either side that has the technology to make observations though. The EU is capable of detecting and tracking such launches, but since the operation involved France and (the not fully exited) UK that would not be a reliable source. Turkey could have tracked it to some degree, but has not been a reliable partner to anyone in recent years.
So that leaves very few countries that could have observed it: From the ground perhaps Jordan, Isreal and Egypt, which aren't all that neutral in this conflict, and from space perhaps China, which will probably simply deny looking at it at all (not their problem and no need to stir up relations with Russia, the US or the EU).
