I'm uneasy on American expenditures on biological weapons, to be sure. Even if they're researching how to counter them, the doomsday scenario is the accidental release of an airborne pathogen. The risk has never made sense to me.

But two points:

The Russians and Assad did use chemical weapons against civilians in Syria. Done simply to mop up rebel cities at the cheapest cost.
Putin poisoned his targets in the most dramatic ways possible: with radioactive isotopes and nerve agents that only governments can produce. He killed them with weapons of mass destruction just to make a point. He went to far to do it on foreign soil!

[–] ksynwa@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Don't get your point here.

[–] Julianus@lemmy.ml -5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The poisoning of dissidents was done with biological and nuclear weapons to underscore the point that Putin has them and is willing to use them flagrantly.

Also that Russia has recently used chemical weapons against civilians. If China was actually worried about this subject (and not deflecting from Covid scrutiny), they'd be watching Russia's actions in Ukraine very closely. Attacking nuclear reactors and now talking up chemical weapons indicates Russia is aiming for a false flag pretext where they blame Ukraine for Russia's misdeeds. Like accusing Ukraine of shelling their own refuges, when artillery is Russia's core strength.

[–] ksynwa@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago

...

[–] muad_dibber@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Syria did not use chemical weapons, the OPCW examiners had their reports silenced.

In a leaked email in Nov, 2019, an OPCW whistleblower stated that the US fabricated the evidence, and used it justify the air-strike. 2

[–] Julianus@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

An email you say? There's a mountain of evidence that contradicts this narrative. I remember the daily pictures of gas shell fragments from artillery strikes against Assad's opposition.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_chemical_weapons_in_the_Syrian_civil_war

[–] muad_dibber@lemmygrad.ml -3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Of course your governments authoritarian media told you syria had chemical weapons, how else could they justify dropping thousands of bombs on syria, and justify western military intervention / more coups in the middle east?

Did you read the wikileaks document?

[–] Julianus@lemmy.ml -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Unfortunately, Wikileaks was suborned by the FSB around 2016. I don't know what they had on Assange, but he completely stopped posting anything critical of Russia and their authoritarian media. Before that, it would credibly criticize anyone, but afterwards it became very, very suspicious.

Anyways, there's too much evidence outside of western media of chemical attacks in Syria. The main justification for western strikes in Syria was hunting ISIS. Assad and Putin's war crimes were a side note to the west. Which is why there was no regime change, in the end.

[–] muad_dibber@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

So you're just gonna intentionally contradict OPCW whistleblowers who are telling you that the US silenced their reports. Why should I believe you over them?

[–] Julianus@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago

Don't believe me, just widen your news sources. The truth is in the parallax.