ISDEI Instituto de Seguridad, Defensa y Estudios Internacionales

By Jim Naureckas September 02, 2013  - " FAIR " -   Let's compare a couple of accounts of the mass deaths apparently caused by chemical weapons in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta on August 21. One account comes from the U.S. government ( 8/30/13 ), introduced by Secretary of State John Kerry. The other was published by a Minnesota-based news site called Mint Press News ( 8/29/13 ). The government account expresses "high confidence that the Syrian government carried out a chemical weapons attack" on August 21. The Mint report bore the headline "Syrians in Ghouta Claim Saudi-Supplied Rebels Behind Chemical Attack." Which of these two versions should we find more credible? The U.S. government, of course, has a track record that will incline informed observers to approach its claims with skepticism–particularly when it's making charges about the proscribed weapons of official enemies. Kerry said in his address that "our intelligence communit...

The United States and its allies are considering an attack against Syria's government. Such an attack is limited only by the people, aircraft, ships, and vehicles available in the area, so when the U.S. Navy moves more ships into the eastern Mediterranean, it starts to look a little like war. This infographic, by Farwa Rizwan at Al Arabiya English , looks at the military maneuvers already underway. France and the U.S., with Turkish and UK airbases serving as a staging point, are the nations most likely to act against Syria's government. Until yesterday, when this map was published, the United Kingdom looked ready to intervene, but then its Parliament voted against intervention . I've left every reference to British military assets on the map intact here, but it's unlikely now that the UK will play a direct role. All these countries are allies as part of NATO. Here is what they could bring to an intervention: Runways and Airplanes It's hard to conduc...