Pat Buchanan, among others, have posed the question: Why would the Assad regime launch chemical weapons against rebel forces when A) they’re winning and B) doing so only risks incurring the wrath of the United States?
To whose benefit is this? All of this redounds back to this is to the benefit of the rebels because now it’s bringing other people in on their side. So there is a great incentive for this to actually have been launched by rebels, not the Syrian army.
Pat Buchanan called it, way back in June: Syria intervention “has Tonkin Gulf written all over it”
The basic question that needs to be asked about this horrific attack on civilians, which appears to be gas related, is: Cui bono?
To whose benefit would the use of nerve gas on Syrian women and children redound? Certainly not Assad’s, as we can see from the furor and threats against him that the use of gas has produced.
The sole beneficiary of this apparent use of poison gas against civilians in rebel-held territory appears to be the rebels, who have long sought to have us come in and fight their war.