In my opinion, the claim of "conspiracy theory" has become the Democratic party's new way to shut down honest discourse entirely. In this case, I was accused of being a conspiracy theorist because I had doubts about both of the claims of Assad gassing his own citizens. Our Neoliberal party quickly trots out the label "conspiracy theory" the moment an idea does not conform to the group-think. This is what I wrote back to my accuser... a man defending Obama's actions in Syria and repudiating Trumps.

-------------------------------------------

Ah yes... the ever-popular way to shutdown critical thinking. I'm a conspiracy theorist, eh? If so, I'm in good company.

The context of your argument:

You are advocating that Obama’s actions were reasonable and considered while Trump’s were not. In doing so, you are advocating for war crimes. That, right there, ought to at least knock you off your moral and intellectual high horse. In case you are wondering why I find neoliberals horrific that ought to highlight the point. I personally would prefer to question whether war crimes are ever justifiable but I’m willing to work within your framework here and question whether the justification was valid. To do so, I’m going to take a trip down memory lane.

The broad historical overlay

Starting at the broad levels, The US has a long and storied history of regime change... both overtly and covertly. So, positing covert regime change in this case hardly rises to the level of automatic crack pot assumption. Conversely, the US has an impressively poor record at intervening when there's an obvious humanitarian crisis happening (and no oil involved). In addition, our human rights record is not so hot both inside and outside our own borders – extrajudicial black sites, torture, assassinations, etc. etc. I assume that I don’t need to document any of that.

In the broadest of pictures, the US is an imperialistic nation. We cover this up with cute phrases like “national interests”. The problem with that phrase is "national interests" means the interests of our plutocrats. Surely we're not fighting over all that oil because it's going to make me rich. We’ve cut a long, bloody swath across much of the globe and that is simply historical fact.

So, with that context, let’s zoom-in on the Mideast and our recent efforts there.

Iraq:

Surely there is no question that the WMD never existed and the entire thing was trumped up. Bush had to bypass his own intelligence community and the UN weapons inspection team to get the answers he wanted. Iraq was not a mistake based on faulty intelligence. That means it was a deliberate lie and makes the entire episode a war of aggression -- a war crime. It also leaves open the question, What was the real reason we destroyed Iraq?

Libya:

In this case, we can see that my fellow conspiracy theorists include the British Parliament. As people who were reading the actual news knew all along, the human rights pretexts for that war were bogus. I could give you other links but surely a report from the British Parliament... bosom buddies with the US... should carry some weight?

Now, stopping for a moment to keep score, we have two administrations from two parties both doing the exact same thing… lying to the US public to justify a war in the Mideast. That raises a few red flags. In and of itself it is horrific. But beyond the betrayal that represents, a curious person might start wondering about the actual motives. This is where you find out about the actual geopolitical interests which are varied but include things like Israel, pipeline routes, gold reserves, the world bank, and the petrodollar -- all closely intertwined issues relating to economic dominance and our inexplicable subservience to Israel. Again, none of this is secret. It’s just not reported in US legacy media.

By the way, back in 2010 Libya had the highest standard of living, the lowest infant mortality rate, and the highest life expectancy in Africa. Libyans enjoyed free health care and free education (Global Research Report) Of course, the picture is somewhat different now:

Open air slave markets in Libya.

Syria:

Syria is a complicated topic and it's easy to range far afield. But if you'd like a real background on the Mideast and Syria then Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. has put together a really well written piece:

While the compliant American press parrots the narrative that our military support for the Syrian insurgency is purely humanitarian, many Syrians see the present crisis as just another proxy war over pipelines and geopolitics. Before rushing deeper into the conflagration, it would be wise for us to consider the abundant facts supporting that perspective.
Syria - Another Pipeline War, Robert F. Kennedry, Jr. 

I found that link rather depressing. I thought I was pretty well aware of how thoroughly the US has been screwing Syria over and it turns out I'd hardly even scratched the surface.

The CIA began its active meddling in Syria in 1949—barely a year after the agency's creation. Syrian patriots had declared war on the Nazis, expelled their Vichy French colonial rulers and crafted a fragile secularist democracy based on the American model. But in March of 1949, Syria's democratically elected president, Shukri-al-Kuwaiti, hesitated to approve the Trans Arabian Pipeline, an American project intended to connect the oil fields of Saudi Arabia to the ports of Lebanon via Syria. In his book, Legacy of Ashes, CIA historian Tim Weiner recounts that in retaliation, the CIA engineered a coup, replacing al-Kuwaiti with the CIA's handpicked dictator, a convicted swindler named Husni al-Za'im. Al-Za'im barely had time to dissolve parliament and approve the American pipeline before his countrymen deposed him, 14 weeks into his regime.

I had no idea that we've been screwing with them for almost 70 years now. The more things change, the more they stay the same. This is the reality of the United States that few Americans know. This is the "fake news" that you've been warned about.

By the time we got to the first Sarin incident on 21 August 2013 in Ghouta, the whole thing should have been viewed at least somewhat skeptically by any reasonable person given what's gone on so far. What are we even doing there? The story changes on a day-to-day basis but you seem to be focused on the "protecting innocent civilians from the brutal dictator Assad" line so let's work with that.

For starters, let’s discuss terminology. I argue that the term “civil war” is misleading. More accurate would be a handful of malcontents… terrorists in fact… are seeking to overthrow the democratically elected government. These groups… now numbering upwards of 1000, are armed and trained by outside forces… the US figuring prominently in that roster. It would be akin to Russia giving advanced military weaponry and training to that idiot group that took over the wildlife refuge. And then did so to another 999 similar groups. Once a great big bonfire was burning, would you call it a civil war?

General Wesley Clark… another noted tinfoil hatter… had this to say about it:

Indeed, a “real revolution” with the help of U.S. arms, Saudi and Qatari funds, Turkish logistical support and Israeli intelligence is under way. But it is certainly not the Syrian people’s revolution. In fact, such revolutions were planned by the Bush Administration for 7 countries including Iraq, Libya, Syria and Iran, as testified by Gen. Wesley Clark, former supreme commander of NATO. And one by one they are being implemented.

That is much more credible to me given how the US has behaved historically and given what's known of the geopolitical situation. We’re toppling the governments of 7 nations for, I’m sure, various geopolitical reasons. Neither terrorism or humanitarianism are among those reasons.

It’s worthwhile noting that this evil dictator Assad presides over a particularly good period in Syria’s domestic affairs. GDP is WAY up. Unemployment was in great shape until 2011 (I’m guessing we messed that up). Life expectancies were WAY up. Overall, while there were certainly things to complain about, it seems likely to me that most of his citizens were reasonably pleased given that they’d been doing quite well…. Until we came along.  Happily, there's a way we can get some insight into how the Syrian people feel about their own government.  Here's an excerpt from gjohnsit's story:

...So how can we determine what the Syrian people want if you can't hold a fair election? Actually there is a way.  The Syrian people have consistently "voted" with their feet, and since their lives depended on it, this vote matters a lot more than any checked box...most Syrian refugees never actually flee Syria. Where do they flee to in Syria? Government-controlled areas
-- Why don't we let the Syrian people decide?, gjohnsit

Syria & Sarin, rev 1:

But let’s move on to the first round of “Assad is using Sarin gas on his citizens”. There are some people who don't believe the attribution for those Sarin gas attacks. Those people include the Turkish government who ran a case against its own officials for transporting the precursors. This story does a wonderful job of summarizing it. If you follow the links, however, you get to hard to discredit things like an internal prosecution by the Turkish government and the NY Times "updating" its own story. Given that paper's role in previous lies, that's a fascinating thing in and of itself.

Honestly, the only thing I don't understand is why Ray calls Obama "mousetrapped". Given the pivotal role the US played in all of this, it seems more likely to me he was complicit but I'm also loathe to discredit Ray's thoughts without solid evidence. But the lack of a National Intelligence Estimate and the corresponding lack of evidence coupled with the previous history is surely, at this point, no longer "crazy conspiracy theory". These are hard facts -- just not reported in legacy media. Another group who has some questions about what happened there is the United Nations: The United Nations inquiry into human rights abuses in Syria.

Our investigators have been in neighbouring countries interviewing victims, doctors and field hospitals and, according to their report of last week which I have seen, there are strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof of the use of sarin gas, from the way the victims were treated,” Ms Del Ponte said in an interview broadcast on Swiss-Italian television on Sunday.

“This was used on the part of the opposition, the rebels, not by the government authorities,” she added.

Ms Del Ponte said the inquiry has yet to see any direct evidence suggesting that government forces have used chemical weapons, but said further investigation was required before this possibility could be ruled out.

The Veteran Intelligence Professionals For Sanity folks are another bunch of clear tinfoil hatters who haven't been able to come up with any evidence. Another group that has some problems with the evidence is the UN weapons inspection team. Once before the United States ignored the UN weapons inspectors and it gave us the shame of Iraq. So before we repeat that same error, I'd urge you to stop listening to pundits and go ahead and read what the UN inspection teams say. They're reports are publicly available right here.

By the way... since humanitarianism is your thing, you'll note that our efforts up to mid 2016 have liberated about 11 million people -- meaning they are displaced refugees. About 5 million people have fled the country. Another 6 million are "displaced" meaning they have lost their homes and jobs. We liberated anohter half million more permanently than that. They're just dead. This does not meet my definition of "humanitarian".

• http://data.unhcr.org/syrianrefugees/regional.php#_ga=1.130562893.399009084.1446221409
  
• http://www.unhcr.org/en-us/figures-at-a-glance.html
• http://www.unhcr.org/sy/29-internally-displaced-people.html

Here is what your humanitariasm has accomplished

Worldwide displacement hits all-time high as war and persecution increase
One in every 122 humans is now either a refugee, internally displaced, or seeking asylum.

GENEVA, June 18 (UNHCR) – Wars, conflict and persecution have forced more people than at any other time since records began to flee their homes and seek refuge and safety elsewhere, according to a new report from the UN refugee agency.

… Since early 2011, the main reason for the acceleration has been the war in Syria, now the world’s single-largest driver of displacement.

UN Refugee Agency - Worldwide displacement hits all-time high as war and persecution increase

Syria & Sarin, rev. 2

All of which brings us to the present moment. So far, we’ve been lied into 3 wars and now Trump is working on number 4. The MO is identical.

1. Sarin (or some nerve agent) attack with confusing timing and targets. Check. Just like last time there is no credible reason for Assad to have done this at this time. He was winning. Why on earth would he do the one thing guaranteed to call down a full fledged US attack?
2. No National Intelligence Estimate performed. Check. Obama called his a "Government Assessment". Trump called his the "White House Intelligence Estimate". Both are made-up terms which indicate that the normal intelligence processes were not followed.
3. Immediate Assertion of Blame. Check. In both cases the villain was identified instantly even without the benefit of an NIE. Kudos to Obama though. Kerry actually was setting the stage 6 months before the attack... drawing that bright red line.
4. Precipitous Action. Check. Obama, to his credit, delayed the attack momentarily but in the end, we attacked. Trump just went ahead and attacked.

It is the EXACT same play book… down to the dotted I’s and crossed t’s. Once again, it may or may not have been Assad but there’s an awful lot of reasons to question the whole thing. This is, in theory, what the national intelligence estimate is supposed to answer. Sadly, Bush, Obama, and now Trump are not particularly interested in the truth.

Oh, and about that "White House Intelligence Assessment"... perhaps it isn't of the highest quality. Ted Postol, Professor Emeritus of Science, Technology, and National Security Policy Massachusetts Institute of Technology, had this to say:

As noted in the main body of my earlier report, the assumption in WHR that the site of the alleged sarin release had not been tampered with was totally unjustified and no competent intelligence analyst would haveagreed that this assumption was valid. The implication of this observation is clear – the WHR was notreviewed and released by any competent intelligence expert unless they were motivated by factors other thanconcerns about the accuracy of the report.

The WHR also makes claims about “communications intercepts” which supposedly provide high confidencethat the Syrian government was the source of the attack. There is no reason to believe that the veracity of thisclaim is any different from the now verified false claim that there was unambiguous evidence of a sarin releaseat the cited crater.

A Quick Turnaround Assessment of the White House Intelligence Report Issued on April 11, 2017 About the Nerve Agent Attack in Khan Shaykhun, Syria, Ted Postol.

You'll note that Ted has a provably strong record of calling out the government on it's weapons lies... including Obama.

And you call me a “conspiracy theorist”. As I noted, if so I’m in good company. I personally don’t think engaging with actual reality and expecting to see actual facts before bombing a nation to rubble constitutes a “conspiracy theorist”. But hey, in today’s terms, anyone who disagrees with the government is a CT.

notes

1. Thank you to Plato's Republic for this great addition of the UN weapons inspector reports and the astute observation that there is already a team of objective professionals investigating Syria and chemical weapons. Also, thanks for prodding me to put in the debunk of the "White House Intelligence Report".
2. Thank you to Linda Wood for giving me proper refugee and death statistics.
3. Thank you to gjohnsit for the horribly depressing story about open air slave markets.