You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Chemical substance dropped from planes on Saraqib
2013-05-01
Two people were killed and 20 others were injured in the Syrian city of Saraqib when warplanes dropped bags containing "strange substances," Al-Jazeera reported, saying the suspicious material was apparently chemical weapons.

Videos uploaded onto the Internet show victims suffering from breathing problems being treated at makeshift hospitals.
Going to make it harder and harder to keep the 'red line' in one piece...
Posted by:Steve White

#11  suspicious powder..
causes odd behavior..
breathing problems..

"General - call up your quick reaction forces, we are on a recovery mission. Operation Horton Heat, now move!"

heh heh, I am president gutsy call.
Posted by: swksvolFF   2013-05-01 19:48  

#10  Refined Sugar Bombs.
High Fructose Corn Syrup (that makes muh flesh crawl)
Lard bomb
Bacon Boy
COulda been anything.

Posted by: Shipman   2013-05-01 18:17  

#9  Bambi seems to be playing the Kadaffy role in an old Robin Williams bit where Reagan kept crossing Kadaffy's "Line of Death".

"OK, then. now THEEESE EEESE the Line of Death!"
Posted by: Dopey Sinatra9196   2013-05-01 15:53  

#8  The Obama fiscal policy is a weapon of mass destruction.

CBR are designed to deny territory or maneuver to the enemy...if a few thousand enemy soldiers get in the way of denying territory...well stuff happens.
Posted by: Bill Clinton   2013-05-01 12:54  

#7  Glenmore:

The term "weapons of mass destruction" has as much meaning as "assault rifle." Specifically, none.

Chemical weapons are area denial weapons.
Posted by: Iblis   2013-05-01 11:30  

#6  Were the contents of the bags suspended in a blue liquid?
Posted by: Mullah Richard   2013-05-01 09:14  

#5  Chemical weapons are banned because they are seen as 'Weapons of Mass Destruction.' So, if they are being used, shouldn't they destroy masses of people or stuff? Should there be a question of whether they were actually used or not?
Posted by: Glenmore   2013-05-01 08:22  

#4  Dropped bags???? Since when is that a way to dispense chemical weapons?

Are they sure it wasn't powdered milk?

I swear I thought turkeys could fly!!!!
Posted by: AlanC   2013-05-01 06:51  

#3  Perhaps we could quietly replace the atropine the IDF has been freely providing the rebels and Syrian citizens ?
Posted by: Besoeker   2013-05-01 03:48  

#2  They called his bluff. Obama wouldn't fight for his own mother.

Putin, the North Koreans, just about every monkey out there can give him the ass and he won't do anything but make a speech.

And they did kill our Ambassador in Benghazi and he never did jack about that either. He's a suit with a mouth. I-N-C-O-M-P-T-E-N-T. And who did he appoint to be head of the State Department? Lurch who thinks you go in the military because you are too stupid to get a good job like his. And John Edwards....another real democrat. They certainly know how to pick 'em.
Posted by: Threater Flusoper9823   2013-05-01 03:44  

#1  Don't cross the dotted line!
Posted by: Skidmark   2013-05-01 00:06  

00:00