Winds Of War And The Unanswered Question:

By Ellen Sauerbrey

The slaughter of hundreds of innocent civilians with chemical weapons "shocks the conscience of the world". It has provoked a debate that is dominating our press on how the U.S. should respond to punish the Assad regime. It appears that we are preparing to take some kind of action. But before we commit American lives and treasure, I hope we know the answer to a basic question that no one is discussing. What is the evidence that it was Assad that used the weapons and not the rebels?

There are no good guys in this civil war in which there are already over 100,000 casualties, but which side is currently the most desperate, Assad or the rebels? Why would Assad, whose forces have had the upper hand in recent months, decide to cross that "red line" to kill several hundred women and children, knowing that it would force Obama's hand, provoke an overwhelming response from the U.S. and our allies, and perhaps destroy his regime.. On the other hand, the rebels are very good at manipulating the Western media and would welcome a U.S. response that would perhaps wipe out Assad's air force or other assets.

The Assad regime agreed to allow U.N. inspectors into the area of the chemical attack, but the U.S. quickly discounted what they would find. Snipers attacked the U.N. team that was attempting to investigate.. The government said that that they had provided safety for the team until they reached a position controlled by the rebels, where it claimed the sniper attack occurred.

A Washington Times article by Shaun Waterman dated May 6, 2013 reported that "Testimony from victims strongly suggests it was the rebels, not the Syrian government, that used Sarin nerve gas during a recent incident in the revolution-wracked nation, a senior U.N. diplomat said Monday.". This was virtually ignored by our government at the time.

Congress must demand that Obama present the evidence to substantiate who used the chemical weapons before we jump into another Middle East conflict. We know that most of the rebel forces have been taken over by Al Qaeda, so it is not clear who it is we are helping. One of the few good things that could be said of Assad is that his secular regime has given reasonable protection to religious minorities. Christians, Druze, Alawite and other religious minorities have coalesced around the Assad regime out of fear that if the radical Islamists gain control of Syria, these minorities are likely to be decimated.

A U.S. military action deploying cruise missiles and drones may lead to far more civilian deaths than the recent chemical attack and is likely to provoke a Russian response. So what is our objective and where is this all leading us? One thing is for sure, it has certainly changed the conversation from Benghazi, NSA spying, and the IRS scandals --to 24/7 chatter about what Obama will do in Syria.