|
How does it take 3+ weeks to test biological samples. That seems like a really long time to confirm.
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 17:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 02:39 |
|
|
They are testing for a number of different chemicals, not just sarin.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 17:44
|
|
|
Things Raul Paul will filibuster: the federal government using drones to see what mail you're receiving and maybe Syria.quote:A Kentucky reporter tried to bring Paul down from theory by saying that Syrian-Americans in his state were worried about the fates of their distant relatives. What would Paul say to them? The Senate floor is very tightly controlled to prevent Senators from doing those standing filibusters (the one he did earlier this year was on a day most of DC was shut down due to weather), so don't get your hopes up for a repeat, especially since he's being rather obviously coy about the whole ordeal. Also, a nice twist from him turning "Syrian-Americans" into "Syrian Christians".
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 17:56
|
|
|
Xandu posted:How does it take 3+ weeks to test biological samples. That seems like a really long time to confirm. Maybe there's only a couple of labs in the world that can break down the compounds and confirm exactly what's in them, and their turnaround time isn't stellar. Edit: I seem to recall that recently there was a manufacturing halt to the rabies vaccines, and turns out it's only made in one factory in all of Europe. Mind blowing!
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 18:05
|
|
|
Xandu posted:How does it take 3+ weeks to test biological samples. That seems like a really long time to confirm. When your work is going to be scrutinized by governments with a vested interest in making you look like an idiot, I'm guessing it takes a little more time to double-check everything with a perfect paper trail.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 18:10
|
|
|
Xandu posted:How does it take 3+ weeks to test biological samples. That seems like a really long time to confirm. It's because they're using fluoride! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=et1NSxT1K4w evilweasel posted:When your work is going to be scrutinized by governments with a vested interest in making you look like an idiot, I'm guessing it takes a little more time to double-check everything with a perfect paper trail. Or this. Sir Tonk fucked around with this message at 18:30 on Sep 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 18:19
|
|
|
Xandu posted:How does it take 3+ weeks to test biological samples. That seems like a really long time to confirm. In my opinion there's no reason it should take this long. Most tests, if not involving incubation of some kind, take maybe 45 minutes. And I can't think off the top of my head why something like this would involve any kind of cell culture. You're looking for evidence of the products of sarin or other neurotoxin decomposition, and every analytical chemistry technique i can think of takes at most hours or a few days, not weeks, to preform. It wouldn't be specific, but you could stick a sample in a gas chromotagrapher and get near instantaneous element breakdown, then compare to the products of nerve agent reactions.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 18:28
|
|
|
So, am I right in thinking that the all the evidence that Assad was behind the chemical weapons attack is, 1.) circumstantial, in that Assad Regime forces appeared to take immediate advantage of the situation, and 2.) second hand, in that Israeli intelligence intercepted a phone call(?) from the Assad Regime chain of command where they discuss the attack?
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 18:29
|
|
|
Maybe they got a negative result and behind the scenes politicking is happening regarding the results.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 18:30
|
|
|
This Jacket Is Me posted:So, am I right in thinking that the all the evidence that Assad was behind the chemical weapons attack is, 1.) circumstantial, in that Assad Regime forces appeared to take immediate advantage of the situation, and 2.) second hand, in that Israeli intelligence intercepted a phone call(?) from the Assad Regime chain of command where they discuss the attack? As in Assad ordered it, or the Syrian military was responsible?
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 18:34
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Maybe they got a negative result and behind the scenes politicking is happening regarding the results. Or there's a positive result and they're trying to assign blame without actually being direct about it, because of Russia and China.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 18:34
|
|
|
This Jacket Is Me posted:So, am I right in thinking that the all the evidence that Assad was behind the chemical weapons attack is, 1.) circumstantial, in that Assad Regime forces appeared to take immediate advantage of the situation, and 2.) second hand, in that Israeli intelligence intercepted a phone call(?) from the Assad Regime chain of command where they discuss the attack? Read this: A Detailed Summary Of The Evidence On Munitions Linked To The August 21st Attacks Post only after reading.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 18:35
|
|
|
How about I just ask him? That Assad ordered it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 18:37
|
|
|
Aurubin posted:In my opinion there's no reason it should take this long. Most tests, if not involving incubation of some kind, take maybe 45 minutes. And I can't think off the top of my head why something like this would involve any kind of cell culture. You're looking for evidence of the products of sarin or other neurotoxin decomposition, and every analytical chemistry technique i can think of takes at most hours or a few days, not weeks, to preform. It wouldn't be specific, but you could stick a sample in a gas chromotagrapher and get near instantaneous element breakdown, then compare to the products of nerve agent reactions. There could be hundreds of samples. And each sample probably has a poo poo load of paperwork, chain of custody, QC whatevers and calibrations to run.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 18:39
|
|
|
This Jacket Is Me posted:How about I just ask him? I thought the intercepted phone calls the US were talking about said it was a commander using them without authorisations from the MoD?
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 18:41
|
|
|
the only thing I've heard about the the content of the phone call is that it is between two different ranked officials presumably in the service of the Assad Regime. My concern is that this is second-hand (from Israel IIRC), who stand something to gain from US involvement, but nonetheless would not want to be directly involved in fighting. Also, what sort of chain of command relays information by phone call in a situation like this? And how were the callers identified? Did they just point-blank say, "Hey, Assad lackey here, just committed a war crime?"
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 18:46
|
|
|
Vladimir Putin posted:There could be hundreds of samples. And each sample probably has a poo poo load of paperwork, chain of custody, QC whatevers and calibrations to run. Not to mention that there are most likely multiple labs running these tests independently with multiple other agencies compiling all the data from the various labs so that there is no cross contamination when it comes to forming conclusions with the data gathered between labs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 18:46
|
|
|
A Winner is Jew posted:Not to mention that there are most likely multiple labs running these tests independently with multiple other agencies compiling all the data from the various labs so that there is no cross contamination when it comes to forming conclusions with the data gathered between labs. Yeah this is all true. I'm just a lab tech, hard to see the big picture.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 18:54
|
|
|
I read that it's a lab in Sweden that's gonna do the analyzing and it would take them 1-2 weeks. From my own work I know of a few tests that take that long to get done (BOD7 for example), but I have no idea about chemical weapons testing. Quoting. Sellström lämnade i helgen Syrien med proverna som väntas ta två veckor att analysera, enligt FOI. Några av proverna ska skickas till Finland. Enligt Åke Sellström ligger man bra till när det gäller att analysera materialet som samlats in. Det är en missuppfattning att det skulle ha gått för lång tid efter den misstänkta gasattacken och insamlandet av material på platsen, hävdar han. – Tvärtom är det sällan man kan ta prover så här pass nära i tiden, säger han till TT. tl;dr Totalförsvarets forskningsinstitut (FOI) in Umeå is gonna run some of the tests, and some will be sent over to a lab in Finland. Estimated time: 2 Weeks. Sources: http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=83&artikel=5634318 http://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/syrienprover-till-sverige/ (They both cite Åke Sellström) Pimpmust fucked around with this message at 19:00 on Sep 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 18:55
|
|
|
A Winner is Jew posted:Not to mention that there are most likely multiple labs running these tests independently with multiple other agencies compiling all the data from the various labs so that there is no cross contamination when it comes to forming conclusions with the data gathered between labs. The test labs are also given unrelated control samples for testing, the lab workers don't know which ones come from Syria.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 19:04
|
|
|
This Jacket Is Me posted:France had no, none, international support during their revolutionary wars. In fact, the entire world was opposed to their revolution. Even the US waged an informal sea war against French interests (where they had been allied a mere few decades before). And for good reason; the whole place had descended into violence... The U.S refused to support the French Revolution because the uprising had inspired a series of insurrections across the black Caribbean, which led the National Assembly to do something really crazy- they abolished slavery. Also, are you suprised that the Monarchies of Europe were opposed to the revolution? Even when the moderate Gerondins were still in control and the country was still a constitutional Monarchy subordinate to the Bourbon throne, the major European powers, led by Prussia and Austria, signed a treaty effectively declaring war on the country if Louis XVI was not given total control of the country again. The radicals who staged The Terror, The Jacobins, took over in the panic and fear surrounding the beginning of the Prussian began March on Paris. The violence and terror of the French Revolution began because of the other nations' stance against the revolution.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 19:04
|
|
|
-Troika- posted:This was posted a few months ago and now you are posting the exact opposite. Ardennes, you're a hypocrite. Stop posting things. I still don't support the intervention in Libya btw. My point is when the choice was made to bomb Libya like we did, our responsibility it increased even if a civil war was already happening because we were a decisive factor in changing the history of that country, and source of a large degree of its current problems. If we had stayed out of it and this had also resulted, the question would be voluntary. Btw, this doesn't mean I support privatization of Libya's oil industry or a transitional government of neoliberals either. The question is whether the United States has any responsibility to the countries it bombs or not, not what is would probably do to them. But looks like you "dumped and ran" as well. Anyway, "intervention on the cheap" has its problems as well, and I do think one of them if a lack of assistance in forming a stable government or a functional society after we decided the outcome of a war. I don't think the US once it went into Iraq should have immediately left either, of course the US hosed up the situation even worse but that is in actuality a separate issue and probably a good reason we shouldn't have been there in the first place. However, that doesn't mean the US gets a The US shouldn't get a pass because it will probably be brutal and incompetent after the end of the war. Btw, this doesn't necessarily mean a ground invasion of Libya even if some peacekeepers do enter the country after the war. I never said there shouldn't be peacekeepers in Libya just not an Iraq style ground invasion which are very different things. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 19:27 on Sep 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 19:12
|
|
|
The biggest issue with intervention for me is that it's a punitive measure, rather than a beneficial measure to the Syrian people. It's not clear that the Syrian people would support the incoming regime, even if the US was able to depose Assad. A Syrian Democracy is the goal for America in this conflict, but organization of common interests generally wins in politics and that often happens to be radical islamic groups in the Middle East as we've seen from the fallout of the attempted democratization of other "Arab Spring" countries. Ideally Assad would pay for his actions, but not this way. Bombing to stop bombing seems a little reductive of a solution, real diplomacy and problem solving in necessary. This Jacket Is Me posted:the only thing I've heard about the the content of the phone call is that it is between two different ranked officials presumably in the service of the Assad Regime. My concern is that this is second-hand (from Israel IIRC), who stand something to gain from US involvement, but nonetheless would not want to be directly involved in fighting. Also, what sort of chain of command relays information by phone call in a situation like this? And how were the callers identified? Did they just point-blank say, "Hey, Assad lackey here, just committed a war crime?"
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 19:18
|
|
|
CASA is pulling its students out of Egypt. Al-Jazeera's being jammed by the government.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 19:20
|
|
|
mynameisjohn posted:The biggest issue with intervention for me is that it's a punitive measure, rather than a beneficial measure to the Syrian people. It's not clear that the Syrian people would support the incoming regime, even if the US was able to depose Assad. A Syrian Democracy is the goal for America in this conflict, but organization of common interests generally wins in politics and that often happens to be radical islamic groups in the Middle East as we've seen from the fallout of the attempted democratization of other "Arab Spring" countries. Ideally Assad would pay for his actions, but not this way. Ultimately if it is cruise missile strikes hitting empty warehouses, the exercise was pointless and if it turns into regime change, we will get a like Libya but far worse situation. Of course, the best solution would be diplomatic and an attempt to stabilize the country but the chance for failure is high (which honestly I think it for all scenarios) and to be frank, it doesn't satisfy the geopolitical needs of Israel and the West.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 19:31
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Ultimately if it is cruise missile strikes hitting empty warehouses, the exercise was pointless and if it turns into regime change, we will get a like Libya but far worse situation. Of course, the best solution would be diplomatic and an attempt to stabilize the country but the chance for failure is high (which honestly I think it for all scenarios) and to be frank, it doesn't satisfy the geopolitical needs of Israel and the West. We'd love a diplomatic solution. We don't want to intervene and we want the mess to go away without a black eye for the US and there's really none that are looking available right now. Nobody's got a good suggested one or even a good way to get working on one. I mean I think people thinking in imperial terms are missing there's nothing anyone from the West wants here.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 19:39
|
|
|
The main barrier to diplomacy, for me, is that the Rebel groups are not truly united in cause. So many different groups: Democratic and Secular Syria, Kurds, the Muslim Brotherhood, and even the Mujahideen (among others) all have a vested interest in removing the Ba'athist regime, but would oppose a dominant bloc of their brothers in rebellion equally. It's really hard to say what the outcome of the situation will be, but the United States should probably not get involved. Ultimately it comes down to a conflict of the Pan-Arab, Pan-Islam, and Democratic and Secular groups as it always does in Middle Eastern countries because of the hosed up carving of the map by the UK and France after World War I.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 19:51
|
|
|
mynameisjohn posted:The main barrier to diplomacy, for me, is that the Rebel groups are not truly united in cause. So many different groups: Democratic and Secular Syria, Kurds, the Muslim Brotherhood, and even the Mujahideen (among others) all have a vested interest in removing the Ba'athist regime, but would oppose a dominant bloc of their brothers in rebellion equally. It's really hard to say what the outcome of the situation will be, but the United States should probably not get involved. Huh? Isn't this a reason too get involved? Support the less-crazy groups and push against the rest.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 19:55
|
|
|
mynameisjohn posted:The main barrier to diplomacy, for me, is that the Rebel groups are not truly united in cause. So many different groups: Democratic and Secular Syria, Kurds, the Muslim Brotherhood, and even the Mujahideen (among others) all have a vested interest in removing the Ba'athist regime, but would oppose a dominant bloc of their brothers in rebellion equally. It's really hard to say what the outcome of the situation will be, but the United States should probably not get involved. This sort of thing is why we aren't interested in intervening: it's a diplomatic nightmare even if you have Assad vanish. It's probably even harder, honestly, because with Assad around you can force them all to work together a little more.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 19:55
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Huh? When has it ever worked?
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 19:56
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:This sort of thing is why we aren't interested in intervening: it's a diplomatic nightmare even if you have Assad vanish. It's probably even harder, honestly, because with Assad around you can force them all to work together a little more. I think the most desired outcome of the administration is that Assad stops using chemical weapons but winds up winning the war. Absent that, he stops the chemical weapons, we leave, and the Syrians sort out their own mess.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 19:57
|
|
|
Charles Pierce dug up a fun quote.John Kerry in April 22, 1971 posted:We veterans can only look with amazement on the fact that this country has been unable to see there is absolutely no difference between ground troops and a helicopter crew, and yet people have accepted a differentiation fed them by the administration. No ground troops are in Laos, so it is all right to kill Laotians by remote control. But believe me the helicopter crews fill the same body bags and they wreak the same kind of damage on the Vietnamese and Laotian countryside as anybody else and the President is talking about allowing this to go on for many years to come. One can only ask if we will really be satisfied only when the troops march into Hanoi. Funny how much things change when your feet aren't the ones in the boots on the ground.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 19:59
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Huh? Getting the Democratic and Secular Syrians in power would require the time and effort that it took to do the same in Iraq, except that we'd have to go against the now instantiated political power of the Muslim Brotherhood in addition to the other more radical Islamic forces working against a Secular state.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 19:59
|
|
|
Internet Webguy posted:Charles Pierce dug up a fun quote. The factual premise of Kerry's argument there - that not having troops on the ground doesn't mean you don't take causalities - is no longer true. He's talking about American casualties and saying "hey, our helicopter crews still die". In Vietnam, that was true. Now, it's not.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 20:02
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Chaos, civil war, and instability are all bad for business, I have no idea where you get the idea they'd like those things. Corporations like predictability when it comes to large investments in foreign countries. Look at African mining operations. You've got no labor laws, no environmental regulations, no real strong governments to deal with, various warlords seeking to make the best deals with you so they can get arms and you can get the cheapest child labor, etc. Look at the shock-doctrine -- chaos and weak rulers give them the ability to come in and take control, or be the most powerful group around and get deals they could never get from a stable nation. It's not always about "investing" in a country's growth, sometimes it's pure plunder. OwlBot 2000 fucked around with this message at 20:05 on Sep 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 20:03
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:The factual premise of Kerry's argument there - that not having troops on the ground doesn't mean you don't take causalities - is no longer true. He's talking about American casualties and saying "hey, our helicopter crews still die". In Vietnam, that was true. Now, it's not. I think you're reading that wrong. The body bags Kerry was referring to were the one's that dead Viet Cong filled. The whole "body count represents progress" thing that was hot at the time. Not that the air support is getting killed, but that air support is doing the killing, and still wrecking havok.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 20:04
|
|
|
This Jacket Is Me posted:I think you're reading that wrong. The body bags Kerry was referring to were the one's that dead Viet Cong filled. The whole "body count represents progress" thing that was hot at the time. Not that the air support is getting killed, but that air support is doing the killing, and still wrecking havok. Yeah, on second thought I think you're probably right.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 20:06
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Huh? How on earth are we supposed to do this??? Did everyone just collective have amenesia on the last 10 years in Iraq/Afganistan? This isn't Vietnam like it happened 40 years ago, like we literally just tried to do this and am limping away while both countries basically implode/go back to taliban country.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 20:13
|
|
|
Thundercracker posted:How on earth are we supposed to do this??? Did everyone just collective have amenesia on the last 10 years in Iraq/Afganistan? Didn't Afghanistan implode because we let the country go? Wasn't Iraq a disaster because our entire occupation was horribly disorganized?
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 20:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 02:39 |
|
|
evilweasel posted:We'd love a diplomatic solution. We don't want to intervene and we want the mess to go away without a black eye for the US and there's really none that are looking available right now. Nobody's got a good suggested one or even a good way to get working on one. Eh, maybe not physically such as oil, but strategically yes there is including knocking out an ally of Iran and Russia and of course a long-standing enemy of Israel.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 20:16
|
|