Analysis chemical attack in Idlib #Syria #SyriaGasAttack #Assad #ONU 4/4/2017

Within a few hours we unveiled interesting details taken from the media not aligned

Assumptions

A Idlib, the chemical bombs or chlorine storage, and not of Sarin, exploded on the ground, are not rained down from above. No offensive doctrine expected to hit the enemy from above, locations distant 9 km away, also in a bag, from their troops stationed on the left and right from ground zero, during a furious battle.
Especially in this period and in the plains, where the winds change direction often.

Policy Analysis
The denial of Damascus

Damascus Military sources denied the use of chemical weapons because “they are no longer in our possession. There would still have been a raid on rebel positions in Khan Sheikhun with Su-22 that “use bombs that can not be adapted to carry gas.” The goal was a “missile silo” and the military hypothesize that the emitted gas could be located instead in the hands of the rebels.

Doubts

The question remains why Assad, who are winning on the ground with the help of the Russians and the Iranians and has just grossed US Ambassadress to the UN a more accommodating attitude on the part of the United States, would have to launch an attack with nerve gas , of this magnitude, without any military necessity. The offensive of the rebels in the north of the province of Hama has failed and ended in disaster, as well as attempts in the suburbs of Damascus. If indeed the raiss ordered attacks with sarin it would be political suicide totally irrazional

.
Military Analysis

1. The disposition of the troops on the ground see here:

2.This is apparent from the video, from chemical attack clouds are different.

3. Not Sarin

4. Probably

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUOFVILX6pY

http://www.worldinwar.eu/sarin-survival-manual/

Original analysis ©World in War

https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/jumping-conclusions-something-not-adding-idlib-chemical-weapons-attack/