"Jim, there is little point in linking sources"
I think that is the most crudely dishonest response anybody has put up on this form.

Bullshit Jim!

I see no point in making a list of blue clickies for you to immediately disparage. You know where the sources are. If you are interested in a counter view go read them. Having a clickie contest gets us no-where.
I have posted enough on Syria for you to know where I am coming from. Unlike you I had 4 years working in the country up to and including the start of the unrest. .I am not saying this gives any greater insights than others, but it gave me contact with the country and certain of the people on the ground both in Damascus, Homs, Palmyra and up towards deir es zor.Syria was a secular country where it was safe to travel the streets any time of day or night. The same was true of many parts of the countryside, although I knew of a few sheiks that still thought and acted in a positively medieval fashion. Arab Spring in Syria was a manufactured entity. Having seen Bird Air and Air America in strange parts of SE asia in the early 70's I have a healthy distrust of uncle sam's actions around the world and even less faith in his propaganda.
As you support the mainstream view tell me why trump bombed the airfield when others suggested an entirely neutral team be dispatched to look for evidence of Sarin? Could it be the truth is harder to discern after bombing the shit out of it? Surely not!
I suggest you cast your net further for news sources and try some analysis.Any fool can spout the MSM. It generally has as much contact with reality as a belief in Martians.
Do you not think it strange that coalition caused civilian casualties
in both Syria and Iraq get little coverage whereas, whenever possible, casualties that can be attributed to Assad, with zero evidence, grab the headlines?. Is it not also strange that when Assad is winning he promptly scores an own goal by killing his own people? If you believe that is a likely scenario rejoin the ovines.