Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there! Sign in to have your say on this topicNew here? Join for free to post

Dozens of children slaughtered by Bashar Assad's men

This thread is sponsored by:
Announcements Posted on
    • 14 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xXxiKillxXx)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gosLh...ipcontrinter=1

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18221461

    WARNING: GRAPHIC content (in the first link)

    Edit: its very graphic.
    (Original post by Iqbal007)
    .and I can't wait till their regime falls and breaks apart. Because all hell will break loose to catch these murderers.
    (Original post by Aphotic Cosmos)
    There are times when our military should be used to defend the innocent, this is one of those times.
    (Original post by Patriot Rich)
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18230869
    Hah! Take that Syria. Look who's not coming to the Olympics, I'm sure you'll think twice next time you massacre children!
    Who's laughing now?
    Take off your tin foil hats. The government have already said it was the terrorists, so why are you entertaining 'wild' conspiracy theories? We all know conspiracies do not and have never existed. You must be crazy to ever suggest a government would ever attack its own people. That has NEVER happened blah blah blah etc etc.

    Anyway seriously speaking, why would a government go out of its way to purposefully enter homes specifically looking for children to kill when its trying to win a propaganda war?
    • 49 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stefan1991)
    Take off your tin foil hats. The government have already said it was the terrorists, so why are you entertaining 'wild' conspiracy theories? We all know conspiracies do not and have never existed. You must be crazy to ever suggest a government would ever attack its own people. That has NEVER happened blah blah blah etc etc.

    Anyway seriously speaking, why would a government go out of its way to purposefully enter homes specifically looking for children to kill when its trying to win a propaganda war?
    Clearly your brain doesn't work the way it should.

    The UN have even confirmed the killings, there were also wide spread reports of indiscriminate shelling........they didn't kill them, they shelled them indiscriminately.
    • 14 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Iqbal007)
    Clearly your brain doesn't work the way it should.

    The UN have even confirmed the killings, there were also wide spread reports of indiscriminate shelling........they didn't kill them, they shelled them indiscriminately.
    Yes the UN has confirmed there are dead... where did I say there weren't any dead? :lolwut:
    The same UN who refused to do anything about the massacre they were told was going on.

    Yes there was shelling. What has that got to do with the accusation that the government went door to door looking for children to kill? :rolleyes: Some died from shelling but many were executed. The terrorists are just as much at fault here, as the BBC has now been forced to admit (check their front page)
    • 49 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stefan1991)
    Yes the UN has confirmed there are dead... where did I say there weren't any dead? :lolwut:
    The same UN who refused to do anything about the massacre they were told was going on.

    Yes there was shelling. What has that got to do with the accusation that the government went door to door looking for children to kill? :rolleyes: Some died from shelling but many were executed. The terrorists are just as much at fault here, as the BBC has now been forced to admit (check their front page)
    The BBC hasn't admitted anything.........look at the person who's backing the Syrians up "Rebels in Syria are partly responsible for the massacre of more than 100 people in the town of Houla, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov says.

    The Russians, the Allies of the Syrian government, it's quite clear that the regime has killed innocent people, why would anyone trust anything that came out of their mouth..........seriously and Russia as well, they haven't even got any people observing inside of Syria so how would their claim stand for anything.

    The day those 100 or so people died, we know one thing, which is that the Government was attacking that city, so it's quite clear who is to blame.
    • Thread Starter
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stefan1991)
    Yes the UN has confirmed there are dead... where did I say there weren't any dead? :lolwut:
    The same UN who refused to do anything about the massacre they were told was going on.

    Yes there was shelling. What has that got to do with the accusation that the government went door to door looking for children to kill? :rolleyes: Some died from shelling but many were executed. The terrorists are just as much at fault here, as the BBC has now been forced to admit (check their front page)
    The front page says this:
    Syrian rebels share Houla blame, says Russia.
    Because Russia, a Syrian government ally, is a real reliable source.
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cyanohydrin)
    No it isn't you lunatic. The last thing the UK needs is to end up in the middle of another sectarian war in the Middle East.

    It has nothing to do with us.
    Yes it is, you heartless nationalistic bastard. Other people's suffering does have something to do with us, it's called empathizing and sympathizing. In the same way we have a obligation to help someone whose being beaten senselessly when we're in a position to do so, we have a obligation to help these people. This is the same principle that foreign aid and welfare rests on and free healthcare.

    If you want to make a consequentialist argument against intervening go ahead. I agree with not intervening in Iran based on consequentialist argument that it will make the situation worse. But, there's very little argument against intervening in Syria, especially when the only criticism anti-interventionist seem to give is them being against NATO intervening and not Arab league hence shifting responsibilities.

    You can go ahead and continue being isolationist but just realize that you're isolationism has consequences just like intervention and in the same way you'd say there's blood on interventionists hand there's blood in isolationist hands. The longer this goes on, the longer people continue to be killed. Causalities are nearing the causalities of Israel-Palestine conflict 60+ year conflict in 1 year alone.
    • 14 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xXxiKillxXx)
    The front page says this:


    Because Russia, a Syrian government ally, is a real reliable source.
    Because the BBC, a British state owned broadcaster, a Syrian government enemy, is a real reliable source :rolleyes:

    The same BBC who used years old photos of dead Iraqi children claiming it was the Houla massacre :rolleyes: How ironic.

    It's obvious the BBC and such decide whosoever propaganda they wish to swallow if and when it suits them.

    (Original post by Iqbal007)
    The BBC hasn't admitted anything.........look at the person who's backing the Syrians up "Rebels in Syria are partly responsible for the massacre of more than 100 people in the town of Houla, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov says.

    The Russians, the Allies of the Syrian government, it's quite clear that the regime has killed innocent people, why would anyone trust anything that came out of their mouth..........seriously and Russia as well, they haven't even got any people observing inside of Syria so how would their claim stand for anything.

    The day those 100 or so people died, we know one thing, which is that the Government was attacking that city, so it's quite clear who is to blame.
    You are an idiot if you think anything is "quite clear here" :rolleyes: This is plain old atrocity propaganda. It's been around for over a hundred years, just research WWI.

    The terrorists would have carried out the massacre themselves and blamed the government if it made the government look bad. Your source is the BBC. It's quite clear that Britain has killed innocent people. Why should we believe anything that comes out of their mouth? :rolleyes:

    The massacre was caused by executions by armed gangs killing people at point-blank range. That is inconsistent with the idea that they were killed by shelling from government tanks.

    It's obvious the only people who benefit from this massacre are the terrorists and their foreign backers. I really don't understand why the Syrian government would send in armed gangs specifically looking for children to kill.
    • 14 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chindits)
    The reaction from the left wing and their Muslim allies will be a mixture of silence and finding a way to blame Israel.
    Funny, because in all likelihood Israel did have something to do with this, considering that they are already arming the terrorists and Mossad has been operating in Syria for a while.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Some people don't like to see the truth.

    Assad will get it though

    (Original post by Stefan1991)

    It's obvious the only people who benefit from this massacre are the terrorists and their foreign backers. I really don't understand why the Syrian government would send in armed gangs specifically looking for children to kill.
    How do you know they were killed by bullets and the Syrian government could be trying to break the will of its people
    • 49 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stefan1991)
    Because the BBC, a British state owned broadcaster, a Syrian government enemy, is a real reliable source :rolleyes:

    Yes far better than the Regime committing the crimes, as it's paid for by the tax payer and is not meant for unbiased information.

    The same BBC who used years old photos of dead Iraqi children claiming it was the Houla massacre :rolleyes: How ironic.

    It's obvious the BBC and such decide whosoever propaganda they wish to swallow if and when it suits them.

    BBC job is to provide information which the British people care about.

    You are an idiot if you think anything is "quite clear here" :rolleyes: This is plain old atrocity propaganda. It's been around for over a hundred years, just research WWI.

    So the 10,000 people who have died is propaganda? You make me sick, the Syrian government has clearly committed crimes especially as it tries hold on to power, your the idiot for being so blind.

    The terrorists would have carried out the massacre themselves and blamed the government if it made the government look bad. Your source is the BBC. It's quite clear that Britain has killed innocent people. Why should we believe anything that comes out of their mouth? :rolleyes:

    The massacre was caused by executions by armed gangs killing people at point-blank range. That is inconsistent with the idea that they were killed by shelling from government tanks.

    It's obvious the only people who benefit from this massacre are the terrorists and their foreign backers. I really don't understand why the Syrian government would send in armed gangs specifically looking for children to kill.
    We can believe the BBC because they even report on the killings of civilians by British forces, etc. Plus your the one with conspiracies oh the rebels did this maybe, yet it's all thoughts, but clearly your taken by Syrian government propaganda and believe everything that comes out of their mouth.

    "Armed gangs" you also realise the Syrian government has non uniformed people working for them right? Also from the damage on many of the dead bodies you can tell it's been shelling.

    And the Syrian government don't benefit............your willing to let this government rule an oppressive regime and do as they wish to their people..............despite their people wanting change, you willing to go against people's rights so that they can rather be placed under a dictatorship.


    YOU MAKE ME SICK, you might as well not reply, you have just proven your stupidity, why don't you go and live under these conditions if your so for them.
    • 14 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Iqbal007)
    We can believe the BBC because they even report on the killings of civilians by British forces, etc. Plus your the one with conspiracies oh the rebels did this maybe, yet it's all thoughts, but clearly your taken by Syrian government propaganda and believe everything that comes out of their mouth.

    "Armed gangs" you also realise the Syrian government has non uniformed people working for them right? Also from the damage on many of the dead bodies you can tell it's been shelling.

    And the Syrian government don't benefit............your willing to let this government rule an oppressive regime and do as they wish to their people..............despite their people wanting change, you willing to go against people's rights so that they can rather be placed under a dictatorship.

    YOU MAKE ME SICK, you might as well not reply, you have just proven your stupidity, why don't you go and live under these conditions if your so for them.
    :facepalm:

    So now in this case if the terrorists kill innocents it's a "conspiracy", but if the government does it it's not?

    Yet if its in a western country, if the government kills their own citizens it's a baseless conspiracy, and if you claim its the 'terrorists' it's not?

    Double standards much? :rolleyes:


    If it was all done by shelling why is there evidence of people being executed at point blank range? Why were they specifically looking for children to kill?
    Because killing children is a great way to win a propaganda war :rolleyes: Well it is if you blame the other side of course.

    Where did I say "I am willing to let this government rule an oppressive regime"? Even though that sentence doesn't even make sense. "and do what they want to people"? :lolwut: Stop attacking a straw man because you fail at providing a decent response.

    "you willing to go against people's rights so that they can rather be placed under a dictatorship" Please show me where I said that? :rolleyes:

    (Original post by Iqbal007)
    Yes far better than the Regime committing the crimes, as it's paid for by the tax payer and is not meant for unbiased information.

    BBC job is to provide information which the British people care about.

    So the 10,000 people who have died is propaganda? You make me sick, the Syrian government has clearly committed crimes especially as it tries hold on to power, your the idiot for being so blind.
    The BBC's job is to provide a narrative which suits the establishment's agenda.

    You'll take the BBC's words on their own state's crimes but not anyone else? :rolleyes:
    • 49 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stefan1991)
    :facepalm:

    So now in this case if the terrorists kill innocents it's a "conspiracy", but if the government does it it's not?

    Yet if its in a western country, if the government kills their own citizens it's a baseless conspiracy, and if you claim its the 'terrorists' it's not?

    Double standards much? :rolleyes:


    If it was all done by shelling why is there evidence of people being executed at point blank range? Why were they specifically looking for children to kill?
    Because killing children is a great way to win a propaganda war :rolleyes: Well it is if you blame the other side of course.

    Where did I say "I am willing to let this government rule an oppressive regime"? Even though that sentence doesn't even make sense. "and do what they want to people"? :lolwut: Stop attacking a straw man because you fail at providing a decent response.

    "you willing to go against people's rights so that they can rather be placed under a dictatorship" Please show me where I said that? :rolleyes:



    The BBC's job is to provide a narrative which suits the establishment's agenda.

    You'll take the BBC's words on their own state's crimes but not anyone else? :rolleyes:
    How are they terrorist, the only people saying their terrorists are the Syrians........they are rebels, defected soldiers who are trying to over throw that crappy regime. It's effectively turning into a civil war...........were the people in Libya terrorist? or Tunisia? or Egypt? No, they weren't, they fought cos the people didn't want a corrupt government who oppress them.

    I criticise both sides, in this case it's quite obvious who are the ones committing crimes, it's the Syrian government, you've got to be deluded if your supporting them.

    So it's a propaganda war all of a sudden, yet it from evidence of many mothers, they say it was government soldiers clearly in their attire coming into their homes. Shelling does kill a lot as well, you can't be saying shelling doesn't do anything, hence why there's been explosions.

    It's true, your supporting a regime who's corrupt, oppressed it's people, yet your willing to support their claims despite the fact there's been clear violation of the ceasefire by them..

    It's quite clear, as your supporting them, who supports a government like that.


    Who else would you trust, the Syrian state news channel :rolleyes:
    BBC criticise any government and gives news of killing from both sides.
    • Thread Starter
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stefan1991)
    Because the BBC, a British state owned broadcaster, a Syrian government enemy, is a real reliable source :rolleyes:

    The same BBC who used years old photos of dead Iraqi children claiming it was the Houla massacre :rolleyes: How ironic.

    It's obvious the BBC and such decide whosoever propaganda they wish to swallow if and when it suits them.



    You are an idiot if you think anything is "quite clear here" :rolleyes: This is plain old atrocity propaganda. It's been around for over a hundred years, just research WWI.

    The terrorists would have carried out the massacre themselves and blamed the government if it made the government look bad. Your source is the BBC. It's quite clear that Britain has killed innocent people. Why should we believe anything that comes out of their mouth? :rolleyes:

    The massacre was caused by executions by armed gangs killing people at point-blank range. That is inconsistent with the idea that they were killed by shelling from government tanks.

    It's obvious the only people who benefit from this massacre are the terrorists and their foreign backers. I really don't understand why the Syrian government would send in armed gangs specifically looking for children to kill.
    You think these children were systematically massacred by their own side? You clearly are deluded.
    • 14 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Iqbal007)
    How are they terrorist, the only people saying their terrorists are the Syrians........they are rebels, defected soldiers who are trying to over throw that crappy regime. It's effectively turning into a civil war...........were the people in Libya terrorist? or Tunisia? or Egypt? No, they weren't, they fought cos the people didn't want a corrupt government who oppress them.
    So you basically pick and choose who you want to call terrorists. Making the whole word meaningless. Every terrorist is fighting for people against what they see as crappy regimes.

    (Original post by Iqbal007)
    I criticise both sides, in this case it's quite obvious who are the ones committing crimes, it's the Syrian government, you've got to be deluded if your supporting them.
    You criticise both sides... yet you claim only the Syrian government are comitting crimes... righhhht. :rolleyes:

    Where did I say I was supporting the Syrian government? :lolwut:

    (Original post by Iqbal007)
    So it's a propaganda war all of a sudden, yet it from evidence of many mothers, they say it was government soldiers clearly in their attire coming into their homes. Shelling does kill a lot as well, you can't be saying shelling doesn't do anything, hence why there's been explosions.

    It's true, your supporting a regime who's corrupt, oppressed it's people, yet your willing to support their claims despite the fact there's been clear violation of the ceasefire by them..
    :facepalm: Stop putting words into peoples mouths. Where did I say I'm supporting a corrupt regime? You're supporting armed terrorists who bomb innocents just to blame it on the government. Two can play at that game.

    It's been a propaganda war from the start. Last thing the Syrian government wants is more foreign intervention, why would they purposefully try and kill loads of children to encourage it and make them look bad?

    (Original post by Iqbal007)
    It's quite clear, as your supporting them, who supports a government like that.
    :facepalm:

    (Original post by Iqbal007)
    Who else would you trust, the Syrian state news channel :rolleyes:
    BBC criticise any government and gives news of killing from both sides.
    :facepalm: Christ you are really naive. Why do you trust the British state news channel over the Syrian state news channel? Both are highly biased.
    • 14 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xXxiKillxXx)
    You think these children were systematically massacred by their own side? You clearly are deluded.
    Who says they are on the side of the armed terrorists and not the government?

    Besides these are ****ing children, stop pretending they have political allegiances.
    • Thread Starter
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stefan1991)
    Who says they are on the side of the armed terrorists and not the government?

    Besides these are ****ing children, stop pretending they have political allegiances.
    So the families of the children murdered are lying are they? They are lying when they accuse the government forces of murdering their kids? They might not have political allegiances BUT there is only one side defending them and their families whilst the army continues to shell them
    • 14 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xXxiKillxXx)
    So the families of the children murdered are lying are they? They are lying when they accuse the government forces of murdering their kids? They might not have political allegiances BUT there is only one side defending them and their families whilst the army continues to shell them
    For a start, how would they know these non-uniformed armed gangs are government forces?

    And there is only one side defending them? They wouldn't even be under attack if it wasn't for the terrorists. That point doesn't even make sense. How is executing and murdering them "defending" them? :confused:
    • 14 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Iqbal007)
    How are they terrorist, the only people saying their terrorists are the Syrians........
    It is well known that Al Qaeda are heavily involved in the anti-Syrian resistance, are you saying Al Qaeda aren't terrorists? Make your mind up already.
    • 49 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stefan1991)
    So you basically pick and choose who you want to call terrorists. Making the whole word meaningless. Every terrorist is fighting for people against what they see as crappy regimes.

    It's not pick and choose, because it's become quite obvious they are rebels who are trying to overthrow their government, why else would their citizens take up arms or choose to flee.

    You criticise both sides... yet you claim only the Syrian government are comitting crimes... righhhht. :rolleyes:

    Where did I say I was supporting the Syrian government? :lolwut:

    I do criticize both sides, however this article directly relates to Assad's men slaughtering innocent civilians.........they have done this for years, it's about time they were taken down. It's not all good to stay silent.
    Clearly it indicates that way as your calling people who are trying to get rid of an oppressive regime "terrorists".


    :facepalm: Stop putting words into peoples mouths. Where did I say I'm supporting a corrupt regime? You're supporting armed terrorists who bomb innocents just to blame it on the government. Two can play at that game.

    When have I put words in your mouth............Who say's I'm supporting terrorists, I support the people of Syria or trying to rebel and free themselves, doesn't mean I support those who attack innocent people. It's also been said that many bombings have been done by the government as well as propaganda.

    It's been a propaganda war from the start. Last thing the Syrian government wants is more foreign intervention, why would they purposefully try and kill loads of children to encourage it and make them look bad?


    :facepalm:

    They aren't just killing children, it's been observed they have attacked that city with it's forces and shelled it......and then just simply denying, ever thought about that.

    :facepalm: Christ you are really naive. Why do you trust the British state news channel over the Syrian state news channel? Both are highly biased.
    It's not state news though, BBC receives funding from tax payers, but the government has no authority over what it wants to show,etc....only the money side of things.
    BBC only biasness is that it's slightly to the left...........other than that they inform people very well of what it does. And don't compare it to the Syrian state news which shows propaganda.
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stefan1991)
    It is well known that Al Qaeda are heavily involved in the anti-Syrian resistance, are you saying Al Qaeda aren't terrorists? Make your mind up already.
    How is it well known? This article gives the opposite impression. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18193504

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: June 1, 2012
New on TSR

The future of apprenticeships

Join the discussion in the apprenticeships hub!

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.