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

I don't know where I sit with Syria

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

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kya)
    I'm Lebanese, Sunni, hear me out.
    I don't have Internet at the mo so I cannot fully contribute to this but I will try my best over my mobile.

    This whole saga dates back far longer than just Bashar Al Assad, his father Hafez Al Assad was just as bad.

    There has always been a large percentage of Syrians who hated Assads tyrant regime. A lot of them emigrated to Sunni-friendly places like Tripoli, Lebanon. Sayda, Lebanon and others also emigrated to Jordan. Reason being is because Sunnis - who are the majority of Syrians - always have been treated like utter dog poop. It is permitted in the Alawi/Shia religion that "the killing of Sunnnis is halal" since they are the supposed special ones.

    The Assad regime(s) always have been mass murdering tyrant ones since day 1. 40,000 massacred in Hama for example. Thousands of Lebanese people were killed for no reason during the Syrian occupation of Lebanon. Tens of thousands of Lebanese people are trapped in Syrian jails as we speak.

    Syria, Iran & Hezbollah all come from the same toilet America & Israel do.
    Assad always goes on and on about how Syria are anti-Israeli. Well, when was the last time a Syrian bullet was fired at Israel & when was the last time a Syrian bullet was aimed at Syrians & Lebanese people?
    Let's not forget Hafez sold the Golan Heights to Israel.

    If America really wanted Assad to step down then they would've done something about him ages ago. Saddam, Mubarak & Gaddafi went under the "American" treatment, enjoyed it and after they were no longer needed, they were taken care of.
    Syria is a massive obstacle in the middle east, why do something about Assad when he's demolishing it for them?

    I really want to go into more detail but I can't over the mobile. Point is, I know tons of Syrians who hate Assads guts out. The only ones who like him are the Alawites & a minority of Christians. Then you get the majority who strongly dislike him but can't speak out because THIS would happen to them.
    Whenever I talk to my Syrian mates whether it's Internet/fb or over the phone we can't mention anything about Assad because it's all recorded and they will get in trouble.
    The fact that if u are found with a copy of COD4 in Syria you go to jail sums it all up really..

    The Lebanese lived through years of being tortured by Assads rad3 army... all animals who used to fire their guns at us for fun.
    The regime needs to be taken down otherwise Syria will crumble.
    Syria crumbling will strongly affect countries like Lebanon.
    A week ago there was over 2 weeks of street fighting between Sunni fighters and Syrian Alawi fighters in northern Lebanon. The man hates Sunnis, Wcyd?

    There are also many videos on YouTube interviewing Syrian Alawites who repeatedly say they worship "Assad before Allah". That should sum them up...




    This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
    his father was worse

    and now Bashar's brother maher is worse

    only i the alawi religion not shia (im sunni)

    you find that alawis are not even considered muslims
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by getoom)
    his father was worse

    and now Bashar's brother maher is worse

    only i the alawi religion not shia (im sunni)

    you find that alawis are not even considered muslims
    You could argue that Alawis aren't Muslims mate, but they think they are. One could argue that Shias aren't as well... :/


    This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
    • 17 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kya)
    You could argue that Alawis aren't Muslims mate, but they think they are. One could argue that Shias aren't as well... :/


    This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
    alawi are not muslim - they belive in a trinity Muhammah (PBUH) Ali (RA) and Salman al farsi (RA) and they believe Allah is Incarnate in these three individuals (agstufirullah)

    whereas shia at least dont commit blatant shirk and you cannot paint all of them with the same brush and there is a lot of debate even amongst the ulama whether they are muslim so lets not go there.

    im not arguing whether alawis are or not im distinguishing the differences between shia and alawi
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by getoom)
    alawi are not muslim - they belive in a trinity Muhammah (PBUH) Ali (RA) and Salman al farsi (RA) and they believe Allah is Incarnate in these three individuals (agstufirullah)

    whereas shia at least dont commit blatant shirk and you cannot paint all of them with the same brush and there is a lot of debate even amongst the ulama whether they are muslim so lets not go there.

    im not arguing whether alawis are or not im distinguishing the differences between shia and alawi
    I respect and agree with what you're saying and I know Shia and Alawites are not identical, but at the end of the day may god guide them to the right path


    This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I know where I sit. Intervention should happen. The only difference between NATO intervening and the Arab league intervening are the reactions to them. If the Arab league intervene, westerners will be applauding them for their intervention whereas if NATO intervenes we expect liberal youths and leftist to start shouting imperialism! imperialism! no blood for oil! and right-wingers to start shouting "wtf David Cameron, stop investing British money into foreign countries, their country their problems their responsible". NATO has better technology and more money to invest. NATO also has Turkey.

    The Arab league are a bunch of spineless people and most of them are hardly role models, the only country that seems sincere in wanting to intervene seems to be Kuwait and it's far too small to hold any real power within the league. They're supposed to be holding some event to discuss what to do about the massacre, £100 says they're going to do jack **** and continue making vague statements in support of military intervention without acting.

    This is just going to be another example of our failure to help our fellow men. The quicker the world becomes globalized and the quicker we become united as humans, the quicker we stop allowing such injustices to go by.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
    I know where I sit. Intervention should happen. The only difference between NATO intervening and the Arab league intervening are the reactions to them. If the Arab league intervene, westerners will be applauding them for their intervention whereas if NATO intervenes we expect liberal youths and leftist to start shouting imperialism! imperialism! no blood for oil! and right-wingers to start shouting "wtf David Cameron, stop investing British money into foreign countries, their country their problems their responsible". NATO has better technology and more money to invest. NATO also has Turkey.

    The Arab league are a bunch of spineless people and most of them are hardly role models, the only country that seems sincere in wanting to intervene seems to be Kuwait and it's far too small to hold any real power within the league. They're supposed to be holding some event to discuss what to do about the massacre, £100 says they're going to do jack **** and continue making vague statements in support of military intervention without acting.

    This is just going to be another example of our failure to help our fellow men. The quicker the world becomes globalized and the quicker we become united as humans, the quicker we stop allowing such injustices to go by.
    This isn't true about the Arab League. Whilst I'm with you that the Arab League is full of joke dictatorships they have responded very well to the uprisings in both Libya and Syria. Of course, Gaddafi and Assad are both hated by the Arab League regimes and Syria is the final frontier for Iran's influence in the Arab world which is despised so much. Qatar and Saudi have already been smuggling weapons to the rebels as they did in Libya and Qatar even sent troops to Libya (which they only admitted afterwards). Iran has recently admitted sending troops to Syria and Russia have continued selling arms to Assad even after the recent massacre.

    As of now, the only people actively supporting the rebels on the ground are some Arab states. Turkey and the NATO countries have been providing other forms of assistance (mainly sanctions on Assad, potential economic assistance, diplomatic power etc.) but they haven't provided any weapons or resources to the FSA. Turkey has provided refugee camps and may intervene if Syrians start firing over the border but only to create a buffer zone and safe passage. Turkey is militarily the strongest power in the region and could easily defeat Assad's troops.

    We're in a very odd position now similar to last year where Arabs favour intervention (whether western or not) more than the west does. This is largely due to the trainwreck that was Iraq and the damaging impact it had on leaders at that time and Cameron/Obama et al. don't want a similar blot on their reputation - just look at what happened to Bush/Blair's reputation. One thing I've noticed is that most of the support for intervention is coming from people who are centre-left. The far left are insane as are all of the right.
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Brutal Honesty)
    This isn't true about the Arab League. Whilst I'm with you that the Arab League is full of joke dictatorships they have responded very well to the uprisings in both Libya and Syria. Of course, Gaddafi and Assad are both hated by the Arab League regimes and Syria is the final frontier for Iran's influence in the Arab world which is despised so much. Qatar and Saudi have already been smuggling weapons to the rebels as they did in Libya and Qatar even sent troops to Libya (which they only admitted afterwards). Iran has recently admitted sending troops to Syria and Russia have continued selling arms to Assad even after the recent massacre.

    As of now, the only people actively supporting the rebels on the ground are some Arab states. Turkey and the NATO countries have been providing other forms of assistance (mainly sanctions on Assad, potential economic assistance, diplomatic power etc.) but they haven't provided any weapons or resources to the FSA. Turkey has provided refugee camps and may intervene if Syrians start firing over the border but only to create a buffer zone and safe passage. Turkey is militarily the strongest power in the region and could easily defeat Assad's troops.

    We're in a very odd position now similar to last year where Arabs favour intervention (whether western or not) more than the west does. This is largely due to the trainwreck that was Iraq and the damaging impact it had on leaders at that time and Cameron/Obama et al. don't want a similar blot on their reputation - just look at what happened to Bush/Blair's reputation. One thing I've noticed is that most of the support for intervention is coming from people who are centre-left. The far left are insane as are all of the right.
    Yeah, I guess you're right, they have cooperated with the western effort in Libya. I don't think there's any evidence to suggest that Saudi are arming rebels, I know the whole point of arming rebels is that it's done in secrecy just in case Assad stays and to avoid any international problems but it still doesn't show that they've done it. And yeah, I think if NATO do get involved Turkey should play a bigger role, who knows it might even decrease the criticism.

    I don't think any intervention would drastically reduce support. It just depends on the type. Libya's intervention has been pretty short in comparison to Iraq/Afghanistan. Syria seems like it will go the same way Libya did if an intervention does happen, instead of NTC in the case of Libya we have SNC for Syria who will take control.
    • Thread Starter
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kya)
    minority of Christians.
    Elaborate.
    • Thread Starter
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I'd like to hear an answer from anyone closer to Syria about why there a demonstations with people in the tens of thousands who support assad, that are happening all over syria, in neighbouring countries, and in lots of countries around Europe, and in Australia (smaller numbers).
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
    Yeah, I guess you're right, they have cooperated with the western effort in Libya. I don't think there's any evidence to suggest that Saudi are arming rebels, I know the whole point of arming rebels is that it's done in secrecy just in case Assad stays and to avoid any international problems but it still doesn't show that they've done it. And yeah, I think if NATO do get involved Turkey should play a bigger role, who knows it might even decrease the criticism.

    I don't think any intervention would drastically reduce support. It just depends on the type. Libya's intervention has been pretty short in comparison to Iraq/Afghanistan. Syria seems like it will go the same way Libya did if an intervention does happen, instead of NTC in the case of Libya we have SNC for Syria who will take control.
    Syria is different to Libya because there's close-quarters combat happening in civilian areas so you can't take them out from the air. In Libya it was small pockets of Gaddafi troops in the middle of the desert who you could take out very easily. The rebels did all of the work in Tripoli and the civilian/densely populated areas. In order for the Syrian troops to be taken out you'd need a ground force which is politically unpopular as troops will be killed.

    The problem here is that most of the right wing and most people in the west don't actually care about Syrians. They don't want their "brave troops" to be dying to rescue poor brown people even though Syrians have been killed rescuing western journalists and feeding/housing them. The Iraq thing has meant they don't trust their government's intentions anymore because no nukes were found in Iraq. They may accept a short 6-month stint in Syria but the NATO countries are worried it'll take longer and they'll get bogged down like Afghanistan.

    Turkey looks closest to intervening and they're already keen to arm the rebels which is more than the US/Europe want at this stage. We may get support for peacekeeping forces sometime soon but let's not forget Tunisia, Libya and soon Egypt will be post-revolution with new governments and they will be strongly on the side of the SNC. When China/Russia failed to criticise the Syrian government at the UN there were huge protests outside the Chinese embassy in Tunisia and it was attacked. Libyan newspapers/TV are covering this heavily and the Muslim Brotherhood will be very anti-Assad when their President gets elected next month. Yemen will also likely follow suit so Syria will be completely dependent on Iran, Russia and China for support of which its getting plenty of. This is why the west is scared. Gaddafi was completely isolated but Assad is getting some support.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by prog2djent)
    Elaborate.
    (Original post by prog2djent)
    I'd like to hear an answer from anyone closer to Syria about why there a demonstations with people in the tens of thousands who support assad, that are happening all over syria, in neighbouring countries, and in lots of countries around Europe, and in Australia (smaller numbers).
    I will try my best just keep in mind it's difficult to get across over my phone.

    Christians always will be a minority in all middle eastern countries.

    You'll find that Christians in the middle east are always fearful by the fact they are out numbered and many of them scared to be living under a president/dictator who they think will treat them differently to Muslims.
    e.g. Hence why all my Egyptian Christian friends are raging that the 'Muslim Brotherhood' are currently leading the polls for next president. When in reality the only reason they are doing this is because they are paranoid that they will be treated differently... which I doubt they will so they are voting for the old Mubarak regime where they can guarantee they will be treated okay. But then that would mean the whole Egyptian revolution benefitted fluff all... but all this comes down to silly paranoia.

    As for Syria the same applies. They are worried that if Assad goes down, the new president will be a more 'religious' Sunni one as to be voted by the majority. Again even though the new president should and most likely will treat Christians equally, they are just very paranoid since they are a minority.

    Also, regarding the tens of thousands of rally's for Assad, a lot of them are government workers and are paid to go to rally's. Saying no will result in them getting beat up.
    I also know a few Syrian supporters of the regime. They said they and their families have suffered in the past coz of Assad and one of them had an uncle killed for no reason. But they say that they still support the regime because they don't wanna take the risk of being treated worse under another regime.
    I also have a friend who's dad owns Al Dunya TV which is one of Syrias main TV channels. He told me that apparently they are ordered to display only what the government approve of and failure to do that will result in his dad getting a beating...

    In conclusion, everyone in Syria lives in utter fear which has led to an immense amount of paranoia.

    Another example are Assads Alawites. They are about 10% of Syria, without Assad they fear they will be treated worse under a new president...
    Libya, Egypt and many countries took the risk of changing the regime and fingers crossed it will pay off for them. Syria needs that extra push, which it won't get because Israel are sat down watching this whilst chewing on popcorn.


    This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
    • Thread Starter
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Thanks Kya
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by prog2djent)
    Thanks Kya
    No worries mate lol


    This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
    • 17 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Morgsie)
    I am one of these people who thinks that the West should not take matters into owns hands, we tried with Iraq and failed.
    I want you to expand on this.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    why should the west care about syria?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

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

    If this has no impact for you, I truly feel sorry for you.
    That video was disgusting. Not only because of the brutal murders of those children, but the way in which their lifeless bodies were dangled in front of the camera for political gain. Whoever filmed that showed us that they, like the killers (whether you want to believe that it was Assad's men or rogue fragments of the opposition) have absolutely no regard for life whatever the age.
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rawkus)
    That video was disgusting. Not only because of the brutal murders of those children, but the way in which their lifeless bodies were dangled in front of the camera for political gain. Whoever filmed that showed us that they, like the killers (whether you want to believe that it was Assad's men or rogue fragments of the opposition) have absolutely no regard for life whatever the age.
    The guy was clearly emotional and showing what Assad's men done. Just because it was for political gain doesn't mean it's wrong. In this case, political gain will reduce the lives being killed. Wow, real bad motive that.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
    The guy was clearly emotional and showing what Assad's men done. Just because it was for political gain doesn't mean it's wrong. In this case, political gain will reduce the lives being killed. Wow, real bad motive that.
    Well I didnt say whether or not I believed it was a bad motive? I said that I was disgusted in the manner that dead children were being flaunted to a camera.

    Lets pretend that this is black and white, and that it was beyond doubt that Assad was the only one killing men, women and children. Would you not object to the body of your child, lifeless, limp and in a horrific condition, being picked up and shaken as if it was a rag doll?
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Good to see that there is much consensus for blind intervention. We never learn, do we.

    (Original post by rawkus)
    That video was disgusting. Not only because of the brutal murders of those children, but the way in which their lifeless bodies were dangled in front of the camera for political gain. Whoever filmed that showed us that they, like the killers (whether you want to believe that it was Assad's men or rogue fragments of the opposition) have absolutely no regard for life whatever the age.
    Balls. If something horrible happens, then by all means it should be recorded and shown to the rest of the world. How else are we to know what is happening there? Imagine if everyone forgot about Auschwitz or similar horrible places in the name of respecting the dead. Far from it, they would certainly roll in disgust wherever they lie for they would suffer the greatest injustice of being forgotten.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Brandmon)
    Good to see that there is much consensus for blind intervention. We never learn, do we.



    Balls. If something horrible happens, then by all means it should be recorded and shown to the rest of the world. How else are we to know what is happening there? Imagine if everyone forgot about Auschwitz or similar horrible places in the name of respecting the dead. Far from it, they would certainly roll in disgust wherever they lie for they would suffer the greatest injustice of being forgotten.
    I'm getting a bit annoyed now that nearly every time I post on here, people reply to points I havent actually made. I agree that recording such horror shows the world what, to an extent, is happening. I never said otherwise. I was instead disgusted at the way in which the bodies were treated. Instead of panning the camera across the corpses, they were picked up and shaken about as if they were of a doll as opposed to innocent children who had been caught up in a conflict that they had no participation in.

    I agree with your first sentence though. Note how as soon as reports filtered of the massacre, certain leaders were using it as proof of Assad's crimes despite no real clarification having been made as to who was responsible at that time.

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 5, 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.