Syrian regime makes chemical warfare threat
Scroll to see replies
Original post by robin22391
well the 14 innocent men shot in ireland, was that not brutal, if the ira had tried to take northern ireland as they planned to do in a vietnamese inspired offensive before they were bankrupted by britain, would they not have responded with every means necessary to restore the state. then imagine if all the surrounding counties and the usa started supporting the rebels against the repressive british regime, imagine if they tried to liberate london with american backing.
my god, you know...even in the american revolution...about 20% of ordinary people still supported britain.
my god, you know...even in the american revolution...about 20% of ordinary people still supported britain.
I am from Northern Ireland, and I can tell you that your comparison is bunk.
While the British army did not cover itself in glory in Northern Ireland, it is a disgraceful insult to compare them with the actions of Assad's death squads. Unlike the actions of the British in NI, the crimes of the Assad regime are so serious, deliberate and systematic as to constitute crimes against humanity and war crimes (according to Amnesty International, the UN and Human Rights Watch).They did not respond to IRA attacks by shelling West Belfast, or massacring the inhabitants of Crossmaglen or Carrikmore. If they did, then they would deserve to get bombed as well.
The people of Syria also have far more legitimate grievances than the Catholics of Northern Ireland. While the Catholics of Northern Ireland did have legitimate grievances, it is almost certain that had the civil rights movement (which was supported by many Protestants) not been hijacked by extremists, said grievances would have been redressed. The people of Syria were living in a total police state, which was ruled by a corrupt and dynastic religious minority, and had one of the worst human rights records in the world. They only resorted to armed struggle after their peaceful protests were ruthlessly crushed with tanks (no, bloody sunday occured after the troubles had already broken out, though it did exacerbate them) with over 70 people being killed in the space of a day (compared to 14 on Bloody Sunday). More people have been killed by Assad in the space of 1 year, than were killed by all sides during the entire Troubles (which lasted roughly between 1969-1998) .
British policy in Northern Ireland has been focused on reconcilliation of the 2 communities. One need not romantise this policy, but it would stand up to any comparison with Assad's behaviour, who relied on divide and rule tactics to keep his minority in power.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by Aj12
Some 55% of Syrians want Assad to stay, motivated by fear of civil war
That's not the same as supporting a regime because its a good regime. I wonder how many Syrians would feel the same if asked would you support the peaceful removal and replacement of Assad. Most people would rather a dictator than civil war, its a given. The same way most people would choose having an arm cut off rather than death. Its not the legitimacy a leader should be based on.
I don't really want to deal with what if's and hypothetical situations. I don't know how Britain would have reacted to that. But the British government has the democratic legitimately that Assad does not. Thousands have been killed by Assad, comparing that to 14 dead men is a joke. Again you can't prove Assad has any real support other than a suspect poll with a loaded question.
That's not the same as supporting a regime because its a good regime. I wonder how many Syrians would feel the same if asked would you support the peaceful removal and replacement of Assad. Most people would rather a dictator than civil war, its a given. The same way most people would choose having an arm cut off rather than death. Its not the legitimacy a leader should be based on.
I don't really want to deal with what if's and hypothetical situations. I don't know how Britain would have reacted to that. But the British government has the democratic legitimately that Assad does not. Thousands have been killed by Assad, comparing that to 14 dead men is a joke. Again you can't prove Assad has any real support other than a suspect poll with a loaded question.
i never said they loved assad like a son, but they support him staying until fair and peaceful elections can be held rather than supporting a civil war led by extremist right wing muslims...the fact is the people do not all support the rebels, they want to be civilised, not another libya, not another iraq and not a western puppet or right wing muslim state. they do not want sectarianism...but nato is encouraging it.
Original post by Clessus
I am from Northern Ireland, and I can tell you that your comparison is bunk.
While the British army did not cover itself in glory in Northern Ireland, it is a disgraceful insult to compare them with the actions of Assad's death squads. Unlike the actions of the British in NI, the crimes of the Assad regime are so serious, deliberate and systematic as to constitute crimes against humanity and war crimes (according to Amnesty International, the UN and Human Rights Watch).They did not respond to IRA attacks by shelling West Belfast, or massacring the inhabitants of Crossmaglen or Carrikmore. If they did, then they would deserve to get bombed as well.
The people of Syria also have far more legitimate grievances than the Catholics of Northern Ireland. While the Catholics of Northern Ireland did have legitimate grievances, it is almost certain that had the civil rights movement (which was supported by many Protestants) not been hijacked by extremists, said grievances would have been redressed. The people of Syria were living in a total police state, which was ruled by a corrupt and dynastic religious minority, and had one of the worst human rights records in the world. They only resorted to armed struggle after their peaceful protests were ruthlessly crushed with tanks (no, bloody sunday occured after the troubles had already broken out, though it did exacerbate them) with over 70 people being killed in the space of a day (compared to 14 on Bloody Sunday). More people have been killed by Assad in the space of 1 year, than were killed by all sides during the entire Troubles (which lasted roughly between 1969-1998) .
British policy in Northern Ireland has been focused on reconcilliation of the 2 communities. One need not romantise this policy, but it would stand up to any comparison with Assad's behaviour, who relied on divide and rule tactics to keep his minority in power.
While the British army did not cover itself in glory in Northern Ireland, it is a disgraceful insult to compare them with the actions of Assad's death squads. Unlike the actions of the British in NI, the crimes of the Assad regime are so serious, deliberate and systematic as to constitute crimes against humanity and war crimes (according to Amnesty International, the UN and Human Rights Watch).They did not respond to IRA attacks by shelling West Belfast, or massacring the inhabitants of Crossmaglen or Carrikmore. If they did, then they would deserve to get bombed as well.
The people of Syria also have far more legitimate grievances than the Catholics of Northern Ireland. While the Catholics of Northern Ireland did have legitimate grievances, it is almost certain that had the civil rights movement (which was supported by many Protestants) not been hijacked by extremists, said grievances would have been redressed. The people of Syria were living in a total police state, which was ruled by a corrupt and dynastic religious minority, and had one of the worst human rights records in the world. They only resorted to armed struggle after their peaceful protests were ruthlessly crushed with tanks (no, bloody sunday occured after the troubles had already broken out, though it did exacerbate them) with over 70 people being killed in the space of a day (compared to 14 on Bloody Sunday). More people have been killed by Assad in the space of 1 year, than were killed by all sides during the entire Troubles (which lasted roughly between 1969-1998) .
British policy in Northern Ireland has been focused on reconcilliation of the 2 communities. One need not romantise this policy, but it would stand up to any comparison with Assad's behaviour, who relied on divide and rule tactics to keep his minority in power.
i too am from the north of ireland, and i think you would change your mind about how britain would respond had the ira aquired its massive shipment of guns which was captured. they planned an actual proper war to retake the north...its likely the ira were heavily infiltrated...something syrias crappy intelligence services are not capable of.
britain is not so great, just watch as they lock up all people who plan to protest the olympics before they have done anything illegal in a mad orwellian pre-crime tactic which they also used for the royal wedding.
i support democracy, not silly american proxy wars in the middle east.
Original post by robin22391
i too am from the north of ireland, and i think you would change your mind about how britain would respond had the ira aquired its massive shipment of guns which was captured.
Pointless, baseless self-justifying speculation and whatabouterry. You fail to mention that the IRA had been receiving foreign shippments of arms and foreign support for years. There is also the small fact that Assad's repression occured before any armed resistance to his tyranny existed.
The reason NI remains in the UK is because the majority of its population want to remain in it. If NI ever had a genuine referandum on independence, and it voted for independence (or reunification with the ROI, whatever), then Britain would happily let it go. They would not respond with violence (funny how you don't condemn Russian intervention in Chechnya, despite the fact that it was incomparably more bloody than anything that the Brits did in NI, and unlike NI, had a genuine mandate for independence, or in Abkhazia, where they ethnically cleansed the entire Georgian population, who formed a large plurality).
its likely the ira were heavily infiltrated
It's not "likely", its a near certainty.
britain is not so great, just watch as they lock up all people who plan to protest the olympics before they have done anything illegal in a mad orwellian pre-crime tactic which they also used for the royal wedding.
I never said that it was great, or even good. But anyone who seriously compares it to the Assad regime's response to protests against his illegitimate rule (70 killed in 1 day), is seriously losing perspective.
i support democracy, not silly american proxy wars in the middle east.
I support democracy as well. I am also not a hypocrite, who condemns armed resistance to any anti-western regime as a "silly american proxy war", then having the gall to accuse the west of being "hypocritical".
a civil war led by extremist right wing muslims
You are aware that Ba'athism is an extremist right-wing ideology, modeled on Fascism, aren't you?
they do not want sectarianism...but nato is encouraging it.
Hardly, the Ba'ath party encouraged sectarianism in Syria (and Iraq) for years. I daresay the Hama Massacre did far more to encourage sectarianism than NATO.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by Clessus
Pointless, baseless self-justifying speculation and whatabouterry. You fail to mention that the IRA had been receiving foreign shippments of arms and foreign support for years. There is also the small fact that Assad's repression occured before any armed resistance to his tyranny existed.
The reason NI remains in the UK is because the majority of its population want to remain in it. If NI ever had a genuine referandum on independence, and it voted for independence (or reunification with the ROI, whatever), then Britain would happily let it go. They would not respond with violence (funny how you don't condemn Russian intervention in Chechnya, despite the fact that it was incomparably more bloody than anything that the Brits did in NI, and unlike NI, had a genuine mandate for independence, or in Abkhazia, where they ethnically cleansed the entire Georgian population, who formed a large plurality).
It's not "likely", its a near certainty.
I never said that it was great, or even good. But anyone who seriously compares it to the Assad regime's response to protests against his illegitimate rule (70 killed in 1 day), is seriously losing perspective.
I support democracy as well. I am also not a hypocrite, who condemns armed resistance to any anti-western regime as a "silly american proxy war", then having the gall to accuse the west of being "hypocritical".
You are aware that Ba'athism is an extremist right-wing ideology, modeled on Fascism, aren't you?
Hardly, the Ba'ath party encouraged sectarianism in Syria (and Iraq) for years. I daresay the Hama Massacre did far more to encourage sectarianism than NATO.
The reason NI remains in the UK is because the majority of its population want to remain in it. If NI ever had a genuine referandum on independence, and it voted for independence (or reunification with the ROI, whatever), then Britain would happily let it go. They would not respond with violence (funny how you don't condemn Russian intervention in Chechnya, despite the fact that it was incomparably more bloody than anything that the Brits did in NI, and unlike NI, had a genuine mandate for independence, or in Abkhazia, where they ethnically cleansed the entire Georgian population, who formed a large plurality).
It's not "likely", its a near certainty.
I never said that it was great, or even good. But anyone who seriously compares it to the Assad regime's response to protests against his illegitimate rule (70 killed in 1 day), is seriously losing perspective.
I support democracy as well. I am also not a hypocrite, who condemns armed resistance to any anti-western regime as a "silly american proxy war", then having the gall to accuse the west of being "hypocritical".
You are aware that Ba'athism is an extremist right-wing ideology, modeled on Fascism, aren't you?
Hardly, the Ba'ath party encouraged sectarianism in Syria (and Iraq) for years. I daresay the Hama Massacre did far more to encourage sectarianism than NATO.
i never mentioned those situations
ad-hominem arguments and misquoting will get you nowhere
and ba'ath is less rightwing than extremist rightwing islamists, i prefer assad remaining or a free election than the country falling to these alqaeda types like afghanistan did.
history is written by the victors, the present is written by the mainstream media
The Syrian government and army are the victims in this charade.
I would question the sanity of any person who believes that the FSA are who the media portray them to be.
I would question the sanity of any person who believes that the FSA are who the media portray them to be.
The FSA are terrorists supported by the west as these terrorists will be the gateway to attacking Iran, the west could not care less about the Syrians killed, the west has used human rights as a prretext for wars so many times that they have eradicated the very meaning of human rights. This is about the west getting an opportunity to get rid of a anti western pro Iranian regime which refuses to dance to obombas tunes, the west wants to get rid of Assad and install a puppet regime who will oppress people with western weaponary (hence boosting western defence industries in tehse hard economic times) as in Saudi annd other sunni states but the difference will be that Iran will lose an ally and the west will be able to use Syria as a launch pad to attack Iran. The west should be ashamed to use human rights as a pretext. Face it the west cannot always get its way, Russia and and China allowed the west the benefit of the doubt by imposing a no fly zone, but the west used this no fly zone to wage war on Libya and conduct airstrikes, sorry but Russia and China are not going to let you play your games again. Just because the west cannot always get its way does not mean it should throw a tantrum. deal with it, Invading Syria means war with Russia, and knowing the west these days they only seem to invade little nations, the west dare not pick a fight with Russia, because Russia will take the west down with it.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by robin22391
i never mentioned those situations
That's my point. You bitch about "westerm intervention", but have not once condemned intervention by any non-western regime. It's funny how mention Afghanistan later in your post. You do not condemn Soviet intervention in Afghanistan, even though it was incomparably more bloody than Western internention in the same country(800,000 dead due to Soviet intervention, minimum estimate)
ad-hominem arguments and misquoting will get you nowhere
I have not misquoted you anywhere.
and ba'ath is less rightwing than extremist rightwing islamists, i prefer assad remaining or a free election than the country falling to these alqaeda types like afghanistan did.
Ba'athism is a foul, right wing ethno-nationalist ideology, modelled on European fascism. Those who consider Assad "secular", "anti-imperialist" or "socialist" are really scraping the bottom of the barrel.
history is written by the victors, the present is written by the mainstream media
More nonsense and clichés. 'The Present is written by the mainstream media', yet here we are debating the present on equal terms. History is not always "written by the victors", there is a great deal of history written by the losers, to give a few examples;
1. The Treaty of Versailles - German criticisms of the treaty are widely accepted by many people, although many of them are BS.
2. The American Civil War (until recently) - The issue of slavery was downplayed, more history books have been written from the souther perspective.
3. The Reconstruction (until recently) - The Radical Republicans were blamed for the failure of the Reconstruction.
4. The westward expansion of America - Most history is quite sympathetic to the Native Americans.
5. The Ottoman Conquest of the Balkans - Ottoman attrocities and oppression are very well known about, and often exaggerated
6. Irish History (even before 1922) - Even though the rebellions of 1798, 1803, 1848, 1867 and 1916 failed ignominiously, most history (even before 1922) was sympathetic towards them.
(edited 11 years ago)
Sorry but if external nations are going to poke their noses into the internal affiars of Syria then what are they expecting a hug and a smile? Don't interfere and Syria won't unleash the weapons and if you do interfere then you deserve what you get. If the west has any spare cash which is burning a hole in their pocket it would do well to keep out Syria and put that cash to better use in their own countries where people are at the stage of begging. Sorry but the days of the western imperial colonial empires are long over, you can no longer walts in and act as if you are gods gift to earth, you aren't deal with it.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by Clessus
rebels are all part of a Zionist-American-Saudi plot to destabalise Syria.
.
.
They are, both consciously and unconsciously.
Original post by prog2djent
They are, both consciously and unconsciously.
Haha, you're funny
Original post by Annoying-Mouse
The CIA are already involved and trying to secure the weapons (rightfully). Hopefully, they'll be able to secure them without the need of military action
I can imagine a satirical cartoon with this, a CIA man, with two faces and two front torso's facing two ways, no back, taking these weapons off Assad and handing them straight to the FSAl-qaeda
Original post by Clessus
Haha, you're funny
I would bombard you with links to videos or stories from my Syrian chums on FB showing the rebels doning a Saudi-flag, the white emirate flag, and the black khalifah, but, well, whatever.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by prog2djent
I would bombard you with links to videos or stories from my Syrian chums on FB showing the rebels doning a Saudi-flag, the white emirate flag, and the blag khalifah, but, well, whatever.
Whatever, and even if that were true, it dosen't prove the Zionist connection.
ehmehgerd weperns erv mers derstrerctern!!!!
Original post by Clessus
Whatever, and even if that were true, it dosen't prove the Zionist connection.
It was meant to be *black flag, not blag.
Syria is one of the biggest and strongest anti-Israeli forces in the area with strong links to Iran and Hezbollah, I think that is enough to see why the "zionists" are supporting the rebels.
Look at who is calling for intervention, just look.
Original post by prog2djent
It was meant to be *black flag, not blag.
Syria is one of the biggest and strongest anti-Israeli forces in the area with strong links to Iran and Hezbollah, I think that is enough to see why the "zionists" are supporting the rebels.
Look at who is calling for intervention, just look.
Syria is one of the biggest and strongest anti-Israeli forces in the area with strong links to Iran and Hezbollah, I think that is enough to see why the "zionists" are supporting the rebels.
Look at who is calling for intervention, just look.
If the FSA really are all just Islamic fundies (doubtful), then if anything the Zionists would not want them in charge, as they are likely to be even more anti-Israel. I have addressed this point further in another post, but if the Arab spring (of which Syria is a part) was really all a Zionist plot, why would Israel have supported the Mubarak regime, and why would the Mubarak regime have been replaced with a more anti-Israel regime?
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by prog2djent
It was meant to be *black flag, not blag.
Syria is one of the biggest and strongest anti-Israeli forces in the area with strong links to Iran and Hezbollah, I think that is enough to see why the "zionists" are supporting the rebels.
Look at who is calling for intervention, just look.
Syria is one of the biggest and strongest anti-Israeli forces in the area with strong links to Iran and Hezbollah, I think that is enough to see why the "zionists" are supporting the rebels.
Look at who is calling for intervention, just look.
well, why not, they have the rest of the Sunni Arabs under control.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- A Level Geography Edexcel 18/20/24 markers
- Even if you gain funding for a phd, you still have to pay for other student debts...
- Thoughts on moving to Turkey after gcse?
- [Official Thread] Russian invasion of Ukraine
- Will World War 3 happen soon?
- Feeling inferior compared to syrians as a half moroccan/half white
- Chinese students at bristol
- history 2023 predictions gcse questions
- Eczema Royal Navy
- I have no friends, no relationship, nothing, I'm rejected for my Nationality
- A-level History exam practice
- History A level Paper
- Was Rousseau an anti- authoritarian?
- History GCSE- Warfare through time
- What game should I buy
- Edexcel A Level History Paper 3: 9HI0 30-39 - 22 June 2022 [Exam Chat]
- Need help with some Alevel business multiple choice question
- BTEC IT level 3 unit 11 Cyber Security
- Predictions for 2024 World of the Hero Paper
- Hamster mystery - please can a hamster owner help
Latest
Last reply 1 minute ago
Feeling inferior compared to syrians as a half moroccan/half whiteLast reply 1 minute ago
Telecommunications engineer job with "Provisional" licence?Last reply 2 minutes ago
Edexcel A-level French Paper 3, IRP/Speaking (9FR0 03) - 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 2 minutes ago
JK Rowling in ‘arrest me’ challenge over hate crime lawLast reply 7 minutes ago
Official Dental Hygiene and Therapy (Oral Health Science) 2024 Entry ThreadDentistry
2867
Last reply 8 minutes ago
can't go to ucl bc intl fees but got home fees for others :(Last reply 9 minutes ago
Woodhouse College applicants 2024Last reply 11 minutes ago
Customer Services Group - Operational Delivery - Administrative OfficersLast reply 13 minutes ago
St dominics, henrietta barnett, RMS, parmiters or girls grammar??Last reply 15 minutes ago
LSE anthropology and law 2024Posted 15 minutes ago
Can I get funding for a full time course if I've studied before?Last reply 17 minutes ago
Degree Apprenticeship at Accenture (assessment centre)Posted 17 minutes ago
Durham vs Exeter Finance/AccountingLast reply 20 minutes ago
Customer Services Group; Executive Officer (EO) - Home Office - Various RolesTrending
Last reply 14 hours ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 14 hours ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
