Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    16
    (Original post by Apocrypha)
    What do you imagine will happen to the Shia's after this Shia Dictator has 'slaughtered' loads of Sunni rebels?
    I imagine people like you would smugly intone "I told you so ...".
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Hysteria)
    I imagine people like you would smugly intone "I told you so ...".
    And I imagine people like you wouldnt have a word to say about it.

    Inciting response mate :rolleyes:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Hysteria)
    You think al-Assad is not propped-up by imperialism? You think supporting Assad mysteriously precludes you from the imperialist charge?

    Have you ever heard of Iran? Or Russia? Or do they not appear on your morally-skewed radar because they're not 'Zionist'?
    The lesser of two evils. The west have historically ruined countries whether that be in Africa or the middle east. The US has religiously funded mercenaries to remove governments opposed to American control. Happened in central America with the Contras in Nicaragua that were trained and armed by the CIA for fear of having Cuban like satellites near its shores.

    Syria, Libya, Iran is just a repeat of that.



    (Original post by Lord Hysteria)
    fact, your paltry computational skills might even be considered reminiscent of Bush's manicheanism ...
    With a post count of that standing, my computational skills never really stood much hope against you anyway!

    Time to get out a bit more!
    Offline

    16
    (Original post by Rovey)
    The lesser of two evils. The west have historically ruined countries whether that be in Africa or the middle east. The US has religiously funded mercenaries to remove governments opposed to American control. Happened in central America with the Contras in Nicaragua that were trained and armed by the CIA for fear of having Cuban like satellites near its shores.

    Syria, Libya, Iran is just a repeat of that.

    With a post count of that standing, my computational skills never really stood much hope against you anyway!

    Time to get out a bit more!
    One of my favourite arguments from C. Hitchens was this: (I used it on this site previously)

    The British Empire sent a fleet to Africa and the Caribbean to maintain the slave trade while the very same empire later sent another fleet to enforce abolition. I would not have opposed the second policy because of my objections to the first; rather it seems to me that the second policy was morally necessitated by its predecessor.

    Christopher Hitchens (A Long-Short War - Introduction)
    There is much to disagree with in the your analysis. But, surely, the anfractuous history of grievous Western imperialism necessitates an intervention to rectify it? Otherwise, our passive acquiescence (or non-intervention of the only power that can effectuate transformation and revolution) is merely the protraction of the imperialist system 'we' imposed.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by player19)
    I will agree that all sides are comitting war crimes but the Assad side is just overrated. But it is also the truth that the Rebels started the war and they are more war crimes.

    Warning it is shocking https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFfnxK-YGGQ

    Here you see the control damage coming from the Western media: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOxGQBGF7lc. According to them that are just extremist while of cource the FSA is not islamistic .
    FSA claims to be secular? That claim alone would have stopped me believing in them as we know it's a pure lie.

    Anyway, yes I do agree that war crimes are being committed on both sides I've seen a video from a Syrian soldier patrolling a checkpoint and his comrades were pushing and chucking this guy who was using fake IDs and must have been caught with bombs in car (suicide-bombing attempt?) the soldiers got real mad at him and he was making stupid excuses. Instead of just letting him go they chucked him over a small wall and shot him dead - an unjust way of punishing someone. Honestly though I can see both sides here where the soldiers get pissed off for their country being trashed around by foreigners ("FSA" comprises of goats in 26+ different states) claiming freedom for Syria and blaming their leader. Syrians have never been so unified and strong.

    What happened in Iraq was very similar. The people were having better lives under Saddam: they were prospering. Even though they were outnumbered in ridiculously; they were together. But World vs. Iraq, Iraq couldn't have won. Now if you go there everybody is wishing for Saddam to come back as they've been left in dilapidated houses and mutated babies. I love it how we continuously discuss about a war where 1.3m(?) from an excuse were killed over 2,998 american lives came to an abrupt end, not just that... We knew Bush was lying and a million died as a result of it yet we still carry on with our daily lives? The most we just do is discuss or protest?
    And you guys call that justice?! Everything we argue about here is so ****ing insignificant, including what I've just typed up now.

    /exeunt (P.S I really dislike Liberalists).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Hysteria)

    Moreover, Syrians are not "his" people. You wouldn't dare rhapsodize mindlessly about "David Cameron's people" ...
    [/URL]?
    Shutup.

    You would if there ever was a civil war ousting Cameron's government. They'd be those loyal to Cameron or those loyal to whatever else it may be. (Or just plain terrorists).
    Offline

    16
    (Original post by iSoftie)
    Shutup.

    You would if there ever was a civil war ousting Cameron's government. They'd be those loyal to Cameron or those loyal to whatever else it may be. (Or just plain terrorists).
    We're a democracy now, for heavens sake! (:confused:) We vote political parties into power. This is what the English Civil war was about.

    The SNC are opposing a dynastic dictatorship. Don't you understand they're trying to dislodge Assad. Great. We should intervene to ensure that it's executed as efficiently as possible, with UN-sanctioned peacekeeping force overlooking the referendum and elections.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Hysteria)

    The SNC are opposing a dynastic dictatorship. Don't you understand they're trying to dislodge Assad. Great. We should intervene to ensure that it's executed as efficiently as possible, with UN-sanctioned peacekeeping force overlooking the referendum and elections.
    Difficult to tell whether you're being sarcastic, or just spreading nonsensical fallacies.

    The syrian national council was established by the US and co. for the simple reason of giving the FSA some form of legitimacy for international support and a reason to hand them weapons.

    Just like the creation of a taliban head office in qatar, before nato forces complete their mission giving the impression it was a success and just and right. Must be a first to have Taliban representatives that lived in tribal areas and speak fluent english i must say.
    Offline

    16
    (Original post by Rovey)
    Difficult to tell whether you're being sarcastic, or just spreading nonsensical fallacies.

    The syrian national council was established by the US and co. for the simple reason of giving the FSA some form of legitimacy for international support and a reason to hand them weapons.

    Just like the creation of a taliban head office in qatar, before nato forces complete their mission giving the impression it was a success and just and right. Must be a first to have Taliban representatives that lived in tribal areas and speak fluent english i must say.
    What's your point?
    Offline

    16
    Great piece in Reuters. Greatly dismantles the myopic trope that non-intervention precludes your responsibility from the consequences. The most noteworthy points in the article:

    • Omar's group, Ghurabaa al-Sham, wasn't defeated by the government. It was dismantled by a rival band of revolutionaries - hardline Islamists.
    • The Islamists moved against them at the beginning of May. After three days of sporadic clashes Omar's more moderate fighters, accused by the Islamists of looting, caved in and dispersed, according to local residents. Omar said the end came swiftly.
    • It's a pattern repeated elsewhere in the country. During a 10-day journey through rebel-held territory in Syria, Reuters journalists found that radical Islamist units are sidelining more moderate groups that do not share the Islamists' goal of establishing a supreme religious leadership in the country.
    • The moderates, often underfunded, fragmented and chaotic, appear no match for Islamist units, which include fighters from organizations designated "terrorist" by the United States.
    • The Islamist ascendancy has amplified the sectarian nature of the war between Sunni Muslim rebels and the Shi'ite supporters of Assad. It also presents a barrier to the original democratic aims of the revolt and calls into question whether the United States, which announced practical support for the rebels last week, can ensure supplies of weapons go only to groups friendly to the West.
    • Part of the problem is that the rebel groups are poorly equipped and badly coordinated. Jamjoom said he had 45 men with guns and two homemade mortar launchers but was desperately low on ammunition. "Everything we have has been looted from the regime," he said, echoing the response of most rebel commanders when asked if they have received any outside support.
    • In Aleppo four Islamist brigades, including Jabhat al-Nusra and Ahrar al-Sham, have taken over the role of government and are providing civilians with day-to-day necessities. They have also created a court based on Islamic religious laws, or sharia.
    • So far the Islamist groups have been the ones to attract outside support, mostly from private Sunni Muslim backers in Saudi Arabia, according to fighters in Syria.
    The available time-frame to support moderate factions is waning. The Islamists are rooting their de facto legitimacy once al-Assad has been amputated. As the article reflected, the "moderate rebel groups dithered, so did their backers outside the country" ...
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Interesting article from Foreign Policy regarding the problems from a legal standpoint.

    I'm not fully sure where I stand on intervention at the present moment, the use of chemical weapons would definitely in my opinion be grounds to invade under the whole 'responsibility to protect' but I feel that the scale it's been used in isn't really enough considering that it's likely that tens of thousands would die as a result from a direct intervention yet only around 100-150 are currently suspected to have died from chemical attack. I'm a little skeptical of US intelligence but the fact that France who opposed the Iraq war seems to confirm the use of chemical weapons makes it more believable.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
    Interesting article from Foreign Policy regarding the problems from a legal standpoint.

    I'm not fully sure where I stand on intervention at the present moment, the use of chemical weapons would definitely in my opinion be grounds to invade under the whole 'responsibility to protect' but I feel that the scale it's been used in isn't really enough considering that it's likely that tens of thousands would die as a result from a direct intervention yet only around 100-150 are currently suspected to have died from chemical attack. I'm a little skeptical of US intelligence but the fact that France who opposed the Iraq war seems to confirm the use of chemical weapons makes it more believable.
    Can you provide evidence of anyone dying from the use of chemical weapons, i cant find any figures, also its disputed both sides have used them, just that the West have focussed more greatly on investigation Assad. Because, and this is the truth, no matter what the Rebels do, they could murder a million syrians, the West will never back Assad. I just cant see it ever happening.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Apocrypha)
    Can you provide evidence of anyone dying from the use of chemical weapons, i cant find any figures, also its disputed both sides have used them, just that the West have focussed more greatly on investigation Assad. Because, and this is the truth, no matter what the Rebels do, they could murder a million syrians, the West will never back Assad. I just cant see it ever happening.
    There's been no confirmed use of Sarin by the rebels, the closest was Turkey intercepted a unknown chemical by Al-Nusra (who are already classed as a terrorist groups). Anyway, it's based on figures provided by US intelligence. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/14/wo...l-weapons.html
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
    There's been no confirmed use of Sarin by the rebels, the closest was Turkey intercepted a unknown chemical by Al-Nusra (who are already classed as a terrorist groups). Anyway, it's based on figures provided by US intelligence. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/14/wo...l-weapons.html
    And this is what i find fishy, 100-150 people have supposedly died from chemical weapons use. Why would a man like Bashar Al-Assad, (whom gives interviews to western journalists in english very frequently during the conflict) Use chemical weapons, and potentially ignite western intervention in the region, purely to kill 100-150 people. I dont buy it, it sounds absolutely ridiculous.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Apocrypha)
    And this is what i find fishy, 100-150 people have supposedly died from chemical weapons use. Why would a man like Bashar Al-Assad, (whom gives interviews to western journalists in english very frequently during the conflict) Use chemical weapons, and potentially ignite western intervention in the region, purely to kill 100-150 people. I dont buy it, it sounds absolutely ridiculous.
    That's your prerogative, why would France, who didn't intervene in Iraq, suddenly lie about the confirmation of US intelligence? Anyway, why wouldn't Assad allow UN to investigate the claims?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
    That's your prerogative, why would France, who didn't intervene in Iraq, suddenly lie about the confirmation of US intelligence? Anyway, why wouldn't Assad allow UN to investigate the claims?
    Because it is a war, and the rebels want to win, they will do anything to win, they have framed the SAA on countless occasions before this one, the chemical weapons attack was such a small scale that it seems to be a framing of Assad. Watch Assad's interviews, http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=5a8_1371732361 such as this recent one, western journalists accuse him of atrocities in person, and he consistently replies. Yes it's my prerogative, but its also common sense. the CIA can say whatever the hell they like, they have no one to speak against them.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Apocrypha)
    Because it is a war, and the rebels want to win, they will do anything to win, they have framed the SAA on countless occasions before this one, the chemical weapons attack was such a small scale that it seems to be a framing of Assad. Watch Assad's interviews, http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=5a8_1371732361 such as this recent one, western journalists accuse him of atrocities in person, and he consistently replies. Yes it's my prerogative, but its also common sense. the CIA can say whatever the hell they like, they have no one to speak against them.
    Assad will also do whatever he can to win. There is no evidence to suggest that it was a set-up, you can always claim anything is a set-up but until you have evidence of a set-up Occam's razor comes into effect. I'm not sure why you're showing me interview, of course his going to paint himself as the innocent one. But, it's not only US intelligence that's stating that is, as I said French have confirmed it.
    Offline

    16
    (Original post by Apocrypha)
    Can you provide evidence of anyone dying from the use of chemical weapons, i cant find any figures, also its disputed both sides have used them, just that the West have focussed more greatly on investigation Assad. Because, and this is the truth, no matter what the Rebels do, they could murder a million syrians, the West will never back Assad. I just cant see it ever happening.
    There has been some evidence surfacing that the al-Assad regime may have used chemical weapons. I am highly skeptical of these claims. It would uncharacteristically stupid and ill-considered. Chemical gas is highly ineffective and inefficient. If I was al-Assad, I would maintain the current military policies ... Aside from Obama's huffing, I don't think anyone would really care about chemical weapons being used against Syrians ... The death toll is reaching 100k, and we're making uncomfortable noizes.

    The American and British government are co-signators to the Chemical Weapons Convention under the enforcement and scrutiny of the United Nations - along, I might add, with over 180 nations. When you broach chemical weapons in the context of Syria, it is the responsibility of the US and all the other signatories under the international agreements to do something. The UN Human Rights Commission reports that "the violations and abuses committed by anti-Government armed groups did not, however, reach the intensity and scale of those committed by Government forces and militia". I have been brusingly attempting to adumbrate a moral distinction between the policies of governments and various militias and groups. Naturally, the crimes committed by individuals within the anti-government forces should be dealt with accordingly. But this is wholly incommensurable to a government that has enacted policies of: unlawful killings, hostage taking, torture, sexual violence, massacres and the violation of children rights'. You must realise the significance of especially government use of WMDs?
    Offline

    16
    (Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
    Assad will also do whatever he can to win. There is no evidence to suggest that it was a set-up, you can always claim anything is a set-up but until you have evidence of a set-up Occam's razor comes into effect. I'm not sure why you're showing me interview, of course his going to paint himself as the innocent one. But, it's not only US intelligence that's stating that is, as I said French have confirmed it.
    Jes per-lez! ... How can you not see he is being framed?

    assad is a thorn in the CIA interests (woooo!!!!!21), so he must be a great arab version of a visionary liberal whose country is being taken over by zionist neocon f***s who want to intall a motherfu*ing pipeline. And **** the UN ... it's a imperlaist whore ... What choice does he have to save his people? And so what if he's a bit rough ... get some perspective!!!!!!!
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Hysteria)
    There has been some evidence surfacing that the al-Assad regime may have used chemical weapons. I am highly skeptical of these claims. It would uncharacteristically stupid and ill-considered. Chemical gas is highly ineffective and inefficient. If I was al-Assad, I would maintain the current military policies ... Aside from Obama's huffing, I don't think anyone would really care about chemical weapons being used against Syrians ... The death toll is reaching 100k, and we're making uncomfortable noizes.

    The American and British government are co-signators to the Chemical Weapons Convention under the enforcement and scrutiny of the United Nations - along, I might add, with over 180 nations. When you broach chemical weapons in the context of Syria, it is the responsibility of the US and all the other signatories under the international agreements to do something. The UN Human Rights Commission reports that "the violations and abuses committed by anti-Government armed groups did not, however, reach the intensity and scale of those committed by Government forces and militia". I have been brusingly attempting to adumbrate a moral distinction between the policies of governments and various militias and groups. Naturally, the crimes committed by individuals within the anti-government forces should be dealt with accordingly. But this is wholly incommensurable to a government that has enacted policies of: unlawful killings, hostage taking, torture, sexual violence, massacres and the violation of children rights'. You must realise the significance of especially government use of WMDs?
    I dont support Assad, i support a Syria where Christians and Shia's and all minorities are free from the persecution and exclusion of Islamic law, something which FSA commanders and extremist rebels alike have set as an aim if they succeed in overthrowing the government. When i see civilians liberated by the SAA, i see them flying Syrian flags, i never see the rebels flying syrian flags, they fly the flags of extremist groups etc. When towns are liberated, they put the Syrian flag up upon a clocktower, clerics from the town are welcoming of the SAA, the rebels occupy towns and proceed to loot them and terrorise the population, aswell as putting them at risk, they also engage in scorched earth policies of burning crops in and around towns out of sheer spite. The rebels are nasty pieces of work for the most part.

    And off the point. Why, in every rebel video, do they scream 'allahu akbar'? Yet in Syrian videos there is no screaming of the phrase, both sides are predominantly muslim, and both believe in Allah, why does one side scream the phrase yet the other doesnt?
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Have you ever participated in a Secret Santa?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.