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

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by IdeasForLife)
    No. I don't think you read it properly or you don't know Islam properly. One of the two.
    Quite the opposite. You either didn't read it properly or don't know properly about Ahmadi's.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tawheed)
    The Quran can not be read strictly like a book, where each sentence, ayah, and following ayah are completel connected. Some verses of the Quran were revealed at entirely different times, for entirely different people, but still juxtaposed with other verses.
    So the ayah where it mentions people of the house right after is not at all refering to the prophet's s.a.w wives?

    I think this is getting too much. Ok let us say for the sake of it now that the wives are not part of the prophet's s.a.w household. Then why do some shias hold so much respect to bibi khadijah R.A than the rest and give more emphasis and are always ready associate themselves with her, but want to dissociate themselves from bibi Aisha R.A and Hafsa R.A.?

    Now I would never want to dissociate myself from anyone of them. As they are the mothers of the believers in Islam.

    Why do I have a feeling that the reason bibi Hafsa R.A is not likeable by some shias I know is purely because of Umar R.A.?

    The most confusing of all to me about the shia belief is that, they would even go to the extent to say that bibi Aisha R.A. was never truly loved by prophet S.A.W. and that only and only bibi Khadija R.A was his true love. Like come on, are you being serious now? It is like they are talking on behalf of him. (This is from the shias I know around me)

    when I say bibi Aisha r.a was a Muslim so talking about whether she will go heaven or not is not even right in the first place. They say: "Oh then why is she not mentioned among the 4 great women in Islam who will gain paradise?"

    Overall, I can not dissociate myself from the prophet's s.a.w wives as they are my mothers. So I can not have that mindset and can never be part of shiasm belief entirely.

    Now, brother, tell me honestly, do you respect bibi Aisha R.A and Bibi Hafsa R.A (meaning you will say to shias that you do associate yourself with them) as you would with the other wives of the prophet s.a.w and accept them as your mothers in Islam?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by IdeasForLife)
    I know enough to say yes. I read it properly. I guess you are wrong unfortunately.

    What are you? Qadiani yourself? Or a non-Muslim who desperately wants the qadiani religion to be accepted in Islam ?
    Do you mean Ahmadiya's?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tawheed)
    Do you mean Ahmadiya's?
    Yes. Different name for them.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by IdeasForLife)
    I know enough to say yes. I read it properly. I guess you are wrong unfortunately.

    What are you? Qadiani yourself? Or a non-Muslim who desperately wants the qadiani religion to be accepted in Islam ?


    Maybe you would be able to rephrase that question, and then I might answer.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheContrarian)
    Maybe you would be able to rephrase that question, and then I might answer.
    If you don't want to answer then it's fine. I'm not desperate for an answer.

    I think this concludes our exchange.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yasminkattan)
    edit:
    Sorry, didn't realise this has already been discussed. Still, it doesn't make sense to me why anyone would exclude the Prophet's wives from the ahl ul-bayt.
    I have a wife, and she is party of my family. However, there are times when Ahlulbayt is used to refer not to the wives, but to a distinct group of people, a select group.

    We find Umm Salama r.a was not brought along with Hasan a.s, Hussain a.s, Ali a.s, and Fatima a.s under the cloak:

    The verse "Allah only intends to ... (33:33)" was revealed to the Prophet (PBUH&HF) in the house of Umm Salama. Upon that, the Prophet gathered Fatimah, al-Hasan, and al-Husain, and covered them with a cloak, and he also covered Ali who was behind him. Then the Prophet said: "O' Allah! These are the Members of my House (Ahlul-Bayt). Keep them away from every impurity and purify them with a perfect purification." Umm Salama (the wife of Prophet) asked: "Am I also included among them O Apostle of Allah?" the Prophet replied: "You remain in your position and you are toward a good ending."
    Reference: Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, pp 351,663

    Points to raise:

    1. Rasullah s.a.w brings them under a cloak (Hasan, Ali, Fatima, and Hussain) a.s. Why has he used a cloak ? It's symbolic, Rasullah s.a.w is trying to by virtue of symbolism show that this group of people, seperate and seperated from others , by virtue of the cloak, are the ahlulbayt a.s.

    2. There are no hadiths i have come across, where Rasullah s.a.w ever uses this Ayah for Umulmumineen Aisha, Umm Salama, Umm Sauda etc, among them very noble wives, towards a good ending, part of his family, but not the ahlulbayt intended by Allah swt in this verse.

    3. Umm Salama and Umm Aisha, are all narrating this hadith. Why does Rasullah s.a.w not include Umm Salama along with the four others ? She is present among them. She even asks if she is among them, but she is told, she has her position, or to remain in a position, and she has a good ending.



    Another point to be raised, in authentic narrations in saheeh muslim, we find sahaba of Rasullah s.a.w also accepting, while the wives are ofcourse, part of his family, at times, when rasullah s.a.w uses 'ahlulbayt', it does not refer to the wives, but a distinct group:

    From Saheeh muslim:

    Yazid b. Hayyan reported: We went to him (Zaid b. Arqam) and said to him. You have found goodness (for you had the honour) to live in the company of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) and offered prayer behind him, and the rest of the hadith is the same but with this variation of wording that lie said: Behold, for I am leaving amongst you two weighty things, one of which is the Book of Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, and that is the rope of Allah. He who holds it fast would be on right guidance and he who abandons it would be in error, and in this (hadith) these words are also found: We said: Who are amongst the members of the household? Aren't the wives (of the Holy Prophet) included amongst the members of his house hold? Thereupon he said: No, by Allah, a woman lives with a man (as his wife) for a certain period; he then divorces her and she goes back to her parents and to her people; the members of his household include his ownself and his kith and kin (who are related to him by blood) and for him the acceptance of Zakat is prohibited.


    And also a portion of another hadith from saheeh muslim


    "One day Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) stood up to deliver a Khutbah at a watering place known as Khumm between Makkah and Al-Madinah. He praised Allah, extolled Him, and exhorted (us) and said, 'Amma Ba'du. O people, I am a human being. I am about to receive a messenger (the angel of death) from my Rubb and I will respond to Allah's Call, but I am leaving with you two weighty things: the first is the Book of Allah, in which there is right guidance and light, so hold fast to the Book of Allah and adhere to it.' He exhorted (us to hold fast) to the Book of Allah and then said, 'The second is the members of my household, ...." Husain said to Zaid, "Who are the members of his household, O Zaid? Aren't his wives the members of his family?" Thereupon Zaid said, "His wives are the members of his family. (But here) the members of his family are those for whom Zakat is forbidden".



    (Original post by h333)
    x
    This isn't about putting down the wives. Umm Salama r.a, for example, is a noble woman, among the best of the wives and most obidient. But not even she is referred to the ahlulbayt a.s purified in verse 33:33.

    If you can find me a hadith , an authentic one, where Rasullah s.a.w recites the afforementioned verse for any of his wives, i will reflect and get back to you. InshAllah.

    I again stress dear sister, the Quran contains ayah that may have been revealed at totally different times, and each ayah must be referred to with tafseer/hadith to find the proper context and time of revelation.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by h333)
    Why do I have a feeling that the reason bibi Hafsa R.A is not likeable by some shias I know is purely because of Umar R.A.?
    No sister, this is not true. It is important to be wary of certian websites, which have secterian motives, which seek to misinteprete madhabs, either shia websites, or sunni websites, misintepreting the other. Maybe there is one event with the second caliph, but i have never heard of it in my life, nor ever come across it. I have no idea at all about this, it's never been taught to me, nor spoken on the pulpit to the best of my knowledge.


    The most confusing of all to me about the shia belief is that, they would even go to the extent to say that bibi Aisha R.A. was never truly loved by prophet S.A.W. and that only and only bibi Khadija R.A was his true love. Like come on, are you being serious now? It is like they are talking on behalf of him. (This is from the shias I know around me)
    This is not our belief. The prophet s.a.w. showed love and mercy to all his wives. And we shia's consider all the wives as mothers of the believers, as per the Quran. I have no right to say other than what Allah swt said. There are wives who never openly disobeyed Rasullah s.a.w to the extent Allah swt would reveal ayahs about them, such as Umm Sauda r.a, Umm salama r.a, and many of his other wives, which we hold in high regard.

    Lady Khadija r.a by ijma of sunni's and shia's was his absolute beloved wife, no-one will ever match her in the eyes of Rasullah s.a.w

    when I say bibi Aisha r.a was a Muslim so talking about whether she will go heaven or not is not even right in the first place. They say: "Oh then why is she not mentioned among the 4 great women in Islam who will gain paradise?"
    The shia you spoke with has used a bad argument, best to ignore them. Allah swt will decide who goes where. I'm not here to speculate.

    Overall, I can not dissociate myself from the prophet's s.a.w wives as they are my mothers. So I can not have that mindset and can never be part of shiasm belief entirely.

    Now, brother, tell me honestly, do you respect bibi Aisha R.A and Bibi Hafsa R.A (meaning you will say to shias that you do associate yourself with them) as you would with the other wives of the prophet s.a.w and accept them as your mothers in Islam?
    I respect her , in that, i will never insult her, mock her, and when i talk about her, i will do so with the utmost respect. If i were there at the time of Rasullah s.a.w, and i saw anyone attacking her, i would protect her, if my heart is true on this faith. I would treat her with dignity and respect.


    I'll talk about umulmimineen Aisha tommorow, i'll explain the position and why things are as they are.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tawheed)
    The wives of the prophet are part of his family. I have a wife, she is part of my family. However, the Quran when using the term 'ahlulbayt' in this verse, and in other cases, is referring to a specific group of the family members, the chosen group, the group referred as 'ahlulbayt'.

    i'll fully expand tommorow inshAllah. But even the sahaba of rasullah s.a.w understood that the term ahlulbayt does not have to include the wives at all times, sometimes, it is contextual for a specific group, i quote saheeh muslim:


    From Saheeh muslim:

    Yazid b. Hayyan reported: We went to him (Zaid b. Arqam) and said to him. You have found goodness (for you had the honour) to live in the company of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) and offered prayer behind him, and the rest of the hadith is the same but with this variation of wording that lie said: Behold, for I am leaving amongst you two weighty things, one of which is the Book of Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, and that is the rope of Allah. He who holds it fast would be on right guidance and he who abandons it would be in error, and in this (hadith) these words are also found: We said: Who are amongst the members of the household? Aren't the wives (of the Holy Prophet) included amongst the members of his house hold? Thereupon he said: No, by Allah, a woman lives with a man (as his wife) for a certain period; he then divorces her and she goes back to her parents and to her people; the members of his household include his ownself and his kith and kin (who are related to him by blood) and for him the acceptance of Zakat is prohibited.


    And also a portion of another hadith from saheeh muslim


    "One day Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) stood up to deliver a Khutbah at a watering place known as Khumm between Makkah and Al-Madinah. He praised Allah, extolled Him, and exhorted (us) and said, 'Amma Ba'du. O people, I am a human being. I am about to receive a messenger (the angel of death) from my Rubb and I will respond to Allah's Call, but I am leaving with you two weighty things: the first is the Book of Allah, in which there is right guidance and light, so hold fast to the Book of Allah and adhere to it.' He exhorted (us to hold fast) to the Book of Allah and then said, 'The second is the members of my household, ...." Husain said to Zaid, "Who are the members of his household, O Zaid? Aren't his wives the members of his family?" Thereupon Zaid said, "His wives are the members of his family. (But here) the members of his family are those for whom Zakat is forbidden".
    Jazak Allah khair for the effort.

    Please do refer to my other post. I have been through these arguments a lot in real life and til today has never made any sense to me If I am being honest. As I still consider them as part of the ahlul bayt and no valid reasons I have come across yet to not.

    Do shias believe that Al-mahdi is still living and will appear? Because I thought that Al-mahdi will be born.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by IdeasForLife)
    If you don't want to answer then it's fine. I'm not desperate for an answer.

    I think this concludes our exchange.
    Yes, it probably is best that you end this exchange here.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by h333)
    Jazak Allah khair for the effort.

    Please do refer to my other post. I have been through these arguments a lot in real life and til today has never made any sense to me If I am being honest. As I still consider them as part of the ahlul bayt and no valid reasons I have come across yet to not.

    Do shias believe that Al-mahdi is still living and will appear? Because I thought that Al-mahdi will be born.
    I'll address the Imam Mahdi a.s part tommorow inshAllah,


    But about Um.Aisha, here is ayatullah kamal haideri. Watch it to the end:



    Will Um.Aisha go heaven or hell ? I absolutely do not believe she is in hell, for the judgement is ONLY with Allah swt. If Allah swt wishes for her to enter Jannah, she will absolutely enter Jannah.

    The judgement is absolutely with Allah swt.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tawheed)
    No sister, this is not true. It is important to be wary of certian websites, which have secterian motives, which seek to misinteprete madhabs, either shia websites, or sunni websites, misintepreting the other. Maybe there is one event with the second caliph, but i have never heard of it in my life, nor ever come across it. I have no idea at all about this, it's never been taught to me, nor spoken on the pulpit to the best of my knowledge.




    This is not our belief. The prophet s.a.w. showed love and mercy to all his wives. And we shia's consider all the wives as mothers of the believers, as per the Quran. I have no right to say other than what Allah swt said. There are wives who never openly disobeyed Rasullah s.a.w to the extent Allah swt would reveal ayahs about them, such as Umm Sauda r.a, Umm salama r.a, and many of his other wives, which we hold in high regard.

    Lady Khadija r.a by ijma of sunni's and shia's was his absolute beloved wife, no-one will ever match her in the eyes of Rasullah s.a.w



    The shia you spoke with has used a bad argument, best to ignore them. Allah swt will decide who goes where. I'm not here to speculate.



    I respect her , in that, i will never insult her, mock her, and when i talk about her, i will do so with the utmost respect. If i were there at the time of Rasullah s.a.w, and i saw anyone attacking her, i would protect her, if my heart is true on this faith. I would treat her with dignity and respect.


    I'll talk about umulmimineen Aisha tommorow, i'll explain the position and why things are as they are.
    See brother you say completely different things to me as most shias do in real life to me. So this is really confusing and I have mentioned people like you to them and they say they are not shias then.

    Anyways shias or not I still will associate with the prophet's s.a.w wives and his close companions including Umar r.a, uthman r.a and abu bakar r.a. I can only dream of achieving their level of imaan. So would not even dare to speak against them in any way. Hope you understand.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by h333)
    See brother you say completely different things to me as most shias do in real life to me. So this is really confusing and I have mentioned people like you to them and they say they are not shias then.
    I'm a proper shia sister. I'm giving the Ijma, or a reasonably widely held opinion. They might be Shirazi's, but i'm not here to label people.

    Anyways shias or not I still will associate with the prophet's s.a.w wives and his close companions including Umar r.a, uthman r.a and abu bakar r.a. I can only dream of achieving their level of imaan. So would not even dare to speak against them in any way. Hope you understand.
    I understand sister, you have freedom in religion, thought and opinion I not only respect your right to have a choice, i also respect how much you revere these personalities, and so even though i may disagree with them, you will never hear me write, talk, in a way that i abuse them or speak in an ill way.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by h333)
    Sorry if the link was offensive to you brother/sister. But I did not see it accusing another belief as stupid or illogic but it just states the arguments. I don't know how else one would do that?

    But I still stand firm on the ahlul bayt with having the prophet's S.A.W wives included.
    It's fine, when I was reading near the end of the page, it said how the beliefs were 'stupid, illogical and biased'/

    That's fair enough if you wish to stand firm. After all, it's your decision. But can I ask, do you reject the hadith from tirmidhi regarding Umm Salama not being part of ahlulbayt?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tawheed)
    I'm a proper shia sister. I'm giving the Ijma, or a reasonably widely held opinion. They might be Shirazi's, but i'm not here to label people.

    I understand sister, you have freedom in religion, thought and opinion I not only respect your right to have a choice, i also respect how much you revere these personalities, and so even though i may disagree with them, you will never hear me write, talk, in a way that i abuse them or speak in an ill way.
    They call themselves twelvers. JazakAllah khair brother. Same with you but I fear even for you brother and would not want you to disagree (hope that is ok, I only wish you best, as you probably do for me) But that is because I really hold what the prophet s.a.w said about them as important to me.

    Just out of interest, when you say that you would not for me speak ill of them, would you accept it otherwise? Like for me I would say not at all so how does it work with shias? What is with the lanat (curse)?

    As the shias I know they tell me openly that it is permissable to send lanat but not infront of the sunnis or those that agree with them.

    Honestly speaking I get shivers when someones mentions lanat (curse) on any of the prophet's s.a.w wives or the close companions.

    I am busy now, will get back soon In Shaa Alllah.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tawheed)
    I do not prefer a syria run by Assad, but it is a lesser evil to a syria run by alqaeda founded/affiliate,cooperating groups, comprising of people who praise osama bin laden et al..
    And here you have created a false dichotomy. You have stated either Assad or al-Qaeda. Interestingly that's the line Assad uses to garner support for himself. Lets not forget Assad released many of the leaders of the groups you've listed from prision.

    .
    I have made it clear, the only way forward is for internationally monitored elections, so the syrian people can choose their fate.

    Under alqaeda, this will forever be impossible..
    And under Assad it is? Please. Also refer to above about false dichotomy.

    Your logic does not hold up. Ok the Syrian Army contains Sunnis and yet the co-operate with death squads from Iraq and Afghan child soldiers. The FSA contains some Alawis and Ahrar and Jaysh al-Islam co-operate with them? Diversity isn't an argument for anything.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ibn Fulaan)
    And here you have created a false dichotomy. You have stated either Assad or al-Qaeda. Interestingly that's the line Assad uses to garner support for himself. Lets not forget Assad released many of the leaders of the groups you've listed from prision.
    When he first started using it in 2012/3, i can put my hand on my heart and say i thought he was talking nonsense only to try and preserve his power. I heard him say Alqaeda, and i said, why is he pulling the alqaeda card?

    But look at the most powerful groups in syria.

    Ashrar Asham, Jaysh al Islam, Jabhat Al Nusra, and Daesh. These are the most powerful groups.

    All alqaeda founded, sympathizing, associated etc.

    They are more powerful than the FSA, which is almost a fringe group.

    Diversity means nothing, but just recognize the syrian arab army has many rouges, many evil people in it, but also many good people, many sunni's, christians, minorities, people who are just , atleast on the ground , those not dropping barrel bombs, fighting against the likes of daesh, al nusra, ahrar asham, defending villages, borders and so on. These people have family all over syria. They aren't all blood thirsty killers.

    May Allah punish anyone on any side who has deliberately killed an innocent person, sunni, shia, christian, i don't care.


    Releasing prisinors was to de-escalate tensions. But i do believe, it appears atleast, that Assad may have played some dirty tricks. Still, you have a lot of people who are praying to Allah swt for the mercy of these radical groups, and people who can't condemn them.

    If you condemn them brother, then your point holds water. But if not...you would have been calling for their release anyway, and calling Assad an oppressor for imprisioning them?

    Afaik, there were demands to release political prisinors. Clearly, the fact they became leaders of groups shows their support and political effort to try to get them released. Maybe Assad thought by releasing them, it would deescalate tensions, or maybe he wanted them to get armed and justify his brutal crackdown on legitimate protest.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Al-farhan)
    x.
    I don't believe there is any legitimate evidence that Umm Aisha ordered arrows to be thrown at the coffin of Imam Hasan a.s. From our point of view, she tried to stop his burial next to Rasullah s.a.w for whatever reason , but i don't think there's any ijma on her ordering any arrows. Afaik. But that's all i know for now.

    Trawled through shia sources, it's a really grey area afaik.

    I have a really strict policy, where i need to be convinced about the realbility and sense of a story.

    If a thousand people believe it, but there's no real evidence, then i can't believe it. I leave the judgement to Allah swt.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tawheed)
    When he first started using it in 2012/3, i can put my hand on my heart and say i thought he was talking nonsense only to try and preserve his power. I heard him say Alqaeda, and i said, why is he pulling the alqaeda card?
    I wonder why. Perhaps then people would ignore his barrel bombing of civilian areas maybe.

    But look at the most powerful groups in syria.

    Ashrar Asham, Jaysh al Islam, Jabhat Al Nusra, and Daesh. These are the most powerful groups.
    Jaysh al-Islam hardly pulls much weight outside of Eastern Ghouta and the suburbs of Damascus. And no, I'd disagree, JaN, Ahrar are perhaps the most active, most powerful? I'd doubt it.

    All alqaeda founded, sympathizing, associated etc.
    Whats the point here? The entire opposition could be said to be al-Qai'da associated with your logic. Assad is a sectarian death squad associator, and not just that, him and his allies are flying them in to Syria. The FSA didn't invite al-Qai'da.

    They are more powerful than the FSA, which is almost a fringe group.
    Yeah, No. This shows your understanding of the conflict.

    Diversity means nothing, but just recognize the syrian arab army has many rouges, many evil people in it,
    Then why do you pull the minorities card in the next line?


    but also many good people, many sunni's, christians, minorities, people who are just , atleast on the ground , those not dropping barrel bombs, fighting against the likes of daesh,
    What? So because the Regimes side has individuals who are not actually dropping the barrel bombs they are to be given a free pass?


    al nusra, ahrar asham
    Oh yeah, because they haven't been effective against ISIS at all.

    , defending villages, borders and so on. These people have family all over syria. They aren't all blood thirsty killers.
    You can easily say the same about Jahbat al-Nusra.


    Releasing prisinors was to de-escalate tensions.
    Yeah because releasing a bunch of individuals who Assad said were terrorists at a time when the country was in turmoil really is to de-escalate tensions.

    But i do believe, it appears atleast, that Assad may have played some dirty tricks.
    May have?

    If you condemn them brother, then your point holds water. But if not...you would have been calling for their release anyway, and calling Assad an oppressor for imprisoning them?
    Heres something for you, before I issue condemnations (which I've already done in a discussion with you on this exact same issue). Do you unreservedly condemn the SAA, Hezbullat, Muqawwa al-Suriyyah, Liwa Faatimiyoon and the Russian Air Force?


    Afaik, there were demands to release political prisinors. Clearly, the fact they became leaders of groups shows their support and political effort to try to get them released. Maybe Assad thought by releasing them, it would deescalate tensions, or maybe he wanted them to get armed and justify his brutal crackdown on legitimate protest.
    Assad would have to be a potato to think the former.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ibn Fulaan)
    Heres something for you, before I issue condemnations (which I've already done in a discussion with you on this exact same issue). Do you unreservedly condemn the SAA, Hezbullat, Muqawwa al-Suriyyah, Liwa Faatimiyoon and the Russian Air Force?
    What do you mean by unreservedly condemn?

    I'll address the rest of your post tommorow inshAllah.

    Hezbollah, went in to defend their borders, and to fight against groups like al nusra, ahrar, jaysh al islam et al, and had they not intervened, there would be terrorism infiltrating lebanon, as well as a possible and potential fall of Assad.

    Like i said, i would take Saddam before i would take ahrar asham, al nusra, jaysh al islam, and daesh et al. and any group working or considering them to be their brothers.

    Had Assad fallen, it would have marked an absolute disaster. If you replaced Assad with Saddam, or even Geddafi or even George W Bush, i would still not want the fall of them.

    In Libiya, i opposed britian going in to rush the libiyan government with air-strikes. It left a power vacuum, libiya is a diasaster, and that is nothing compared to what syria would be if Assad fell.

    Assad must go, but in democratic means.

    Eastern Goutha , does that not sound familiar brother? That's right where chemical weapons slaughtered hundreds of syrians the day Assad himself invited weapons inspectors to inspect a weapons attack done by other rebel forces, and the same period of time the whole world warned Assad if he used chemical weapons, they would attack him.

    Ofcourse, it can't be Alloush and co staging a weapons attack can it?

    Just to add, eastern goutha and the suburbs of damuscus are very ferocious points of fighting. Jaysh regularly throw shells and rockets that kill civilians. And it's where Assad is. Not to be undermined.

    Ahrar, Al Nusra, Daesh, and Jaysh are among the strongest forces. If you put Jaysh to the side, ahrar are in the top 3 according to standford university. Al Nusra, you once said, were the best armed and supported, and while you changed your view after, i believe they remain one of the most powerful. Daesh we all know, are incredibly powerful.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: February 6, 2017
  • 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
    Brussels sprouts
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • 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.