The syria debate thread

Scroll to see replies

I'm writing a response to this brother.

I just want to ask you something - if i write a short response (not like two pages) do you promise, by my rights on you as a muslim, to properly examine what i am saying, so you may not turn to accusations and assumptions?

I will address your points one by one, but if you do justice to me, and to my points - irrespective of your assumptions, and simply look at what i have to say, then i will post my response shortly.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 81

Al-farhan

Original post by Tawheed

Bro, I always look through things properly, and if something is fishy or doesn't sound right there is no assumption or accusation in pointing it out.
I have not accused you of anything you haven't given me an excuse for.

Reply 82

Tawheed

Original post by Al-farhan

Brother, you have not addressed any of my points directly. I do not wish to say this in such a direct fashion, but the majority of points you have made have been assumptions directly against me. Why not address what i am saying?

I know this is a very emotional topic. I know you may have met people who glorify Assad in the past in your discussions.

But i am certianly not one of those people. I know he is responsible for crimes against humanity, but i am looking at this conflict in the least secterian, least bias, and most level headed manner.

Let me address your points in the other post now.

Reply 83

Al-farhan

Original post by Tawheed

Ok, I await your reply.

Reply 84

Tawheed

Look, it would be better if i addressed one point at a time and we dealt with it that way. Otherwise each party ignores the others completely.

Original post by Al-farhan

1- It is very clear (despite the clever wordings facade and frontage) your stance on Assad and his regime. Also it is very clear that your mouth/fingers cannot utter the clear truths of Assad being responsible for vast majority of lives lost and not even so called isis come close to his blood dripping records.

Brother , i have thought hard and long about this. If you want evidence, look at the ISOC thread. Brother Ideas For Life raised to me the issue of death tolls in syria, and i researched it and thought - Assad is surely doing the overwhelming definite vast majority of these murderers. For a long period of time brother, i spent many of my evenings trying to do research on this. I did not simply come out to brother Ideas For Life and blindly said 'oh no he isn't'. I thanked him for bringing these to light, i was shocked.

Let me stand on record here, my personal opinion is that Assad and his regime are definitely responsible for a great share of that death toll - after performing research. I could argue even a lot of it, seeing as the sophisticated weapons they have, the nature of the conflict, use of things such as 'Barrel bombs'. He and his regime are almost certianly in my eyes and from my own research responsible for a good share of the atrocities that are being commited in syria. I can't lie against that, and i can't lie against what i truly feel. However, i can not say with any certianty that he is definitely responsible for the majority overwhelming of the killings of innocent civilians. I apportion a lot of blame on the shoulders of ISIS and other radical groups who have a lot of blood on their hands.

Do you know my own wife herself believes this? Half of my family are sunni muslims. I lived for a long period of time in the house of my sunni muslim family members. I've campaigned for human rights causes all over the world (i.e for all depraved people, including non-muslims)

Do you really think brother, that i would lie to myself without having any good reason at all, and try to bring everyone here to a more balanced picture?

I ask you, as a brother who maybe yesterday felt - rightly or wrongly- i was another one of those 'assad apologists' to now see that i am just somebody who is looking at this whole narrative in as balanced a way i can. I think people who glorify Assad (a lot of them) are ignorant, rather than evil. They don't see the full picture or put Assad in his proper place. I don't think its because they realize they are supporting someone like that.

Anyway, here are my points for the Syria death toll, i hope you consider it with open eyes:

1. I have done some extensive research into the SOHR (run by Rami- who has not been to syria in over 15 years and runs the entire operation with contacts inside syria from his flat in coventry). The SN4HR (which has critisized the SOHR, and themselves are bias). and the DNC figures. Many of these figures conflate, contradict. I have produced a report on this if you wish.

2. We must understand, like in the Iraq war, especially in the Libiya war where death tolls were revised dramatically - and initially politicized for foreign intervention, we must understand that death tolls, who did what, who is dying, by whom , where, are often prone to extreme bias.

3. Non-bias, non-partisan reports from a non bias and even 'pro opposition' source - Al Jazeera, acknowledged that many of those classed as 'civilians' are actually armed combatants. You see brother, the death toll in syria is estimated if we take all of them into account to be roughly 250,000 people on all sides, including a very large chunk of that from those on Assads. 90-120K of these are estimated to be civilians. I know, because i've studied these polls - even if they are extremely partisan, biased, and very hard to verify. In these civilian deaths, it may surprise you to find that the vast overwhelming majority are men - many or most of whom are within the age range of being armed fighters.

According to the source i was saying from al jazeera, many armed combatants are listed as civilians at times:

Al Jazeera journalist who visited the rebels and is non-bias (or even pro opposition) :
NR: "Every day the opposition gives a death toll, usually without any explanation of the cause of the deaths. Many of those reported killed are in fact dead opposition fighters, but the cause of their death is hidden and they are described in reports as innocent civilians killed by security forces, as if they were all merely protesting or sitting in their homes. Of course, those deaths still happen regularly as well."
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/fea...020166516.html

4. The UN itself gave up years ago on counting these figures - as they could not verify. Many of the thousand splintered militias and groups in syria have a lot to gain from exagerrating. This has happened in previous wars. Each side minimizes their own soldier death toll , elaborates the other sides atrocity or death toll or proportion or blame. Therefore while we can not say it's just a lie and keep a blind eye- we must take it with a pinch of salt.

5. I have provided evidence brother, clear evidence, that it was most likely not Assad who commited the eastern goutha chemical weapons attack massacare. Many, many groups of people are saying this - respected ones who aren't muslim either. Many massacares Assad may be responsible for, but many he isn't - there's another evil and it's hardline groups, ISIS, al Nusra et al.

6. Many of the crimes commited by other groups - especially ISIS go underreported, mainly because of a lack of access to those areas.

We therefore can not simply claim anything for now. There are no accurate sources in my eyes of this issue. For example - one source states Assad has tortured to death over three thousand, and ISIS ten. Yes - just ten people in this entire four year conflict. There are very dubious sources and this happens in almost all wars.

I highly recommend reading this article(from the gaurdian):
What the Syrian death tolls really tell usSharmine Narwani\
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/feb/15/syrian-death-tolls-tell-us

If/When you are ready for me to move on to another point, let me know.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 85

Tawheed

Original post by Al-farhan

Ok, I await your reply.

If/When you are ready for me to move on to another point, let me know.

Reply 86

Al-farhan

Original post by Tawheed

If/When you are ready for me to move on to another point, let me know.

That is quite an essay you have posted tawheed, it will take some time to reply.
But the gist of my reply is that you actually have strengthened my thoughts of your stance rather than change it.
There are a lot of distortions and blatant apologia and anyone who is not blind can see that.
My full reply will follow.

Reply 87

Tawheed

Original post by Al-farhan

It's unfortunate you feel that way. To be honest, there's nothing else i can say- i am being honest to you through and through.

Would you like to cover the Syrian Chemical weapons attack - to start with ? It's just one part of my message, and maybe if we hone in on that, you'll see rather than absolving Assad, i am actually hilighting extremely dangerous groups here, willing to stage things for their own geo-political aims ? And western governemtns/Gulf states willing to jump on anything and everything - however flawed to suit their regime change ideaology and geopolitical goals - rather than actual democracy and the better good of syria?

I highly recommend you to accept this proposal brother, i think it may be the breakthrough.

I hope your response with systematically show exactly what i stated that was wrong or extremely biased.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 88

Al-farhan

Original post by Tawheed

i am actually hilighting extremely dangerous groups here, willing to stage things for their own geo-political aims ? And states willing to jump on anything and everything - however flawed to suit their regime, ideaology and geopolitical goals - rather than actual democracy and the better good of syria?

I see you are talking about Iran, Hezb, Russia and co?
Oh wait no you're not, they clearly are the ones who care about the Syrian people and their rights.
Honestly I don't know how to describe your situation, at best ignorance and at worst hypocrisy and dishonesty.
Ps I will reply to your mega post soon inshaAllah.

Reply 89

Al-farhan

Original post by Tawheed

Good night bro, tomorrow inshaAllah.

Reply 90

Tawheed

Original post by Al-farhan

Brother, i will give you the benefit of the doubt.

When i was replying to your points, i had clearly stated i will do one at a time. Iran and Co were further down the list of your points? Wallahi i was going to address them - but i thought we were going to go through one at a time.

Reply 91

Tawheed

Original post by Al-farhan

Good night bro, tomorrow inshaAllah.

Wasalamunalaykum, inshAllah

Reply 92

TheArtofProtest

Original post by Tawheed

3. A plausible answer as to why Assad released his prisinors is perhaps a political way to ease tensions. A political analyst and journalist as well as a commantator - part of Oxford Universities commitee has stated:

"As for accusations that the Syrians have released militants from their prisons to “populate” ideologically extremist rebel groups that will make Assad look like an angel… You can’t have it both ways – political prisoner releases were initiated to defuse conflict and demonstrate leniency. Were some of these prisoners “extremists” of the variety that man Islamist rebel groups? Almost certainly. But that was the Sunni constituency that the Syrian government was also trying to placate in the early days." Sharmine Narwani.

The release of political prisoners made no political sense, especially more so given the tightly monitored security state that Syria is.

The apparent framing of the release of radical prisoners as a "concession" betrays the the raison d'etre for the uprising of the Syrian Civil War, in which many thousands of lives have perished.

Your attempt at framing your argument from the view that "Assad really isn't that bad" is completely and utterly disgraceful, for if he were to genuinely offer, as you claim, a "concession", then stepping aside should be the easiest concession that he would be required to undertake.

Reply 93

Tawheed

Original post by TheArtofProtest

Hang on, i'm not here to try and whitewash Assad or make him seem 'nice'. I'm just trying to state what i believe to be the balanced picture, i've long condemned Assad for the bad things he has done. I just profoundly disagree with the points you are raising here - even though i can see where you are coming from. You have got to be careful on these issues - your quote is actually a false one, i had never stated 'he was not that bad'. He was a dictator with blood on his hands, and surpressed his people politically, and deserves condemnation for this.

Firstly, i believe Assad should have brought in political reforms far before the crisis. I believe he could have done many things - and should have done these things. His reaction to the protests i believe was not right at all.

Secondly, it is very important to understand the political structure of Syria. There were groups inside syria, and outside syria who had long looked for weaknesses and long sought regime change - even if violent methods were to be used. This is beyond fact and accepted. Releasing political prisinors would make sense to try to ease tension among groups calling for corruption to end and for prisinors to be released - maybe it was a way of appeasing some of the groups. I am not totally ruling out a possibility that maybe he wanted chaos among the crowds, but to say he did release those prisinors so that an armed battle could take place i think doesn't stand the test of coherent logic.

Think about it:

1. Groups within protests belonging to people such as the Muslim Brotherhood, or other political prisinors (part of the dissension against Assad)
2. To appease them, to make concessions and look like you're trying to be 'reasonable' and bring 'reform' he may have - i said may- released this political prisinors for this very purpose.

It makes complete sense. I don't deny he may have had dirty motives, but i just don't agree with it.

Assad would have absolutely nothing to gain in trying to turn this all into a brutal and armed conflict. He knew absolutely full well the Gulf states, the United states, enemies regionally, internally, and Alqaeda In Iraq would be sure to use any destabalization in Syria in order to invade, exploit weaknesses. Do you think he would release people he thought would then seek an armed rebellion against him - knowing full well that would be the opportune moment for those plotting to destbalize syria to do so ? It's absolutely essential to understand the entire geopolitical and historical nature to this conflict.

Many of the insurgents rushing in - and the majority of hardline terrorists groups from ISIS , to Al Nusra, to ahrar al sham et al, were funded by The US and gulf allies , knowingly on the part of gulf allies, convinient ignorance or purposefully by the United states during the 2012 period, and the funding and arming of these groups increased the scale of the war manifold, and destabalized syria further. Turkey, and these states allowing terrorists to flood in through their borders and being so reckless was in my eyes, the absolute primary cause for the tensions we see.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 94

username883747

Original post by Tawheed

Brother, i pray for you and respect all of that,

But it would literally take you ten seconds to answer the following:

1. Do you condemn Jabhat al nusra - tha alqaed affiliate?
2. Do you condemn Ahrar - al- sham ?

It's a yes , or no, or neutral answer. It will take you a minute at most.

I also have university exams. If you give simple answers to these questions, i will fulfill my pledge.

No. When i answer them I'd like to so so with justice.

And what are you playing at? You don't give me your word and then try and put conditions on it.

Reply 95

username1148663

Carpet bomb the whole Middle East, this has gone on for more than a millennium and they are a waste of humanity's time.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 96

Tawheed

Original post by Al-farhan

I have provided evidence from many non-partisan sources that gulf states, and the united states were more interested in regime change and proxy wars - than any democratic resolution for the syrians. Saudi-arabia could hardly call for open and free democratic elections - they are dictatorships themselves! Before 2010/11, many years before, for a long period of time it has always been in the plans to support millitant jihadist groups against syria.

Infact, i have provided the declassified document- a speech from Joe Biden himself- in addition to several commentators who are not shia, nor sunni, and are non-partisan, from ex MI6 british diplomats , intelligence officers, political analysts et al.

Their interest was in causing chaos, proxy wars, blood-shed, and supplying terrorism.

However, in 2012 itself, look at what Iran was doing - please read the report in full:

Iran’s Foreign Ministry has offered a six-point plan for solving the Syrian crisis, while Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi continues to emphasize that Iran would not under any circumstances support a “Western project for the overthrow by force of Bashar al-Assad.”

The plan stresses at the outset that “only the people of Syria have the right in a democratic process to determine their destiny and the political future of their country.”

The six points are translated below:

The immediate cessation of any kind of violent or armed action under the supervision of the United Nations. At this stage the government and all armed groups must immediately end all their military activities, especially in residential areas and cooperate with the representative of the United Nations and the committee under their supervision for the stabilization of the conditions [of the country] and the return of calm.

After the cessation of conflict the provision of humanitarian aid must immediately begin to [be given to] all conflict-stricken areas and without discrimination. In order to secure this important aid it is necessary that economic sanctions against Syria are lifted [and] the ground prepared for all refugees to return to their place of residence.

At the same time as the establishment of calm, comprehensive national dialogue with the presence of the entire [political] spectrum and different social and political tendencies and the government of Syria, the urgent pursuit of the formation of a committee for national reconciliation. This dialogue must provide the way for the formation of a transitional government on which there is consensus. The main obligation of this government is the holding of free and competitive elections for the formation of a new parliament, the formation of an Assembly of Experts for the formulation of a Constitution and the holding of presidential elections that will be set for a fixed date.

All individuals who have been merely arrested because of peaceful political activities, irrespective of group or sect, must be quickly freed by the government and opposition groups. Individuals who have perpetrated crimes must be fairly investigated in a competent court.

The process of incorrect news transmission regarding changes in Syria must end as soon as possible. All the media and media owners must have the possibility to prepare and send news on the conditions of Syria from a secure place and send all the views of the people of this country for the informing of public opinion, in contrast to malicious and discriminatory approaches.

The formation of a committee for estimating the cost of damages and reconstruction, with attention to the damages to the country’s infrastructure. The obligation of this committee will be for the creation of the appropriate modus operandi for the attraction and guidance of foreign aid, determining priorities for reconstruction and the conditions for the participation of organizations and friendly countries in the process of reconstruction.

Link:
http://iranpulse.al-monitor.com/index.php/2012/12/1027/iran-announces-6-point-plan-for-syria/

Reply 97

Tawheed

Original post by Al-farhan

To add to my previous post, while saudi's and gulf states which are infamous for promoting secterianism and division were arming millitants (and its widely acknowledged the majority of those fighting in syria are hardliners, and the moderates are in the minority) Iran was actively calling for elections - under international observation- and syrians to vote.

saudi arabia and gulf dictatorships, being dictatorships could not possibly even call for this. It would look silly on their part.

They, therefore continued arming millitants who had absolutely little interest in the greater good of Syria.

In addition to the document shown here is another 2012 quote:

‘Free vote, sole solution to Syria crisis’

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says free elections and national understanding constitute the only way out of the spiraling crisis in Syria.
“The only solution to Syria's problems is that influential states in the region, including Iran and Turkey, insist on the holding of free elections in this country,” Ahmadinejad told Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan on the sidelines of a summit of the Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO) in Baku on Tuesday.

The Iranian president noted that the ongoing war in Syria would not pay off and would benefit neither party.

Warning that factional conflicts will last long in Syria in the absence of a national understanding, Ahmadinejad stated that efforts must be undertaken to establish cease-fire between the involved parties [in the ongoing confrontation] until national understanding is reached and general elections are held.”
“Everyone should feel committed to the rights of Syrian people. It might be a difficult option, but there is no other way,” said the Iranian chief executive.

Reply 98

Tawheed

Original post by Al-farhan

Brother, i sincerely hope moving forward with these discussions whatever you feel my biases are or are not, you kindly direct the content of my messages.

So far, this has not occured - but to give you the benefit of the doubt, you are writing a response to the post i wrote earlier.

Reply 99

MatureStudent36

Original post by skunkboy

Stop playing the game 'the world domination '. Don't support imperialism. The world powers should stop trying to control other countries. That's a reason why terrorists still exist.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Terrorists exist because they hold a minority viewpoint and try and use force to impose their belief on the majority.