Palmyra retaken by Syrian government forces

Original post by Mathemagicien

ISIS pulling down statues that represent things that they don't agree with? Awful. I'm glad we are on the Rhode to safeguarding the ancient artifacts, or what is left of them. They must not fall.

Hehe good call. These Rhodes must fall idiots are no better than the Taliban who destroyed the Bamiyan Buddhas

Reply 2

Multiculturalism

9

Original post by BeastOfSyracuse

Hehe good call. These Rhodes must fall idiots are no better than the Taliban who destroyed the Bamiyan Buddhas

The Rhodes Must Fall campaigners want to remove monuments that celebrate colonialism, and with it slavery, racism, and genocide.

How is that comparable???

Reply 3

KimKallstrom

14

Original post by Mathemagicien

ISIS pulling down statues that represent things that they don't agree with? Awful. I'm glad we are on the Rhode to safeguarding the ancient artifacts, or what is left of them. They must not fall.

Reply 4

the bear

Original post by Mathemagicien

ISIS pulling down statues that represent things that they don't agree with? Awful. I'm glad we are on the Rhode to safeguarding the ancient artifacts, or what is left of them. They must not fall.

i see what you did thar !!

:five:

there is oriel threat to our civilization.

Reply 5

karl pilkington

Who are the 'Syrian forces' are they Assad's forces. Either way good thing that they are being defeated.

Reply 6

RF_PineMarten

18

Original post by karl pilkington

Who are the 'Syrian forces' are they Assad's forces. Either way good thing that they are being defeated.

Yeah. It's the Syrian army and allies, with Russian air support.

The Assad government has Hezbollah fighters and some Iraqi Shia militias on their side, and I think they may have been involved, based on a few articles that mention mention the government's "militia allies". Not entirely sure about that though.

Reply 7

TrumpCanSaveUs

I hate our governments. I admit my reasons are selfish. I hate what they've done in the Middle East because of the migrants coming here from all over the Middle East. I believe this was all planned including the migrant crisis that is used to further destroy White European people.

Good job to Syrian army for fighting these terrorists, including the so called moderate rebels.

You should never finance, arm and train opposition to a government.

Reply 8

Original post by Habibananna

I don't especially support the Assad regime, especially due to prosecution of the Sunni muslims (one myself). But I do want the country to finally be at peace no matter what, it's just sad it will fall back in the control of the corrupt the government.

P.s. I'm not Syrian but I lived there during my childhood and I had the biggest crush on Bashar al Assad when he was young. So weird.

I really respect this POV.

I absolutely get that many Sunnis hate Assad for legitimate reasons, but I really hate when they then start supporting extremist Islamist groups for their own (religious - supporting a group just because they believe in implementing Sharia, for example) ends, rather than making the well-being of the Syrian people as a whole (including all groups/ethnicities/religions etc) in Syria their top priority, like I believe you do.

I do think Assad has done some disgusting things, but the simple fact is that he is the only viable option for a stable Syria as things stand, and the least bad option of many bad options. I do, however, hope to see him replaced one day, even soon if it would help the peace process - the long term security and stability of the Syrian people are the only thing that matters in this conflict, and if Assad being replaced would aid that, then I would support it.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 9

Original post by Habibananna

Yes I agree with you, definitely, he is the only option right now for a stable society. However, I do believe that it is so wrong not to replace this brutal dictator, the barbarism he has carried out is to such a severe extent.
He's a typical dictator. There's no doubt that Syria was pretty stable/secure prior to the War, which shows that dictators can sometimes be beneficial to the order/development of a country (controversial opinion, but hey ho - just look at the Shah in Iran and LKY in Singapore, both dictators but necessary to develop their countries), but the atrocities he has committed renders his rule illegitimate beyond the immediate purpose(s) of restoring order/safety.

Ultimately, I think there has to be a nationwide referendum/vote on the future of Syria, and this must be decisive in determining who is to lead Syria.

Reply 10

Original post by Habibananna

Yeah, this is perhaps one of the rare cases of a dictatorship which has served well for a country, ultimately for the future of Syria I do wish it will become a tolerant society where all sectors of the same religion can live in peace.
I think this is overly optimistic, sadly. The first priority must be to restore order and stability before we can start to strive to create what you suggest.

And as you said, hopefully there will be some kind of referendum or an election for the Syrian people to replace the Assad regime. I do believe though this was one of the rare cases in the ME there is no blame on outisde interference or finger pointing for causation of a civil war. Perhaps their hopes of a similar arab spring (to their neighbouring countries) or an uprise against the corrupt government failed

I just hope that, in the case of such an election/referendum, all parties respect the outcome - whatever it may be (even if it is in support of Assad), as it would (assuming fair elections, supervised by the UN) reflect the wishes of the Syrian people.

I am glad that we are on agreement on the lack of a foreign cause of the conflict. :smile:

The cause was, in my opinion, Assad's repressive rule that led to the protests, which he reprehensibly crushed, leading to more violent protests. This was fuelled by foreign fighters/aid, and has led us to where we are today.

Reply 11

Reformed

14

Original post by Mathemagicien

ISIS pulling down statues that represent things that they don't agree with? Awful.

statues that represented civilisations greater than theirs. green eyed monster syndrome

Reply 12

intelligent con

14

So an oppressive butcher backed by another oppressive butcher wins a victory and everyone celebrates because it saves a bunch of old rocks? Don't people realise anything good for Assad is bad for the rest of the world?

Reply 13

Original post by intelligent con

So an oppressive butcher backed by another oppressive butcher wins a victory and everyone celebrates because it saves a bunch of old rocks? Don't people realise anything good for Assad is bad for the rest of the world?

You just went full retard. Never go full retard.

Reply 14

41b

5

Original post by Multiculturalism

The Rhodes Must Fall campaigners want to remove monuments that celebrate colonialism, and with it slavery, racism, and genocide.

How is that comparable???

The Bamiyan Buddhas were built by a rapidly expanding military India that was based on colonialism, slavery, racism and genocide.

Most great things built have been done so by societies with some history of slavery, racism and genocide.

Reply 15

AlifunArnab

7

Original post by intelligent con

So an oppressive butcher backed by another oppressive butcher wins a victory and everyone celebrates because it saves a bunch of old rocks? Don't people realise anything good for Assad is bad for the rest of the world?

It's strange isn't it?

Reply 16

Emperor Trajan

5

The Syrian army, backed by Russian warplanes, is reported to be continuing its offensive against so-called Islamic State (IS) after recapturing the ancient city of Palmyra on Sunday.

Fighting was taking place around IS-held towns to the north-east and south-west of the city, reports said.

The army says it will use Palmyra as a launch pad to expand operations against IS and cut its supply routes.

Syrian military sources quoted by AFP news agency said the army was targeting IS-held towns including al-Qaryatain, south-west of Palmyra, and Sukhnah towards the north-east.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-35912302

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 17

Ambitious1999

Original post by Christ Redeems

I really respect this POV.

I absolutely get that many Sunnis hate Assad for legitimate reasons, but I really hate when they then start supporting extremist Islamist groups for their own (religious - supporting a group just because they believe in implementing Sharia, for example) ends, rather than making the well-being of the Syrian people as a whole (including all groups/ethnicities/religions etc) in Syria their top priority, like I believe you do.

I do think Assad has done some disgusting things, but the simple fact is that he is the only viable option for a stable Syria as things stand, and the least bad option of many bad options. I do, however, hope to see him replaced one day, even soon if it would help the peace process - the long term security and stability of the Syrian people are the only thing that matters in this conflict, and if Assad being replaced would aid that, then I would support it.

I totally agree. I do think Assad could stay if some agreement is made on a federal Syria as suggested by the Kurds. Such a Syria would consist of 3 autonomous cantons ( a bit like Switzerland or former Yugoslavia under Tito)

Kurdistan canton in the North.
Sunnistan canton in the East.
Alawitistan canton in the west.

All 3 would have their own autonomy and devolved powers. Damascus would still be the capital with Assad in power but limited control over the other 2 cantons.

Reply 18

Original post by Ambitious1999

I totally agree. I do think Assad could stay if some agreement is made on a federal Syria as suggested by the Kurds. Such a Syria would consist of 3 autonomous cantons ( a bit like Switzerland or former Yugoslavia under Tito)

Kurdistan canton in the North.
Sunnistan canton in the East.
Alawitistan canton in the west.

All 3 would have their own autonomy and devolved powers. Damascus would still be the capital with Assad in power but limited control over the other 2 cantons.

That sounds like a reasonable compromise.

It would allow Assad to stay in power over a 'whole' Syria, which means Iran and Russia could support it, would give the Kurds (some of) the increased autonomy they have sought (and reflect their de facto autonomy), and gives Sunnis the rights they are fighting for, which means Saudi etc could support it.

I think that's a good compromise in all honesty, but I worry that Saudi and the USA have made Assad staying a 'red line', so they might object to that. The fact that Syria, and Iran's, red line is that he stays, therefore, presents a problem - someone is going to have to budge... I think a good compromise could be the solution you outline, with the promise of imminent UN-supervised, nationwide elections (leaving Assad's future to the people of Syria).

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 19

Ambitious1999