A conversation with an ex IDF commando

Discussion in 'World Events' started by otheadp, Sep 24, 2007.

  1. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member

    Syria isn't a Islamic Nation.:roflmao::roflmao::roflmao:

    Religion: The overwhelming majority of the Syrian population is Sunni Muslim. Other Muslims include Ismailis, Shiites, and Alawites (a schism of the Shiite branch). Of the non-Muslims in Syria, most are Christians, primarily Greek and Armenian Orthodox. Religious minorities include Druze, who follow a religion related to Islam, and a community of approximately 1000 Jews. 70% Sunni Muslim, 12% Christians (mostly Orthodox and Greek Catholic) and 18% other minority groups including Jews and Druzes.

    From the Syrian Constitution;

    The constitution requires that the president be Muslim, but does not make Islam the state religion. Islamic jurisprudence, however, is required to be the main source of legislation.

    nationalist socialist= NAZI
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    nationalist socialist= NAZI

    Thats the most obvious evidence of your ignorance I have ever seen

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member


    Well it is their education system as enumerated in their Constitution, and what is National Socialism?

    Noresfire seem to expound the ideals of it very well, he talks of the Anschluss with Lebanon, he expounds the idea of ("Lebanon belongs to Syria, in every right and manner".) ( "It's in the best interests of Syria and Lebanon to unite. Lebanon would enjoy all of the benefits of being part of Syria".) isn't that the same reasoning given by Hitler for the Anschluss, and Liberstraum, the lands were Germans live belong to Germany in every right and manner, those are the exact word of Hitler, and the exact same reasoning, and as it seems that Norsefire received his basic education in Syria, from a constitutionally mandated, nationalist socialist school system, from what he expounds what would you call the system, plus the effect that the Baath party is and was deeply involved with the Nazi Germans and Hitler.

    The Arab/Muslim Nazi Connection [Free Republic]
    Sami al-Joundi, one of the founders of the ruling Syrian Ba’ath Party, recalls: "We were racists. We admired the Nazis. We were immersed in reading Nazi ...

    FOR EU CITIZEN: Arab support for the Nazis - is this the info you ...
    They had storm troopers, and literal translations of Nazi slogans. Sami al-Joundi, a founder of the Syrian Ba'ath Party, recalls: 'We admired the Nazis. ...

    Michael J. Totten: Comment on Baathism, Racism, and Terror
    In 1940, in a time when Syria was dominated by the fascist Vichy France, itself under control of Nazi Germany, Michel ‘Aflaq founded the Ba’ath Party (in ...

    Michael J. Totten: Comment on History of the Ba'ath Party
    The Vichy government basically handed over Syria to the Nazi's, who were intent on causing ... This axis served as the pre-cursor to the Ba'ath party. ...

    Parallels Between Nazis Party and Ba'ath Party | NewsBusters.org
    Parallels Between Nazis Party and Ba'ath Party. By John Armor | December 23, 2005 - 21:26 ET. The American press did not side with the Nazis in WW II and ...

    FrontPage Magazine
    The Nazi party and the Baath party express concepts of destiny with a common theme: the superiority of their respective racial demographic over others, ...

    Later Mandate Period, Ted Thornton, NMH, Northfield Mount Hermon
    The emerging Ba'ath ("Resurrection") Party in Syria became attracted to some atavistic Nazi ideas, including anti-Semitism, that fit well with the ...

    D.C. Dispatch | 2003.04.12 | Schneider
    In the 1960s, the party came to power in Syria and Iraq. But those two countries became bitter ... In other ways, the Baath Party resembles the Nazi Party. ...
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Norsefire Salam Shalom Salom Registered Senior Member

    Buffalo, the majority of the US is Christian. Is the US a Christian nation?

    I meant, that Islam does not govern Syria. Only 70% of Syrians are Muslim, and that's much less than the near 100% of Iran or Egypt.

    We have the second highest amount of Christians.

    Non-Muslims are given every right that Muslims are given, except for being in Government, though I'm pretty sure Christians ARE in Government.

    Christians are allowed to join the Syrian Armed Forces as well.

    Nazi? Where do nazis fit into this? Nationalist means nationalist, and socialist is socialist. So...I don't get it.

    As I've said, it is amazing how you, from the USA, call ME a Nazi.
  8. Norsefire Salam Shalom Salom Registered Senior Member


    So, because the schools are Syrian, they are Nazi? That makes alot of sense

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    In fact, Israel is FAR more of a Nazi, extremist terrorist state under religious theocratic control.
  9. Roman Banned Banned

    We are; it's just sickly and weak.
  10. Norsefire Salam Shalom Salom Registered Senior Member

    Precisely, if in fact I understand you correctly, that International Law is biased BS.
  11. Roman Banned Banned

    I'm saying rules are for people who need protection.
  12. Norsefire Salam Shalom Salom Registered Senior Member

    I do partially agree, but then again, when you DO make rules, you need to make everyone happy. That's why we don't care for this "international law". It's done without our consent nor our ability to vote on the matter, therefore we don't give a shit.
  13. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member


    Really? Why?
  14. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member

    Really? Syria became a member of the U.N. on 11/7/1945,


    Here is the vote as recorded by the U.N.

    It does appear that Syria was present to vote on the matter, and as a member of the United Nations should have addressed the matter through the U.N. instead of starting a war that they lost and then failed to let end with a peace agreement.
  15. Norsefire Salam Shalom Salom Registered Senior Member

    Ah, I stand corrected. Well then, I can't comment on the matter, but try no matter how many rules, you simply can't control the hatred generated when your land is taken from you. As would be with you this very day.

    If someone came and took your land and claimed it as their own, and then pushed you to some tiny piece of land to live in poverty, would you not be fighting right now? Even if they had UN approval?

    As for your prior post, why? Because...don't expect people to obey if they aren't happy. The American Colonists are a perfect example. When England taxed them, they got pissed, as they had the right to.

    They were taxed, yet never represented. It's taxation without representation, as in, they were never given the chance to VOTE on whether or not they wanted to be taxed.
  16. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member


    But the poverty came after the Arabs started the war, lost, and then failed to make the Peace that was needed, U.N. 181 would still have come to fruition, if the peace had been made, and the Palestinians would have had a State of their own right along side Israel, but because of the fact that no Peace was made, the Israelis because of security reasons weren't going to allow a large group of potential enemies to move back into their midst.

    The Arabs in their stiff necked pride failed to make a Peace, and in their stiff necked Pride killed the Palestinian State, when they tried to kill the Israeli State.
  17. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Heh, look at all the natives who have relied on the word of the colonials, how peaceful their existence is today
  18. Norsefire Salam Shalom Salom Registered Senior Member

    But, the Arabs had the right to start the war. If your land is being stolen from you, no matter if there is a "law", you will and SHOULD fight back.

    Would I personally have fought back? No, but that is me. I support Semitic unity, but I'm one Syrian out of 20 million

    And you're right, we do have pride. Lots of it. I'm extremely proud to be an Arab. And you should be proud to be American.

    Unless you are saying pride is a bad thing?
  19. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member

    When pride keeps a state of war going for 59 years it is wrong, when pride kills your own children to kill the children of others it is wrong, when pride kill hundred of thousands in useless wars what do you call it?, when pride keeps a people, (the Palestinians) in a state of Statelessness as refugees what do you call it?, when pride keep the Palestinians in poverty and hopelessness for 5 decades what do you call it? I call it wrong, and I call it that the Arabs don't really give a shit about the Palestinians, it's the Palestinians dieing not the Arabs.

    What Right? The land as claimed by you and the Arabs is supposedly Palestinian, the U.N. Resolution 181 gave the Palestinians the rights to what was determined to be Palestinian's Land, if anybody had a right to start a war it was the Palestinians, not the Arab League, it wasn't their land, you your self say the land belongs to the Palestinians, so WTF was the Arab League up to? the Palestinians seem to be well pleased that the U.N was going to give them a state, and exactly what did the Arab League accomplish with their ill conceived war? They didn't destroy the Israeli State, but they sure screwed the Palestinians when they lost and then didn't accept a peace that would still have seen a Palestinian State, didn't they.

    The Land was determined to belong to the Palestinians and the Israelis by the U.N., not the Arab League.

    It should also be noted that the Arabs didn't let the Palestinians participate in the Armistice Negations.
    Making Sure the Palestinians Remain Refugees

  20. Norsefire Salam Shalom Salom Registered Senior Member

    But pride hasn't done any of that. The situation has. Israel has caused us to. Not pride.

    Are Hamas doing what they are for pride? No, they are doing it to get their land back.

    I can't speak for the Arab League and don't understand their ways.

    Palestinians are Arabs. Jews moving into Palestine is ok.
    But when the nation is torn in two, that is too far.

    What right does the UN have to split entire land? That's why Hamas fight.

    You're talking about how we didn't accept all these peace treaties and what not, yet you are forgetting who took the land in the first place!

    The UN gave them the land, illegally, without their consent. And then, to add to that, they offer us "peace"?

    It's like me jacking a lady's purse, and then giving half of her stuff back for "peace".
  21. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member


    You got to be kidding me, they get their ass kicked in a war that they started, and can't admit that they were defeated, and make a proper peace, and the Arabs continue a war for 59 years and you say;

    That is the Same Reasoning that the Japanese use until a 2nd Sun appeared over Hiroshima, only they called if saving face, they couldn't admit that they had lost, and were going to continue to fight until they could negotiate a peace, and the 3rd Sun appeared over Nagasaki, yes Iran, Hezbullah, Syria, and the Palestinians, are going to keep fighting to save face and the 4th sun will appear, this time over the Middle East, only it will be the 4,5,6,7,8,9,10......

    Israel has caused? That is the Pride of the Bully speaking, Israel caused nothing, The U.N. had partitioned the Lands of Israel between the Israelis, and the Palestinians, both were to have States in the Lands of Israel, the lands partitioned didn't belong to Syria because Syria is a construct of the League of Nation;


    Syria didn't exist a a state until after WWI, and then as a Mandate of the French, and the French, concluded a;

    Franco-Syrian Treaty of Independence in 1936, but the Mandate continued because France failed to ratify the document. Syria was granted its independence in 1943, after Free French and British forces regained it from Vichy France in 1941 during the Syria-Lebanon campaign. The French forces finally left the country on April 17, 1946: this day is celebrated by Syrians as "Independence Day" (Arabic: عيد الاستقلال), it is also referred to as "Evacuation Day" (Arabic: عيد الجلاء).

    So Syria didn't become a State until after WWII, and by 1948 it had already went to war. A war that it had no interest in, and no right to conduct under the agreement of the U.N. charter that allowed it to become a member.
  22. Norsefire Salam Shalom Salom Registered Senior Member

    A war they started that was justified, THAT is the part you are forgetting. Of course we got our asses kicked by a tiny state backed by a mighty superpower. Not ashamed in the least myself.

    Again, you can't steal our land and then ask for peace.

    Comparing the two is completely off. Japan attacked the US. Israel attacked us.

    So yes, the 4th onwards WILL appear over the Middle East, as Israel tries ever so desperately to save face and speak shit.

    Of course they did, but again, what right do they have to do that? So the UN can just split up the US now, and you won't do anything about it because the UN said so?

    Yes, after WWII it had already went to war, a war which it had no choice BUT to go to.

    Now, Syria "officially" might've been 1946, but the land of Syria existed LONG before that.

    Like I've said, the Ummayyad Empire's HQ was in Syria.

    So yes, as an "official country", but as a land, an empire, Syria existed long before that. Since before the times of Saladin even.
  23. Norsefire Salam Shalom Salom Registered Senior Member

    And so, what is that argument there? That the French "ruled" us, and then were kicked out?

    What is that argument? Nothing. I could argue the same with England and the US, that they ruled you until you pushed them out.

    So Persia wasn't a nation, nor Greece, nor Rome, nor the Mongols, because there was no UN?

Share This Page