Syria: The "Rebels" Are Terrorists

[RedStar]

Advocating murder is sick. See a shrink and get it fixed.

The rebels are violent. Their group is responsible for the unrest in Syria. Wanting them to get punished is not 'murder'. Quit judging people unfairly.

Apparently, it's "murder" when Assad does it but not murder when the rebels do it. Assad's government is under attack. He responds with force. As would any government.

 

[RedStar]

All I see is that we are steadily seeing a replacement of secular polities with religious political groups. So the aim appears to be to protect leaders like Saud and the Emiratis, while replacing the Gaddhafis and Assads. What would be achieved by supporting Islamists and Islamist regimes in the ME? If the aim is long term instability it is incredibly shortsighted - the secularists will migrate and the countries all unite under the Islamist banner. So its something else. Saudi Arabia and Turkey are both joined at the hip when it comes to Kurds [note that both are also currently run by Islamist regimes] With Egypt given over to the brotherhood and Syria falling into their hands as well, it would seem that the desired outcome is a pro-Islamist regime in all the major countries in the ME Not sure what that is supposed to achieve

According to Bells, "freedom and democracy"! Yay!

 

[Aqueous Id]

Norse don't even bother. They'll deny reality and continue their bullshit propaganda even though you are Syrian and clearly know what you are talking about.

And you're - what - Cuban? Which is why you were commenting on Batista?

"To know what one is talking about" in this matter is to possess a US passport with its admonishments against travel to Syria, and to collect the images of sites like Hamas with their bombed out homes. The evidence is everywhere. To deny best evidence in order to perpetuate a lie is propaganda. So far that's all you've offered, besides cowering away from my remarks above (p.4) which have decimated your ludicrous appeal to hatred and violence.

 

[RedStar]

And you're - what - Cuban? Which is why you were commenting on Batista?

I'm Russian.

"To know what one is talking about" in this matter is to possess a US passport with its admonishments against travel to Syria, and to collect the images of sites like Hamas with their bombed out homes. The evidence is everywhere. To deny best evidence in order to perpetuate a lie is propaganda. So far that's all you've offered, besides cowering away from my remarks above (p.4) which have decimated your ludicrous appeal to hatred and violence.

Except you clearly don't know, and don't take into account, the concerns of all the Syrian people who do support Assad; you don't take into account the damage the rebels have caused, which Assad is responding to in turn; you don't take into account the fact that the United States is condemning Syria while allying itself with Saudi Arabia; and you apparently don't take into account all the evidence thus far presented that Islamic extremists and foreign powers are on the ground in Syria adding to the unrest.

You're basically the typical American idealist. Apparently you know more about what's going on in Syria than Syrian people do.

 

[RedStar]

Here's an idea. Let's see what actual Syrians think.

Here's a youtube channel for Syriangirlpartisan: http://www.youtube.com/user/SyrianGirlpartisan

 

[Aqueous Id]

The rebels are violent. Their group is responsible for the unrest in Syria. Wanting them to get punished is not 'murder'. Quit judging people unfairly.

Shelling civilians is indefensible. At the moment, you have only condemned yourself by advocating evil. My judgment is moot.

Apparently, it's "murder" when Assad does it but not murder when the rebels do it. Assad's government is under attack. He responds with force. As would any government.

No, murder is murder. Any government that shells its own people commits murder, no matter the cause. For you to continue to deny this is sick.

 

[RedStar]

Shelling civilians is indefensible. At the moment, you have only condemned yourself by advocating evil. My judgment is moot.

"Advocating evil"? Now I know this debate is futile, when you bring your one-sided moralism into it.

Again, let's be consistent, O' USA, and condemn Saudi Arabia. But they don't. How convenient that they don't condemn a friendly regime.

No, murder is murder. Any government that shells its own people commits murder, no matter the cause. For you to continue to deny this is sick.

No, I agree, it is. But the alternative is to let the "rebels" win. A precision strike team apparently won't work.

I'd like to take this opportunity to remind you that in the "War on Terrorism", the USA routinely killed civilians in Pakistan as "collateral damage" with the Drone strikes.

 

[Aqueous Id]

I'm Russian.

Maybe you are and maybe you aren't. You exhibit Western attitudes and speech. Even if you ever lived there, your own national identity is indistinct. Perhaps you are Russian in your mind.

Except you clearly don't know, and don't take into account, the concerns of all the Syrian people who do support Assad;

Time will tell how many freely support him and how many are worried abut the consequences of voicing their dissidence. What is clear is that you are not only naive about the safety and security of Syria, but you're buying all the pro-Assad propaganda that's for sale.

you don't take into account the damage the rebels have caused,

Damage? The response to "damage" is to shell his own villages? It's you that fail to take into account the scale of harm. And you continue to wallow in contradictions. You assail Islamic fundamentalism, but support the tyrant who is in league with the Mother of All Theocracies Iran.

which Assad is responding to in turn;

He responding to any challenge to his maniacal grip on power. One man has controlled the destiny of millions for decades, and has done so by atrocity.

you don't take into account the fact that the United States is condemning Syria while allying itself with Saudi Arabia;

No I just don't care about the external facts. The subject here is terror in Syria. You started this, but can't finish it.

and you apparently don't take into account all the evidence thus far presented that Islamic extremists and foreign powers are on the ground in Syria adding to the unrest.

Irrelevant. The subject is terror in Syrian.

You're basically the typical American idealist. Apparently you know more about what's going on in Syria than Syrian people do.

You know nothing about me or what I know. So far the only ideals I have posited are the rules of war concerning governments versus their civilian populations. That's by international accord, so equating this to idealism is bogus. It is you who have brought a boatload of tired ideals and of the worst kind, outdated (Batista? Lenin?) and advocating for carnage and destruction for the survival of enemy of the West, simply because it pleases you, a pleasure that is without remorse for his victims. That's not only idealism, but it's of the psychopathic variety.

 

[RedStar]

Maybe you are and maybe you aren't. You exhibit Western attitudes and speech. Even if you ever lived there, your own national identity is indistinct. Perhaps you are Russian in your mind.

Woah, that sounded deep, bro.

Time will tell how many freely support him and how many are worried abut the consequences of voicing their dissidence. What is clear is that you are not only naive about the safety and security of Syria, but you're buying all the pro-Assad propaganda that's for sale.

Probably. But considering all news is propaganda and pretty much everything political is propaganda, the statement "you're buying all the pro-Assad propaganda for sale" is as meaningless as the statement "you are buying all the pro-America/pro-rebel news for sale".

Damage? The response to "damage" is to shell his own villages? It's you that fail to take into account the scale of harm. And you continue to wallow in contradictions. You assail Islamic fundamentalism, but support the tyrant who is in league with the Mother of All Theocracies Iran.

A strategic partnership, to be sure, much like the USA and Saudi Arabia, I imagine. Hmm. You point out Assad's hypocrisy here, yet ignore all the hypocrisy I've pointed out.

He responding to any challenge to his maniacal grip on power. One man has controlled the destiny of millions for decades, and has done so by atrocity.

Lol. You'd be good at writing epics.

No I just don't care about the external facts. The subject here is terror in Syria. You started this, but can't finish it.

Of course you don't care about external facts when they demonstrate what bullshit the US foreign policy and Syrian "uprising" is.

Irrelevant. The subject is terror in Syrian.

Very relevant. It calls into question the reliability of the parties involved.

You know nothing about me or what I know. So far the only ideals I have posited are the rules of war concerning governments versus their civilian populations. That's by international accord, so equating this to idealism is bogus.

Convenient that the US ignores these international laws when it feels the need.

It is you who have brought a boatload of tired ideals and of the worst kind, outdated (Batista? Lenin?) and advocating for carnage and destruction for the survival of enemy of the West, simply because it pleases you, a pleasure that is without remorse for his victims. That's not only idealism, but it's of the psychopathic variety.

I see. So you present an ultimatum; either I agree with you, or I'm a "psychopath". Sorry, you are not God and you do not determine right and wrong. In my opinion, your sickening imperialist ideals that feel the need to intervene in every country are sick and psychopathic, without remorse for the victims. That's not only idealism, but it's of the psychopathic variety.

 

[Aqueous Id]

"Advocating evil"? Now I know this debate is futile, when you bring your one-sided moralism into it.

Not one-sided, as I have repeatedly mentioned the rules of war, which are multilateral accords. And not moralism, but accords.

Again, let's be consistent, O' USA, and condemn Saudi Arabia. But they don't. How convenient that they don't condemn a friendly regime.

You are skirting your own OP. The topic is terror in Syria.

No, I agree, it is.

Ah, now you agree Assad is a murderer. A fatal admission that destroys your whole premise.

But the alternative is to let the "rebels" win.

The alternative is democracy.

A precision strike team apparently won't work.

That's supposed to be a justification for slaughtering villagers with haphazard shelling?

I'd like to take this opportunity to remind you that in the "War on Terrorism", the USA routinely killed civilians in Pakistan as "collateral damage" with the Drone strikes.

Here you are engaging in blame-shifting while minimizing victim impact. It's the same psychopathy demonstrated by Norsefire.

 

[RedStar]

Not one-sided, as I have repeatedly mentioned the rules of war, which are multilateral accords. And not moralism, but accords.

And when the US and her allies start following international law, I'll care.

Ah, now you agree Assad is a murderer. A fatal admission that destroys your whole premise.

Nay. Assad is a killer. The rebels are killers. The United States is a killer. Governments are killers. I imagine you are either naive, or just being intellectually dishonest here.

The alternative is democracy.

If it were that easy. The alternative is leave Syria alone and let the Syrian people deal with this themselves.

That's supposed to be a justification for slaughtering villagers with haphazard shelling?

It's the justification the United States uses in Pakistan, so I guess it's good enough by your own standards.

Here you are engaging in blame-shifting while minimizing victim impact. It's the same psychopathy demonstrated by Norsefire.

I'm actually starting to get really personally offended with this "psychopathy" accusation. Again, I can easily call you the psychopath for supporting a group of murderers (the rebels).

No. My point in bringing up the US actions in Pakistan is destroying the credibility of the United States in condemning Syria. Stop being intellectually dishonest. Again, why is it that the USA gets to do this, but when Assad does it, it's "murder"? Here, you are engaging in more one-sided moralism, completely ignoring the material facts.

You're a pyschopath.

 

[Aqueous Id]

And when the US and her allies start following international law, I'll care.

You are skirting your own OP which is terror in Syria. The day you start to care about oppression and atrocity wherever it occurs, regardless of political ideals, is the day you begin to show rehabilitation from the naive idealism that advocates murderous dictatorships.

Nay. Assad is a killer.

Admission noted. Now follow through, and state you do not advocate Assad's campaign of terror on Syrians. Then you wil finally get around to addressing your own OP.

The rebels are killers.

We see no crumbled buildings at the hands of rebels. And their recent actions (executions) are by a minority of criminals. The rebel population, as a whole, has been beaten into submission for decades by totalitarian rule and atrocity. You make the naive assumption that a huge crowd are responsible for the crimes of a minority. It's a common fallacy, generalizing from the particular to the whole. Fatal logic.

The United States is a killer.

So open a thread on that topic. You're trolling your own topic - red herring.

Governments are killers.

Earlier you were expounding the virtues of Switzerland, and the safety and security of Syria. Another contradiction.

I imagine you are either naive, or just being intellectually dishonest here.

A bald assertion unsupported by fact.

leave Syria alone and let the Syrian people deal with this themselves.

You have said nothing about the parallels in North Africa. When left to the bully with the firepower you get an Iran, a North Korea, a (OK: Stalinist) Russia, not to mention all the third world atrocities under brutal dictators during the Cold War. The intervention in Libya appears to have mitigated the carnage. There is a time and a place to stand up for the underdogs. And this is one of them.

It's the justification the United States uses in Pakistan, so I guess it's good enough by your own standards.

You will notice I have said nothing to advocate US intervention so far, except in North Africa. "My standards" remain the rules of war, the international human rights accords, and the same standards used to measure Assad for his material support of global terror (getting back to the OP).

I'm actually starting to get really personally offended with this "psychopathy" accusation.

Defensiveness is another attribute.

Again, I can easily call you the psychopath for supporting a group of murderers (the rebels).

I'm not supporting any murderers. I'm supporting the vast number of people in rebellion who had not killed anyone, until you painted them as such by gross generalization.

No. My point in bringing up the US actions in Pakistan is destroying the credibility of the United States in condemning Syria.

The US began condemning Syria since Bhutto (Zulfikar) was running Pakistan. Having found and killed Bin Laden in Pakistan has given the US credibility.

Stop being intellectually dishonest.

Another bald allegation without supporting facts.

Again, why is it that the USA gets to do this, but when Assad does it, it's "murder"?

Because the USA is not the topic of this thread. Nor is the US shelling its own towns.

Here, you are engaging in more one-sided moralism, completely ignoring the material facts.

Prove how multilateral accords are either of those. I have brought this forward, and you have admitted to it (finally).

You're a pyschopath.

Unlike you, I'm not minimizing the victims of terror in Syria. It would be the first element of such a claim.

 

[Bells]

All I see is that we are steadily seeing a replacement of secular polities with religious political groups. So the aim appears to be to protect leaders like Saud and the Emiratis, while replacing the Gaddhafis and Assads. What would be achieved by supporting Islamists and Islamist regimes in the ME? If the aim is long term instability it is incredibly shortsighted - the secularists will migrate and the countries all unite under the Islamist banner. So its something else. Saudi Arabia and Turkey are both joined at the hip when it comes to Kurds [note that both are also currently run by Islamist regimes] With Egypt given over to the brotherhood and Syria falling into their hands as well, it would seem that the desired outcome is a pro-Islamist regime in all the major countries in the ME Not sure what that is supposed to achieve

Do you actually think Assad is better?

No, really?

I have to ask, what do you think will be achieved by supporting Assad? The man promised reforms for how many years and has delivered nothing and there is no sign that things are about to change. When it gets to the point where you are ordering the murders of peaceful protesters because they dare to criticise your regime, then really, I would say that it is high time to ask what could possibly be achieved by supporting his rule.. a rule that allows no political opposition and where elections are not open and free. What we have seen from Assad is further restrictions and repression of Syria's population.

 

[Captain Kremmen]

The rebels oppose Assad, who has links with Russia and Iran, therefore they are Good.
Imagine them in white hats. Hurrah!
Assad is bad. He has a Black Hat. Boooooh!
Cowboys and Indians.

 

[RedStar]

More proof that the "Free Syrian Army" is a sectarian, terrorist organization.

The BBC in its coverage of Syria is clearly biased against the government of Bashar al-Assad. In fairness to the BBC this organization is not alone because the endless negativity of secular Syria under the current government is blamed for every ill under the sky. However, for once this news agency reported the cleansing of the Shia in Damascus by forces of the so-called Free Syrian Army (FSA), which in essence is a terrorist and mercenary organization.

Once more the FSA which is supported by a wide array of nations including America, the United Kingdom, France, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar, and by others doing the bidding of the axis of America and Saudi Arabia, began cleansing Iraqi Shia Muslims in Damascus when they entered the capital city. This is clear evidence once more that Christians, Alawites, the Shia and others have much to fear from the wanton violence of the FSA.

It must be stated clearly that Iraqi refugees never fled Damascus when under the full control of the Syrian Army and the leadership of Bashar al-Assad. On the contrary, various faith groups from Iraq were given sanctuary in secular Syria. These refugees in vast numbers fled the vacuum unleashed by America in Iraq. Therefore, Syria under Bashar al-Assad took in Catholics, Orthodox Christians, Shia Muslims, Sunni Muslims, Shabaks, Yazidis, and any Iraqi national fleeing the chaos of this country. Of course, the above refugees did not desire to flee to Saudi Arabia and Turkey. With regards to Turkey this applies to past history related to the massacre of 1.5 million Armenians, Greek Orthodox, Assyrian Christians and other minorities in the early part of the twentieth century.

http://moderntokyotimes.com/2012/07...e-fsa-cleansing-the-shia-christians-refugees/

Care to comment on that, Bells? Or will you ignore all the evidence, yet again, and continue with your one-sided assertions?

 

[spidergoat]

Comment on what? The essay you cited was itself a commentary, not a journalist's report. The only evidence seems to be a flyer, which may or may not have been printed by the rebels, and some biased accusations by the Russian press. If the Christians generally supported Assad in the past, it's not surprising that they would fear reprisals. Whether this has anything to do with discrimination based on religion is another question.

 

[quadraphonics]

Care to comment on that, Bells? Or will you ignore all the evidence, yet again, and continue with your one-sided assertions?

 

[RedStar]

Comment on what? The essay you cited was itself a commentary, not a journalist's report. The only evidence seems to be a flyer, which may or may not have been printed by the rebels, and some biased accusations by the Russian press. If the Christians generally supported Assad in the past, it's not surprising that they would fear reprisals. Whether this has anything to do with discrimination based on religion is another question.

Why is it "biased" if it's a Russian source and somehow entirely legitimate and "fair and balanced" when it's a pro-Western source? I'm sick of your intellectual double standards and dishonesty.

Al-Qaida confirmed to be involved in Syria (again)

For the first time, the British Foreign Minister, William Hague, acknowledged Monday before the House of Commons that the group Al-Qaeda has carried out terrorist operations in Syria.

"We have reason to believe that terrorist groups affiliated with al-Qaeda have committed attacks designed to increase the violence, with serious implications for international security," said Hague.

http://english.pravda.ru/world/asia/17-06-2012/121401-al_qaeda_syria-0/

 

[RedStar]

Alawite Filmmaker Assassinated

Alawite filmmaker assassinated in Damascus
August 07, 2012 03:25 PM
Agence France Presse
A+ A-

DAMASCUS: An Alawite film director was assassinated near his home on the outskirts of Damascus, Syria's General Cinema Institute said on Tuesday.

"Treacherous hands assassinated" Bassam Mohieddin on Sunday, the institute said in a statement, adding the killing took place in Jdaidet Artuz, scene of recent clashes between troops and rebels.

Rami Abdel Rahman, director of the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, confirmed the assassination.

Born in 1955 in the coastal city of Tartus, Mohieddin held an MA in filmmaking and television from the National Academy of Film and Theatre Arts in Sofia, Bulgaria.

Mohieddin was a member of the Alawite offshoot of Shitte Islam to which President Bashar al-Assad belongs. The majority of Syria's population is Sunni Muslim.

Rights watchdogs have expressed fears that the Syrian uprising -- in which more than 21,000 people have been killed since March 2011 -- is becoming increasingly sectarian.

Read more: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Mi...r-assassinated-in-damascus.ashx#ixzz22u5BM9GM
(The Daily Star :: Lebanon News :: http://www.dailystar.com.lb)

Please enlighten me, O' Civilized Peoples of the West, on how this "uprising" is truly about freedom and democracy for all! We, the less civilized barbaric peoples, would love to learn.

 

[RedStar]

Huge Pro-Assad Rally in Sydney, Australia

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=9c2_1344211807

The mainstream media would like to paint this as "Assad vs every other Syrian", but it's really not. There are probably as many, if not more, Syrians that support Assad as oppose him. And as for me, I don't support Assad because I actually like the guy. I support him because I oppose the rebels that much.