Myth and Facts about Syrian war

[Sargon of Akkad]

yes, and are you a Ikhwan and morsi fanboy as well or is general el-Sisi the true democratically elected president who represents the will of the majority sunni population ?

btw, I like him, Saddam and Gaddafi were also so much better then what we have now, and Assad is a much better option than handing over Syria to the islamists.

strongmen are good for that part of the world, and speaking off, I hope Trump wins and allies with Putin to end the war in Syria.

You missed the point completely. The point was that had Mubarak not stepped down and tried to imitate Bashar, Egypt would likely have been several times worse of today. In a worst case scenario there might have been a civil war in Egypt today that would have resembled the one in Syria. Instead Mubarak left voluntarily eventually. Same story in Tunisia with Ben Ali.

If Al-Assad had done the same, when most Syrians were clearly demanding his exit, there would be no terrorism in Syria today.

Speaking about terrorism the Al-Assad regime was the greatest supporter of Al-Qaeda and the insurgency in Iraq against the Americans along with Iran who supported all the Shia groups.

Not to say that father (Hafiz) and son (Bashar) have been terrorizing Syrians for the past 40 years. Syria had for decades the highest amount of political prisoners and this is even more the case today. It was one of the most oppressive regimes in the entire world. Clouded in "secularism". North Korea is also secular by the way and so were/are all the insane dictators in Central Asia and Africa. You know those that created one of the largest genocides in a few months time (Rwanda) or those who boil people alive (Uzbekistan). The list is VERY long.

In fact in the ME/Muslim world alone the worst dictators were secular. From Saddam to Suharto.

The only reason why you support Al-Assad is because you are most likely against Arabs and Muslims. I would do the same if I were an anti-Muslim/Arab Indian. Your support has nothing to do with ground realities or concerns for Syrians or human rights, I am afraid. Let alone terrorism which Assad is the greatest source of by far.

The start of the whole mess was Syrians protesting vs Assad during the Arab Spring.
This was put down by Assads security forces.
Only after that states like Iran, KSA/Gulf States, Hezbollah, Russia and the US (half heartedly) started to meddle.
You want to blame Syrians for getting rid of a dictatorship, that already before the revolt
had been mass murdering its own citizens?

Exactly but let us reduce it to a Western/Zionist/Arab/Turkish conspiracy. Millions of Syrians all across the country just ventured outside to protest (something illegal in Syria unless government approved as part of propaganda rallies) back in late 2010 and early 2011. The largest protests in the Arab world after Egypt. KSA was behind it all along with the numerous Saudi Arabian diaspora in Syria! The late King Abdullah, who was a close friend of Bashar BTW (House of Saud and the House of Assad - lol have intermarried) was the mastermind.

I guess if you are one of the worst dictators in the world and PART of your opposition is composed by "Islamists" you have carte blanche to kill as many people as possible and to be the undisputed terrorist number 1 (by far). Just because. Makes sense.

Let us reduce the Syrian civil war into the absurd logic of either Al-Assad regime (complete shit) or ISIS/Al-Nusra (complete shit). Because there are NO other options, right?

No wonder that the world is dominated by morons.

 

[CBU-105]

You missed the point completely. The point was that had Mubarak not stepped down and tried to imitate Bashar, Egypt would likely have been several times worse of today. In a worst case scenario there might have been a civil war in Egypt today that would have resembled the one in Syria. Instead Mubarak left voluntarily eventually. Same story in Tunisia with Ben Ali.

but here's the thing, even though Mubarak did step down, Egypt was heading down the path to hell with the MB lunatics... until the Army stepped in, and some of it wasn't pretty but it had to be done. Essentially though, it took a back to square one approach to fix it, with a strongman.

as a side note, the Saudi 'government' reaction to where they stand on Sisi and the Ikhwan is also very interesting, but that's another matter.

If Al-Assad had done the same, when most Syrians were clearly demanding his exit, there would be no terrorism in Syria today

bit of a chicken or egg situation that, most accounts seem to indicate that the jihadists formented tremendous unrest and killed a lot of people before it started raining barrel bombs.

or, are you saying his stepping down and an eventual takeover by the army following a period of Islamist induced chaos would have been better than things as they stand today ?

Speaking about terrorism the Al-Assad regime was the greatest supporter of Al-Qaeda and the insurgency in Iraq against the Americans along with Iran who supported all the Shia groups.

not very different than elements of Sunni regimes in the neighbourhood, or wealthy individuals in the area supporting the many Sunnis fighting the US occupation of Iraq.

rule no1 of war is that there are no angels.

 

[Sargon of Akkad]

but here's the thing, even though Mubarak did step down, Egypt was heading down the path to hell with the MB lunatics... until the Army stepped in, and some of it wasn't pretty but it had to be done. Essentially though, it took a back to square one approach to fix it, with a strongman.

as a side note, the Saudi 'government' reaction to where they stand on Sisi and the Ikhwan is also very interesting, but that's another matter.


bit of a chicken or egg situation that, most accounts seem to indicate that the jihadists formented tremendous unrest and killed a lot of people before it started raining barrel bombs.

or, are you saying his stepping down and an eventual takeover by the army following a period of Islamist induced chaos would have been better than things as they stand today ?


not very different than elements of Sunni regimes in the neighbourhood, or wealthy individuals in the area supporting the many Sunnis fighting the US occupation of Iraq.

rule no1 of war is that there are no angels.

I don't care about the Muslim Brotherhood and my logic applies to Morsi too as he could have made it much bloodier and turned the situation into a much worse one. Why is that? Egypt is one of our oldest and most important allies, a neighbor, a fellow Arab country etc. The list is very long. Stability in Egypt is of paramount importance to us. Not only but the entire Arab world and immediate region (Southern Europe and MENA).

MB were elected by the majority of the electorate in Egypt but their policies eventually turned the majority of Egyptians against them and they proved exactly that when they went into the streets to remove Morsi. Just as they did when they removed Mubarak. KSA had no say in that. We just supported the will of the Egyptian people just as we support the will of the majority of the Syrian people. What Sisi later did (took power) is his own work and I do not support that although I like him.

So you don't think that people rebelling/defending themselves after being mass-murdered just due to protesting largely peacefully, does not create unrest and potentially terrorism that gets hijacked by outside forces? Do you not see that the examples of Ben Ali and Mubarak proved your theory wrong.

The difference here is that no other regime in the region supported Al-Qaeda in Iraq. Only a very small minority of private citizens did in the regional countries.

So it is actually karma that Al-Assad is now facing the same terrorists that he was supporting heavily just a few years before war erupted in Syria.

Anyway the leaders in our part of the world are worth less (on average) than a beggar. As for there not being any angels, that is correct, but there are bigger jerks than others and Assad is certainly the biggest one so far in Syria closely followed by the same ISIS that he helped create and that would not be there had he not desperately tried to keep his throne intact.

You may wonder if I would have the same opinion about say other regimes in the Arab world, the House of Saud included, and I would as I supported the removal of Gaddafi too who was a Sunni as 99,9% of all Libyans are.

I simply do not believe that the current dictatorships (especially not if they are mass-murdering their people) and previous ones in the region are anything but a negative thing and although there is opposition which is just as bad as them or worse (radical extremists) I know for a fact that most Arabs/Middle Easterners seek the same rights as people all across the world.

Why should it always be a choice between two evils/bad solutions? Can you tell me why is that? This is propaganda and dehumanization campaign that makes it appear like the people of the region can only live under crazy dictators or crazy extremists.

I guess if you are one of the worst dictators in the world and PART of your opposition is composed of radicals you have carte blanche to kill as many people (mostly civilians) as possible and to be the undisputed terrorist number 1 (by far). Just because. Makes sense. Of course such policies will limit terrorism, right? Of course, lol! In a parallel universe maybe.

Let us reduce the Syrian civil war into the absurd logic of either Al-Assad regime and friends (both complete shit) or ISIS/Al-Nusra (complete shit). Because there are NO other options, right?

No wonder that most people in the world are idiots and that the politicians are no different.

Just look at the US. The best they can come up with is a 70 year old Hillary Clinton and a 70 year old Donald Trump. Those two people are apparently going to become the most powerful person in January next year. What a GIANT joke. This is what the world has come to apparently.

 

[CBU-105]

their policies eventually turned the majority of Egyptians against them and they proved exactly that when they went into the streets to remove Morsi. Just as they did when they removed Mubarak.

but in fact it was not the majority who voted him in the first place who went out and protested against Morsi, it was only a tiny elite.

So you don't think that people rebelling/defending themselves after being mass-murdered just due to protesting largely peacefully, does not create unrest and potentially terrorism that gets hijacked by outside forces?

not just hijacked, the opposition in Syria has been 100% completely taken over by the extremists, a lot of whom are backed by foreign players.

so even though people originally maybe had good reasons to revolt, those voices have long been silenced, I think the world today largely sees an out of control civil war with "al qaeda" and Daesh running rampant, no point wasting time with nuance at this stage of the game.

I don't wish to bicker on every point here but

Why should it always be a choice between two evils/bad solutions?

sadly, at the moment, that's just what we have, its either Assad or the IS/rebels.. like I said, the time for nuance is gone, the world has lost its patience.

secular dictators ftw

 

[Serpentine]

Because there are NO other options,

Those 'other options' you are talking about are also allied to Nusra (which you admitted is shit) and take them as brothers. It basically means +95% of opposition are complete and utter shit. So yes, the options are quite rare.

 

[500]

yes, and are you a Ikhwan and morsi fanboy as well or is general el-Sisi the true democratically elected president who represents the will of the majority sunni population ?

btw, I like him, Saddam and Gaddafi were also so much better then what we have now, and Assad is a much better option than handing over Syria to the islamists.

strongmen are good for that part of the world, and speaking off, I hope Trump wins and allies with Putin to end the war in Syria.

You are recycling #1. You see, thats why I made this thread, because Assad supporters are recycling same silly arguments on and on.

1) Assads took free secular Syria.
2) Turned it into corrupt tyranny with shabihas and mass torture.
3) 40 year of shabiha rule led the country to bloody civil war and destruction.

Thats the legacy of ur Assad. How many more people Assad should kill before u realize that it does not work and he should be removed? Rhetorical question.

 

[Steve781]

You are recycling #1. You see, thats why I made this thread, because Assad supporters are recycling same silly arguments on and on.

1) Assads took free secular Syria.
2) Turned it into corrupt tyranny with shabihas and mass torture.
3) 40 year of shabiha rule led the country to bloody civil war and destruction.

Thats the legacy of ur Assad. How many more people Assad should kill before u realize that it does not work and he should be removed? Rhetorical question.

The town of Maaloula, one of the last in the world where they speak Aramaic, the language of Jesus Christ, welcomed the Syrian Army when they drove out the "rebels" who set their churches on fire. A perfect secularist he might not be but virtually all Christians, Alawites and Druze support him.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...n-village-residents-speak-language-Jesus.html

 

[CBU-105]

40 year of shabiha rule led the country to bloody civil war and destruction.

no, not shabiha, more like a planned takedown, all part of the 'arab spring' virus.

ur Assad

How many more people Assad should kill before u realize that it does not work and he should be removed? Rhetorical question.

you have any idea how many will be killed if JFAS and co. win this shitfest ?

 

[raptor22]

The start of the whole mess was Syrians protesting vs Assad during the Arab Spring.
This was put down by Assads security forces.
Only after that states like Iran, KSA/Gulf States, Hezbollah, Russia and the US (half heartedly) started to meddle.
You want to blame Syrians for getting rid of a dictatorship, that already before the revolt
had been mass murdering its own citizens?

Well, removing of him didn't initiated back in 2011 and during the Arab Spring.... and Americans and others + terrorists groups were involved deeply from very beginning .... there are reports of weapon smuggling into the Syria before protests even started besides reports protests turned violent due to presence of armed militia amongst people ....

Since 2011, more than 25,000 foreign recruits from 104 countries (including, for instance, Argentina, Honduras, Cote d’Ivoire, Cambodia and South Korea) have been drawn into the conflict in Syria and Iraq alone, notwithstanding the absence of ethnic or cultural links of many of the foreign fighters to Syria and the Arab world.

Who facilitated their presence in Syria? and why?
​

How US Ambassador Chris Stevens May Have Been Linked To Jihadist Rebels In Syria

Media White-Washing The White House On Syria
http://www.businessinsider.com/us-syria-heavy-weapons-jihadists-2012-10
Surprise Video Changes Syria "Timeline"

And none of those aforementioned countries by you doesn't care about Syrian people or their revolution , we've seen American policies towards the other nations in Egypt, Tunisia , Bahrain , Cuba, ... Egypt's state of emergency lasted for 31 years without any freedom run by a dictator like Mobarak and it was the best ally of the USA, israel and Saudis ...even when Mobarak used thugs armed with sticks, knife, swords and molotov cocktail to kill people both Saudis and American were supporting him .... and when people revolted they hatched a plot and toppled Egyptians' elected government through a military coup ... Bin Ali in Tunasia took refugee to Saudi Arabia ... or peaceful protests of Bahrainia were crack down by Saudis under the green light of American ... right now Yemen and its people are being bombed out by Saudis on the daily basis .... none of the American allies in the region are democratic some of them even doesn't have constitution .. their invlovement in Syria ain't about Syrian people but mostly due to their bigger plot ...

Don't get me wrong , Syrian have right to protests and elect their own government but it's not American, Saudis , Qataris , Turkish , israeles and even Iranian concern ...... they just want to see the region in their favor or in chaos ....

 

[500]

The town of Maaloula, one of the last in the world where they speak Aramaic, the language of Jesus Christ, welcomed the Syrian Army when they drove out the "rebels" who set their churches on fire. A perfect secularist he might not be but virtually all Christians, Alawites and Druze support him.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...n-village-residents-speak-language-Jesus.html

Town of Maalola was fine before Assad. Read again #1. Come on Assad child murderer supporters cant u make up anything new?

no, not shabiha, more like a planned takedown, all part of the 'arab spring' virus.

No it was 40 years of shabiha rule. I understand that you don'd value dignity and freedom. But that does not mean other people are like u.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Well, removing of him didn't initiated back in 2011 and during the Arab Spring.... and Americans and others + terrorists groups were involved deeply from very beginning .... there are reports of weapon smuggling into the Syria before protests even started besides reports protests turned violent due to presence of armed militia amongst people ....

Since 2011, more than 25,000 foreign recruits from 104 countries (including, for instance, Argentina, Honduras, Cote d’Ivoire, Cambodia and South Korea) have been drawn into the conflict in Syria and Iraq alone, notwithstanding the absence of ethnic or cultural links of many of the foreign fighters to Syria and the Arab world.

Who facilitated their presence in Syria? and why?
​

​

There are a couple of hundreds coming from Sweden, and they are all from Muslim families,
and they have gone mainly to join ISIS, sometimes much to the surprise to their families.
It happens frequently that families call the authorities, asking for help to have them stopped.
They join due to Mullah brigades doing propaganda, most often outside any Mosque,
or due to beeing radicalized by Islamist websites.

ISIS apparently works as a flycatcher. Lures morons to Syria/Iraq, where they can be
removed from the human genepole, without anyone complaining.
Should there be a collective Darwin Award?

Don't get me wrong , Syrian have right to protests and elect their own government but it's not American, Saudis , Qataris , Turkish , israeles and even Iranian concern ...... they just want to see the region in their favor or in chaos ....

Noone wants chaos in Syriah, some are power players.
I simply want them to have a life where they bicker about which football team is the best, and nothing more serious.
Assad will not facilitate that.

Let us reduce the Syrian civil war into the absurd logic of either Al-Assad regime (complete shit) or ISIS/Al-Nusra (complete shit). Because there are NO other options, right?

No wonder that the world is dominated by morons.

None of the two alternatives have any attraction, so where find an alternative?
FSA - Free Syrian Army seems to have evaporated as an organisation and
looks like just a large number of pockets of rebels trying to make do, without coordination.

There is little hope, until you have some form of umbrella for rebels which have some form of decency.

 

[Sargon of Akkad]

Those 'other options' you are talking about are also allied to Nusra (which you admitted is shit) and take them as brothers. It basically means +95% of opposition are complete and utter shit. So yes, the options are quite rare.

Most of the Syrians fighting on the ground in Syria (the vast majority of the people), among the Syrian opposition, do not belong to Al-Nusra.

Also I am talking about the 20 million Syrians as a whole. Nobody here is going to tell me that they only see two options for themselves and their country. Those two options being the Al-Assad regime and allies and ISIS/Al-Nusra type of people.

The problem here is that 90% of all Syrians are ordinary people (civilians) who take no direct part in the fighting. I know for a fact that the vast majority of those (millions of them escaped Syria thanks to the actions of those 2 parties) do not wish to live under the rule of either party.

None of the two alternatives have any attraction, so where find an alternative?
FSA - Free Syrian Army seems to have evaporated as an organisation and
looks like just a large number of pockets of rebels trying to make do, without coordination.

There is little hope, until you have some form of umbrella for rebels which have some form of decency.

There is the option of rendering the Al-Assad regime and friends and ISIS and Al-Nusra absolute in Syria. Once that occurs Syrians themselves can choose their own future without outside powers, crazy dictators and crazy extremists (on both sides of the conflict) deciding it for them.

Of course for that to take place the world should put more resources on solving the war in Syria but there is no such interest otherwise it would have been solved long ago. The world powers and regional countries have their own agenda and care more for that agenda than solving the problems in Syria. This is a problem. Syrians and their supposed "love" for crazy dictators and crazy extremists is not if you know Syria and Syrians.

You should ask the average Syrian in Sweden (I know that many have arrived in recent years and there is a strong Arab community in Sweden too) whether they would like to see a Syria with those two parties in power. I can guarantee you that most, as in almost everyone, would not but they might tell you what they would prefer of those two options.

The goal is to remove those 2 options altogether and find a better third option or even better more of such options.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Most of the Syrians fighting on the ground in Syria (the vast majority of the people), among the Syrian opposition, do not belong to Al-Nusra.

Also I am talking about the 20 million Syrians as a whole. Nobody here is going to tell me that they only see two options for themselves and their country. Those two options being the Al-Assad regime and allies and ISIS/Al-Nusra type of people.

The problem here is that 90% of all Syrians are ordinary people (civilians) who take no direct part in the fighting. I know for a fact that the vast majority of those (millions of them escaped Syria thanks to the actions of those 2 parties) do not wish to live under the rule of either party.



There is the option of rendering the Al-Assad regime and friends and ISIS and Al-Nusra absolute in Syria. Once that occurs Syrians themselves can choose their own future without outside powers, crazy dictators and crazy extremists (on both sides of the conflict) deciding it for them.

Of course for that to take place the world should put more resources on solving the war in Syria but there is no such interest otherwise it would have been solved long ago. The world powers and regional countries have their own agenda and care more for that agenda than solving the problems in Syria. This is a problem. Syrians and their supposed "love" for crazy dictators and crazy extremists is not if you know Syria and Syrians.

Already at the beginning of the demonstrations and subsequent repressive response,
there was doubt in most Western press that it would be possible to find a group
that would work for the prosperity of the average Joe of Syria, instead of people
wanting to replace one dictator, with another.

 

[Falcon29]

Most of the Syrians fighting on the ground in Syria (the vast majority of the people), among the Syrian opposition, do not belong to Al-Nusra.

Also I am talking about the 20 million Syrians as a whole. Nobody here is going to tell me that they only see two options for themselves and their country. Those two options being the Al-Assad regime and allies and ISIS/Al-Nusra type of people.

The problem here is that 90% of all Syrians are ordinary people (civilians) who take no direct part in the fighting. I know for a fact that the vast majority of those (millions of them escaped Syria thanks to the actions of those 2 parties) do not wish to live under the rule of either party.

I don't get why you keep complaining, this was never about 'protests' in the first place. And we know if these 'protests' took place in KSA, Egypt, Jordan or elsewhere, how the narrative would be framed against the 'protestors'. You're trying to assert one side has moral high ground, when it isn't true. And also the majority does not side with the opposition. The opposition is full of Salafi's who lower everyones IQ on an annual base, while they receive monthly paychecks from US, Saudi Arabia and other nations, while they demand everyone marry their daughters to them, and slander anyone they don't like as an infidel, on top of that claim to be the 'true' Muslims, and exercising ultimate authority through force, which dispels the whole notion of being 'true' Muslims, as they are largely hypocritical in their practices.

You don't care for democracy in the region, so stop bothering. You're either for a serious revolution across the region or not. And that's not happening anytime soon, as long as there are power hungry players, but at least the government has the justification to remain in power as they came under attack by foreign conspiracies and not the other way around. You should work on getting rid of the Salafi sect, instead, you promote them as alternative to compete with MB ideology. Salafist's are by far the worst, they are hypocritical, they are very dumb and have no logic, sense of reason or basic education, they are also cruel, as they violate Islamic law in secret, they make fatwas left and right that are all inspired by state or foreign state policies, and they claim to be those who must and are upholding Islam, when really they're destroying it and ruining it's image, more so among Muslims themselves rather than non-Muslims.

I would start by toppling the monarchy, then kill all the monarchy clerics like Qurni, Sudeis , Arour, etc .... since they claim to be clerics of God, when all their crap fatwas and religious rulings, teachings, are all intended for personal benefit and benefiting the state government, and not a distinct Lord figure.

The goal is to remove those 2 options altogether and find a better third option or even better more of such options.

That's a Saudi and Israeli goal, along with a Salafi goal, we know what that 'better third option' entails of .... There is no consensus on your 'goal'.

 

[Sargon of Akkad]

Already at the beginning of the demonstrations and subsequent repressive response,
there was doubt in most Western press that it would be possible to find a group
that would work for the prosperity of the average Joe of Syria, instead of people
wanting to replace one dictator, with another.

It would not take any miracle for Syrians to replace the Al-Assad regime with a better regime at all. A regime that reflects the will of the Syrian people. Not only that but the demography of Syria as well.

The main problem here is that the international community lead by the US (Obama) in particular (as they could have changed the cause of the conflict more than anyone else), left the Syrian people alone. As did every regional power and world power and those who did not only pursue their own agenda in Syria.

This obviously created a power vacuum and as this is the Middle East most people will fight for causes by using religion as this is the main motivational factor and factor to recruit people with. Especially in the current era where everyone is using religion whether regimes or militias. This of course is often hijacked by extremists.

However the million big protests all across Syria were not about religion at all but part of the Arab Spring protests that demanded changes all across the Arab world. Religion was secondary.