What's new

Syrian Civil War (Graphic Photos/Vid Not Allowed)

Russia killed millions of Russians, Chechens, Tatars, central Asians (Kazakhs, Afghans, etc.); China killed millions of Chinese ("great leap forward"). None of our allies want Syrian people to suffer, especially Turkey, who regularly helps Syrians on a massive scale.

The Syrian sunnis must be very greatful for their 'brethren' joining 'their cause' from all around the world. Alawite areas? Not a scratch. Sunni areas? Piles of rubble. How do you like the 'help' from foreign jihadis now?
 
.
Russia killed millions of Russians, Chechens, Tatars, central Asians (Kazakhs, Afghans, etc.); China killed millions of Chinese ("great leap forward"). None of our allies want Syrian people to suffer, especially Turkey, who regularly helps Syrians on a massive scale.
Oh, you are highlighting the Chinese civil war but If thats the case then same had happened with Americans in past, and after that period of long instability both nations have emerged as strong regional powers, but as the systematic approach of world have changed now , You cannot satisfy regime change with guns and will have to wait a lot to get legitimate status by permanent members of UN but first you need to oust current regime and rebels are not capable of doing that and even If you will fight generations of war then even their is no guarantee that who will come out as victor of this war..
 
. .
Iranian colonel, Gassim Garib, has been given a one way ticket to hell:


I bet he took pictures with Qassim Sulaimani...:lol:

Why are the mourners jumping around the coffin and beating their chests like monkeys? A mating ritual or what? Can't they conduct a normal Islamic burial in the "Islamic Republic" of Iran? Weird screaming too.:cuckoo:

Is that supposed to be the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad (saws)? Rest assured that this was not how things worked 1400 years ago in Hijaz during an Islamic burial.

Anyway one less terrorist/murderer/evil person hellbent on spreading misery in Syria in the name of an evil regime and it's imperialism covered under an "Islamic" garb.

This will be the end (eventually) of any Mullah foot soldier in the Arab world. Not even one of the 100's of volcanoes have erupted in regards to animosity against them. Poor Mullah's and their supporters believe that it has reached its zenith. Little do they know, little do they know….They better not test us further. Luckily for them their new friend the US could/would come to their aid IF it ever ends in an all out war. If not they would be doomed. But let them waste billions, people, their pathetically negative reputation etc. further. The Syrians won't ever forgot who prolonged their suffering once the Al-Assad regimes gets removed. There are no IF's here.

In general the "leaderships" of our region are quite something. We could use a few French revolutions. Personally I would not mind it one bit as long as it could be done smoothly.
 
Last edited:
.
The Syrian sunnis must be very greatful for their 'brethren' joining 'their cause' from all around the world. Alawite areas? Not a scratch. Sunni areas? Piles of rubble. How do you like the 'help' from foreign jihadis now?
As if that was our fault...
Alawite areas have "not a scratch" because we don't bomb them indiscriminately (most of the time.) We usually pick out military targets because 1.) our main interest is to destroy military infrastructure, not civilian infrastructure and 2.) we don't target civilians on purpose most of the time. Meanwhile, Assad bombs Sunni (and Christian) areas indiscriminately and regularly targets civilians purposefully. 99% of the destruction of infrastructure can be attributed to Assad, not rebels or their foreign allies.
 
. .
The Syrian sunnis must be very greatful for their 'brethren' joining 'their cause' from all around the world. Alawite areas? Not a scratch. Sunni areas? Piles of rubble. How do you like the 'help' from foreign jihadis now?
First of allm there are some Alawi villages in Hama, Homs and Idlib which were heavily affected + Alawi areas in Damascus.
Secondly, the casualty rate among the Alawis is much higher than among the Sunnis in Syria.
 
.
Iranian colonel, Gassim Garib, has been given a one way ticket to hell:


I bet he took pictures with Qassim Sulaimani...:lol:
if he is dead make sure he killed many of ibn tayymia followers :rofl:

Chest beating please. I want to hear it Persians as loud as possible....:omghaha:
losing one it doesn't matter as long he killed many scumbags

soon you will see that in your home

Why are the mourners jumping around the coffin and beating their chests like monkeys? A mating ritual or what? Can't they conduct a normal Islamic burial in the "Islamic Republic" of Iran? Weird screaming too.:cuckoo:

Is that supposed to be the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad (saws)? Rest assured that this was not how things worked 1400 years ago in Hijaz during an Islamic burial.

Anyway one less terrorist/murderer/evil person hellbent on spreading misery in Syria in the name of an evil regime and it's imperialism covered under an "Islamic" garb.

This will be the end (eventually) of any Mullah foot soldier in the Arab world. Not even one of the 100's of volcanoes have erupted in regards to animosity against them. Poor Mullah's and their supporters believe that it has reached its zenith. Little do they know, little do they know….They better not test us further. Luckily for them their new friend the US could/would come to their aid IF it ever ends in an all out war. If not they would be doomed. But let them waste billions, people, their pathetically negative reputation etc. further. The Syrians won't ever forgot who prolonged their suffering once the Al-Assad regimes gets removed. There are no IF's here.

In general the "leaderships" of our region are quite something. We could use a few French revolutions. Personally I would not mind it one bit as long as it could be done smoothly.
we are not afraid of death we welcome it like imam hussain welcomed death in karbala
 
.
if he is dead make sure he killed many of ibn tayymia followers :rofl:


losing one it doesn't matter as long he killed many scumbags

soon you will see that in your home

You mean many civilian Syrians (Muslim as Christian), Salman.

He is not fighting for an "Islamic" regime but an evil, corrupt and murderers un-Islamic regime that gives Islam an terribly bad name like certain other regimes and so-called "Islamic" groups in the region.

Not only that he is at the same time aiding the filthy Al-Assad regime whose crimes I don't have to explain to any person that has followed this conflict or knew about his regime before the conflict.

See what? Nothing in KSA (regardless of what happens) can be as violent and long-standing as what we have seen in Iraq for decades or see right now in Syria. Trust me on that one. The most unstable country for the past many years on the Peninsula has been beautiful Yemen but even they have come nowhere near the casualties in for instance Iraq. Let alone Syria. Not even Libya.

Also I would guess that at least 50% of all Daesh sympathizers (real ones) in KSA have long ago went to Syria and Iraq and either been killed or defected and now repent. Mostly all youth in the age group of 16-30 years. I am personally very happy that the filth has been killed. I hope all of them go abroad to fight Al-Assad and Mullah backed terrorist groups. Let filth kill each other and not civilians.

we are not afraid of death we welcome it like imam hussain welcomed death in karbala

Who are "we"? Are you a Wilayat al-Faqih cult follower that is about to go to fight for the Al-Assad butcher to "protect" an imaginary shrine that is actually located in CAIRO, EGYPT?

The ordinary Shia in Iran is a coward. Iranians are all talk mostly. Even most Iranians admit this. They like to talk big but rarely act upon their words. Arab are much more direct and sincere on this front. Now, don't start talking about the Iraq-Iran war. That was an invasion of their country and resistance was to be expected (every country would do the same) and even back then it were the Iranian Arabs that were the most heroic ones by large. We are talking about something else. This conflict has another nature.

In an all-out war against Arabs and Sunnis they won't stand a chance. Neither in terms of numbers (obvious) or religious motivation. Nothing is as effective as religious motivation on a battlefield really. Forget nationalism.

You think that DAESH would be as successful if it was a Ba'athi organization? Or composed of some Farsi nationalists? Wake up buddy, religion remains the best tool for such "adventures" Especially in the ME of course. Much less so in other less religious areas of the world.

What is even funnier here is that the same Al-Assad that is now a "champion" in the fight against Islamism is heavily dependent on Shia Islamists from the region and before the conflict in Syria began he was flooding Iraq with extremists. Yet brainless Iraqi Shia Arabs support him because he is a "Shia" (he can't even pray) and because the Mullah's in Iran support him. Oh, wait the Shia Twelver Marja considered Alawites to be kuffars until recently when they became "halal" due to politics.

This region is a joke. When will people wake up?:lol: Everyone is laughing at this region and using it as tissue. "Resistance" Iran is no different. Forever under the mercy of the West. One wrong calculation and the master will tighten the rope. Too much barking and he will sanction you and make you poorer than Angola (Iran). Sad but truth. But let the Farsi clowns here bark about their "might". Westerners are laughing as usual.
 
Last edited:
.
Why are the mourners jumping around the coffin and beating their chests like monkeys? A mating ritual or what? Can't they conduct a normal Islamic burial in the "Islamic Republic" of Iran? Weird screaming too.:cuckoo:

Is that supposed to be the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad (saws)? Rest assured that this was not how things worked 1400 years ago in Hijaz during an Islamic burial.

Anyway one less terrorist/murderer/evil person hellbent on spreading misery in Syria in the name of an evil regime and it's imperialism covered under an "Islamic" garb.

This will be the end (eventually) of any Mullah foot soldier in the Arab world. Not even one of the 100's of volcanoes have erupted in regards to animosity against them. Poor Mullah's and their supporters believe that it has reached its zenith. Little do they know, little do they know….They better not test us further. Luckily for them their new friend the US could/would come to their aid IF it ever ends in an all out war. If not they would be doomed. But let them waste billions, people, their pathetically negative reputation etc. further. The Syrians won't ever forgot who prolonged their suffering once the Al-Assad regimes gets removed. There are no IF's here.

In general the "leaderships" of our region are quite something. We could use a few French revolutions. Personally I would not mind it one bit as long as it could be done smoothly.
French-style revolutions are fundamentally not smooth. Syria is having a French-style revolution, gone horribly wrong (foreign interventions, etc.), the positive effects of which won't be seen until several decades from now, at least.
 
.
French-style revolutions are fundamentally not smooth. Syria is having a French-style revolution, gone horribly wrong (foreign interventions, etc.), the positive effects of which won't be seen until several decades from now, at least.

What I meant with "French revolution" was a swift removal of the leadership. If you ask me leadership is one of the major problems of the MENA region and one of the main culprits of the current status quo and all its ills. Be it religious fundamentalism or lack of progress.

A society cannot develop accordingly in a confined space. Europe's relevance in the world (minus Romans and ancient Greeks) began when certain movements/changes in the society were given room to blossom in. Although it most often did not occur peacefully but those movements/societal changes eventually prevailed and were not rejected by the leadership of the time but adopted and later even encouraged by them (Age of Enlightenment etc.)

In the MENA anything that goes against the status quo (a status quo created by regimes and not so much the society around them) is doomed to fail regardless of what it is. That's a HUGE problem for progress. Absolute dogmas (much like the rule itself) are ruling and just challenging them is a crime itself. If I published this post in your average MENA country I would likely be in trouble if I was a public figure/had a certain influence or merely was an average JOE in the most extreme cases depending on the context.


Not every revolution ended up as Syria or Libya. The transition in Tunisia for instance went very smoothly and Tunisia is now a model country in the region quite frankly although they have their challenges with extremism/terrorism and the economy. Societal ills are to blame for that. Societal ills that were developed/nurtured during dictatorships.

Similarly the transition in Yemen (from Ali Abdullah Saleh to Hadi) went relatively smoothly in comparison although the revolution was not profound enough to correct the ills of decades of dictatorship, nepotism etc. Time is needed for that hence why transitions are difficult. Especially in a already unstable MENA.

From a pragmatic viewpoint, if Syria, Libya etc. emerge to become democracies and stable countries every drop of blood will be worth it. Freedom never comes for free. I could live with a few years of unrest in KSA if that meant that necessary changes would occur in let's say 5-10 years time instead of 30 years time.

But ok, I am also extremely frustrated/tired with the leadership and to a degree the natives. It's another world for the diaspora.

Speaking about the French Revolution then nobody complained about a few years of unrest (until the accession of Napoléon Bonaparte) as the cornerstone for the France we know today was created back then. Had a French Revolution not taken place the absolute rule would have continued for at least several more decades.

Of course I would prefer to see changes occur peacefully but some rulers in the MENA are willing to kill and do everything to stay in power. I am tired of the sheep like following too. I personally don't owe them anything that a commoner compatriot with the support of the nation could not have accomplished. Rather the opposite, most leaderships in the MENA region (secular, Islamists, republics, monarchies) have done more harm than good although the monarchies have been the most stable countries. That's not to say that they do not have their significant faults.

In short I want to see political reforms. Call it democracy or what you like. The end goal should be for the average man and woman to be able to decide their own future. That's not contrary to Islam, rather the opposite actually.
 
Last edited:
.
What I meant with "French revolution" was a swift removal of the leadership. If you ask me leadership is one of the major problems of the MENA region and one of the main culprits of the current status quo and all its ills. Be it religious fundamentalism or lack of progress.

Not every revolution ended up as Syria or Libya. The transition in Tunisia for instance went very smoothly and Tunisia is now a model country in the region quite frankly although they have their challenges with extremism/terrorism and the economy. Societal ills are to blame for that. Societal ills that were developed/nurtured during dictatorships.

Similarly the transition in Yemen (from Ali Abdullah Saleh to Hadi) went relatively smoothly in comparison although the revolution was not profound enough to correct the ills of decades of dictatorship, nepotism etc. Time is needed for that hence why transitions are difficult. Especially in a already unstable MENA.

From a pragmatic viewpoint, if Syria, Libya etc. emerge to become democracies and stable countries every drop of blood will be worth it. Freedom never comes for free. I could live with a few years of unrest in KSA if that meant that necessary changes would occur in let's say 5-10 years time instead of 30 years time.

But ok, I am also extremely frustrated/tired with the leadership and to a degree the natives. It's another world for the diaspora.

Speaking about the French Revolution then nobody complained about a few years of unrest (until the accession of Napoléon Bonaparte) as the cornerstone for the France we know today was created back then. Had a French Revolution not taken place the absolute rule would have continued for at least several more decades.

Of course I would prefer to see changes occur peacefully but some rulers in the MENA are willing to kill and do everything to stay in power. I am tired of the sheep like following too. I personally don't owe them anything that a commoner compatriot with the support of the nation could not have accomplished. Rather the opposite, most leaderships in the MENA region (secular, Islamists, republics, monarchies) have done more harm than good although the monarchies have been the most stable countries. That's not to say that they do not have their significant faults.

In short I want to see political reforms. Call it democracy or what you like. The end goal should be for the average man and woman to be able to decide their own future. That's not contrary to Islam, rather the opposite actually.
Eh.. Lets just say I respectfully disagree on some things.. I'm for reforms through the system and only through the system. I don't know about others but when it comes to my own country, I consider those who incite violence in order to achieve some perceived 'reforms' simply traitors. The goal of every responsible citizen should be to contribute to the prosperity of his/her country rather than to deteriorating its stability. The end goal for me is a stable country where people have the right to decent employment opportunities, basic human rights, peace of mind, increased quality of life (proper public services, medical services, etc.) All this can be achieved without lawless insurgency, and it's almost never over in 5-10 years. Once lawlessness is the norm, it's very hard for things to stabilize, and especially if you're talking about Saudi Arabia (Iran would revel in the news that KSA is in turmoil and would immediately start their usual strategy of arming and inciting their locals proxies to kill and kill..) Very messy stuff. Reform takes smart strategy by working within the system and not by destroying the whole system and letting enemies achieve their goals on your land. Besides, there's such a thing as destructive 'democracy', but that's only a personal opinion of mine. Look forward to your response lol..


One more point: I believe we should try to make a better future for our children and grandchildren and not necessarily our descendents hundreds of years from now.
 
.
ISIS Offensive in Al-Hasakah Ends Miserably: 1,200 Militants Trapped Inside the City

Three weeks after launching their large-scale offensive in the provincial capital of the Al-Hasakah Governorate, the Islamic State of Iraq and Al-Sham (ISIS) has found itself encircled by the Syrian Armed Forces at the eastern (Al-Nishwa) and northern flanks; meanwhile, the predominately Kurdish “People’s Protection Units” control the the western and southern flanks.

With no outlet to retreat, the terrorist group has an estimated 1,200 combatants stuck inside the provincial capital with scarce provisions to muster up a counter-assault, leaving them at the mercy of the Syrian Armed Forces and the YPG fighters assaulting their positions from all sides.

To make matters worse for the ISIS militants, the Syrian Armed Forces and the YPG are involved in a cold war style battle to take control of as much territory as they can before the other arrives; this has worked out well for the YPG, as they have taken control of large swathes of territory with little resistance from the terrorist group.

ISIS Offensive in Al-Hasakah Ends Miserably: 1,200 Militants Trapped Inside the City
 
.
Eh.. Lets just say I respectfully disagree on some things.. I'm for reforms through the system and only through the system. I don't know about others but when it comes to my own country, I consider those who incite violence in order to achieve some perceived 'reforms' simply traitors. The goal of every responsible citizen should be to contribute to the prosperity of his/her country rather than to deteriorating its stability. The end goal for me is a stable country where people have the right to decent employment opportunities, basic human rights, peace of mind, increased quality of life (proper public services, medical services, etc.) All this can be achieved without lawless insurgency, and it's almost never over in 5-10 years. Once lawlessness is the norm, it's very hard for things to stabilize, and especially if you're talking about Saudi Arabia (Iran would revel in the news that KSA is in turmoil and would immediately start their usual strategy of arming and inciting their locals proxies to kill and kill..) Very messy stuff. Reform takes smart strategy by working within the system and not by destroying the whole system and letting enemies achieve their goals on your land. Besides, there's such a thing as destructive 'democracy', but that's only a personal opinion of mine. Look forward to your response lol..

I don't advocate insurgency or violence against despotic regimes that are unwilling to change at all costs but historically such endeavors were more often than not needed to remove them.

Take Syria as an example. Where opponents of the Al-Assad regime (of all ideologies) supposed to look at his despotic regime's conduct passively all while the regime was killing them and their loved ones? When do you draw the line?

Were/are all peoples of the MENA not in their full right to demonstrate/demand certain universal rights in their own countries at first through peaceful means? I certainly think so.

I consider most of the current regimes in the MENA region to be by large oppressive regimes. Regimes that hinder progressive thinking and development to a very large degree. The sooner most of them either reform or are removed (preferably peacefully as I wrote) the better.

What are the chances of a genuine prospect of real, necessary and profound changes in the MENA in the near future? Peaceful that is? Of course gradually it will occur but how long can we afford to wait? Hell even North Korea has moved forward since for instance 20 years ago although those are tiny baby steps. Insignificant in other words.

What's the point of "saving" a country from a few years of unrest (it's not like our populations are decreasing even during Syria's civil war the population has been increasing if we look past external refugees) when the needed reforms can occur after the end of the unrest (mostly this always happens - take a look at even Iraq of all countries) when the alternative is 50 years of "safe" baby steps? When the reforms are finally completed under this approach that country x or y will be lightyears behind the remaining world.

Totalitarianism, authoritarianism and unbreakable isms are IMO the biggest obstacles to prosperity in the region. They are in my view and many others also the main reason for the increase of fundamentalism. Of course there are many other causes too and it's not just black and white (it hardly ever is) but yes I do believe that non-authoritarian/pluralistic regimes and not autocratic ones are the way forward if you want to see progress at the end of the tunnel. I am by no means a blind follower of regimes.

A big mistake in my view is when people from the region are unwilling to challenge the status quo in any shape or form (I am not talking about violence here) but just conclude that "dictatorship x or y" are at least "my" dictatorship x or y so I have to support them. After all everyone else is doing so. Nah, I don't like that mentality one bit. In fact I despise it and it's a big problem in the Arab world IMO. Of course I am talking about the worst regimes here but in general most of them have traces of such rule.

I don't support the Syrian opposition because I am an Islamist (I am not) but because a possibly free and democratic Syria might force nearby Arab countries to reform. Aside from Al-Assad being a murderous despot that no sane person should support regardless of others being bad or just as bad. You don't have to pick between shitty options you are allowed to refrain from picking one at all. I have chosen to side with the lesser evil in my eyes.
Of course also due to the alternative (continued Pro-Mullah rule). Clearly the so-called "Arab Spring" has been a big failure so far with the exception of Tunisia but that's a discussion for another day.
 
Last edited:
.
I don't advocate insurgency or violence against despotic regimes that are unwilling to change at all costs but historically such endeavors were more often than not needed to remove them.

Take Syria as an example. Where opponents of the Al-Assad regime (of all ideologies) supposed to look at his despotic regime's conduct passively all while the regime was killing them and their loved ones? When do you draw the line?

Were/are all peoples of the MENA not in their full right to demonstrate/demand certain universal rights in their own countries at first through peaceful means? I certainly think so.

I consider most of the current regimes in the MENA region to be by large oppressive regimes. Regimes that hinder progressive. The sooner most of them either reform or are removed (preferably peacefully as I wrote) the better.

What are the chances of a genuine prospect of real, necessary and profound changes in the MENA in the near future? Peaceful that is? Of course gradually it will occur but how long can we afford to wait? Hell even North Korea has moved forward since for instance 20 years ago although those are tiny baby steps. Insignificant in other words.

What's the point of "saving" a country from a few years of unrest (it's not like our populations are decreasing even during Syria's civil war the population has been increasing if we look past external refugees) when the needed reforms can occur after the end of the unrest (mostly this always happens - take a look at even Iraq of all countries) when the alternative is 50 years of "safe" stagnation? When the reforms are completed under this approach that country x or y will be lightyears behind the remaining world.

Totalitarianism, authoritarianism and unbreakable isms are IMO the biggest obstacles to prosperity in the region. They are in my view and many others also the main reason for the increase of fundamentalism. Of course there are many other causes too and it's not just black and white (it hardly ever is) but yes I do believe that non-authoritarian/pluralistic regimes and not autocratic ones are the way forward if you want to see progress at the end of the tunnel. I am by no means a blind follower of regimes.

A big mistake in my view is when people from the region are unwilling to challenge the status quo in any shape or form (I am not talking about violence here) but just conclude that "dictatorship x or y" are at least "my" dictatorship x or y so I have to support them. After all everyone else is doing so. Nah, I don't like that one bit.
There was a red line and the Syrian regime crossed it many times. In cases like Syria is where a revolution is warranted (and needed) but most Arab countries are not like Syria in that respect. Are there any gulf countries or North African ones that allow criminal, sectarian gangs roam free to kill, steal, and rape wherever they like? No. This was only done by the barbaric Assad regime. Is the Egyptian government responding to insurgency with un-proportionate and indiscriminate bombing? No, I don't think so. Syria is an outlier. My breaking point (where I would join a revolution) is if my government is doing those above things. Otherwise, at least for me, this revolution business sounds a lot like shooting myself in the foot, counterproductive.

Please excuse my late response, I just saw a huge *** spider in my room which I had to promptly hunt down and kill or I'd have nightmares for the night (probably still will lol)
 
.
Back
Top Bottom