What's new

US fighter jet downs Syrian plane in Raqqa province

Agreed therefore i am of strong opinion that BasharulAsad should have been left in power for sake of humanity
I am no fan of Assad, but I am afraid that he and his regime are needed for the future of this country, I just don't see 1 of 93 'moderate' rebel groups taking over, I think if Assad is gone, Syria will become an even bigger hellhole than it already is.
 
.
We have permission from legitimate government of Syria to be there.
Simple
You mean the government that came into power through a coup,
and then periodically run "elections" that even their closest ally - Russia find ridiculous.
Between the elections, they massacre civilians.
The troops that are sent by a government, where only "approved" candidates can be elected.
 
. .
As you said ISIS not Syrian government.
Obviously the coalition has the right to self defense, when doing actions against ISIS.
The Syrian Army was attacked before, but then it was a mistake.
Otherwise, the Veto power of the UNSC allowed the US to punish Syria for its Sarin attack.
 
.
You mean the government that came into power through a coup,
and then periodically run "elections" that even their closest ally - Russia find ridiculous.
Between the elections, they massacre civilians.
The troops that are sent by a government, where only "approved" candidates can be elected.
but they still secular and hold election.
What about US friend in middle east ???
What do you say about total monarch without any kind of election and so brutal government of Persian gulf countries such as KSA .
Yeah they have money. Democracy is just for poor Government.
 
.
I am no fan of Assad, but I am afraid that he and his regime are needed for the future of this country, I just don't see 1 of 93 'moderate' rebel groups taking over, I think if Assad is gone, Syria will become an even bigger hellhole than it already is.
You might be right, even though the country became a hell hole due to his greed for power. However, I agree to some extent that enough damage has been done. Hopefully he steps down in future and a transitional government can take over (something any decent leader would have done long ago).
I think that some countries (mainly in the middle East) need to be ruled by a dictatorship not democracy though. Most countries society in the region don't seem to be ready for democracy due to sectarianism, nepotism, tribalism, ethnic issues etc. So democracy can be a hindrance for some than a benefit.
 
.
.
but they still secular and hold election.
What about US friend in middle east ???
What do you say about total monarch without any kind of election and so brutal government of Persian gulf countries such as KSA .
Yeah they have money. Democracy is just for poor Government.

I don't see much difference between Iran and KSA.
Both are <CENSORED> governed by religion.
 
.
Obviously the coalition has the right to self defense, when doing actions against ISIS.
The Syrian Army was attacked before, but then it was a mistake.
Otherwise, the Veto power of the UNSC allowed the US to punish Syria for its Sarin attack.
There is not any proof or evidence about Sarin attack.
No that is not right read American statement even they didn't speak about any attack against them by Syrian jet.
 
.
No is not as you sad ISIS not legitimate government of Syria.
Also in south of Syria there is not ISIS more
what they are doing there Americans.
Is clear They come to steal Syrian wealth as they did in Saudia.
Lol which wealth does Syria have that the West is after? Lol
This attack was because the Syrian air force was threatening Western backed forces fighting ISIS. They have been warned several times but they kept going on, hence the retaliation. They should know their limits and who to attack, Russia will never risk a war with western powers for Assad's mistakes/foolishness, so Assad better get that on his head and stop his attack against Western backed forces
 
.
This attack was because the Syrian air force was threatening Western backed forces fighting ISIS. They have been warned several times but they kept going on, hence the retaliation. They should know their limits and who to attack, Russia will never risk a war with western powers for Assad's mistakes/foolishness, so Assad better get that on his head and stop his attack against Western backed forces
It's Syria soil not US soil they have any right to be every place of the country.
so simple.

Lol which wealth does Syria have that the West is after? Lol
freedom what your beloved total monarch does not have

I don't see much difference between Iran and KSA.
Both are <CENSORED> governed by religion.
You are free to think any think you like.
have good orgasm with Saudis.

you are disgusting people.
You speak about democracy and freedom and then monarch and dictators are your best friend.
you accuse both of Saudis and Qataris for supporting terrorism while selling billion of dollars for them.
and you come here and speak against Iran democracy and power.
 
.
Hopefully he steps down in future and a transitional government can take over (something any decent leader would have done long ago).
The Russians seemed hint to that and apparantly Assad himself would leave office if the timing is right.
Hopefully he steps down in future and a transitional government can take over (something any decent leader would have done long ago).
I can find myself with what Tillerson once said: "Assad must go, it is not the prioity, first ISIS" he also said something in the lines that Assad must go, but the governement behind Assad mustn't go necessarily. I just don't want to see the extremists rule who are the main 'opposition'.
I think that some countries (mainly in the middle East) need to be ruled by a dictatorship not democracy.
Oh yes, they need a strong leader with an iron fist (who doesn't kill his own people), one does not simply go from pure autocracy to democracy, it took mainland Europe about 150 years (starting to count from the French revolution) to reach the modern democratic values of today. The same applies to the Russians, they are inclined to vote for a strong leader who keeps the country in line (Putin) rather than a 'democratic' one (Yeltsin), in the 90's the Russians translated democracy (freedom) in 'stealing everything they could', that's why you have those corrupt oligarchs, like Medvedev. Lets not forget the Soviet Union only fell 26 years ago.
 
.
@mike2000 is back and @A.P. Richelieu
what do you have to answer about this part of my sentence?
I LOUDLY REPEAT IT ????
You speak about democracy and freedom and then monarch and dictators are your best friend.
you accuse both of Saudis and Qataris for supporting terrorism while selling billion of dollars for them.
and you come here and speak against Iran democracy and power.
 
.
We have permission from legitimate government of Syria to be there.
Simple
Yes:

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/05/syria-civil-war-explained-160505084119966.html
https://www.wsj.com/articles/10-000...esident-bashar-al-assads-crackdown-1406315472
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/mar/19/syria-leaked-document-assads-role
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/25/syria-crackdown-protesters-brutal
http://www.bbc.com/news/10338256

Very legitimate.

Iranian Mullahs and Bashar family - a match made in hell; both find common ground in oppression and pulling the Zionist conspiracy card to gain sympathy and ensure their legitimacy. Though Bashar has gone too far in his brutality in comparison and now he dares to rely upon ISIS card to ensure his legitimacy.

You (Iranians in general) have no moral ground for accusing others for inciting violence and/or supporting monarchs and dictators when you people forge alliances with the worst kind of scum on Earth at present.
 
Last edited:
.
UNSC already voted for world powers to intervene in Syria to target terrorists groups like ISIS BY ALL MEANS NECESSARY. So their presence is legitimate.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp....able-member-states-to-join-fight-against-isis
You should probably have bothered to read the actual resolution in question before posting because if you had you would`ve seen that the statement you posted is simply not correct.Here is the relevant part of the resolution in question [res#2249]
5.Calls upon Member States that have the capacity to do so to take all necessary measures, in compliance with international law, in particular with the United Nations Charter...
As you can see this in no way at all gives the us or anyone else carte blanche to come into syria and violate its sovereignty nor does it give anyone the right to occupy syrian territory,to support insurgent/terror groups and to attack syrian military or allied forces.The us presence in syria is NOT legitimate in any way unlike the russian,iranian and other allied forces that were formally invited into syria by the legitimate government of syria.
In fact the resolution begins with this:
Reaffirming the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations,Reaffirming its respect for the sovereignty, territorial integrity, independence and unity of all States in accordance with purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter
Sadly the us seems rather hellbent on ignoring this particular section.Heres a link to the resolution in question,read it for yourself if you like
https://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/2249(2015)
 
.
Back
Top Bottom