Un Says Violence In Syria Is Affecting Up To 2 Million Civilians

[Morch]

It effects civilians when they go out and play with toys they shouldn't be touching. Like these 'civilians'. I wonder if these jokers are in the UN's estimate of 2 million.

Yes, really, they've got only themselves to blame. If the they stayed home, kept their mouths shut and heads bowed non of this would happen, right?

Taking a clip of some untrained people trying to use a mortar and asserting this discredits the OP, is a callous joke by itself. Guess it could also be used to show not all people involved are highly trained foreign terrorists.

To avoid skewing the argument I think it necessary to consider what the likely outcome would be should Assad be removed. Would those formerly bowing their heads set out on the path of an all inclusive democracy or would Islamic extremists try to destabilize any consensus government endorsed by outside influences until said influences lose interest leading to the Islamists gaining control.

I'm not by the way excusing the Russian or Chinese stance, which by supposedly letting the Syrian people choose for themselves means in effect letting Assad the tyrant prevail due to superior force.

P.S Of the two million civilians affected per the OP an estimated 140,000 of them are Christians who have fled their homes with nothing. Iraq is a blueprint of what to expect there, as at least 50% of the Iraqi Christian population has fled post 'liberation'.

How does your post avoid "skewing the argument"?

Most of the people hurt or otherwise effected in this conflict, and similar ones, are civilians. Whether or not they subscribe to a certain religious philosophy does not change that status.

That the outcome of this conflict may very well be even worse for the ordinary populace is quite probable. Still doesn't make most casualties legitimate targets.

[Morch]

It effects civilians when they go out and play with toys they shouldn't be touching. Like these 'civilians'. I wonder if these jokers are in the UN's estimate of 2 million.

Yes, really, they've got only themselves to blame. If the they stayed home, kept their mouths shut and heads bowed non of this would happen, right?

Taking a clip of some untrained people trying to use a mortar and asserting this discredits the OP, is a callous joke by itself. Guess it could also be used to show not all people involved are highly trained foreign terrorists.

The point of the VDO is when does a civilian lose the rights of a civilian ? And are these jokers, and the tens of thousands of jokers just like them running amok in Syria today, part of the UN estimates? I believe there count, particularily the casualty count of civilians to be inaccurate. Because IMO civilians taking up arms are no longer civilian. But are indeed enemies of the state in this instance. Combatants. Trained or not. How many innocent people may this mortar crew have injured prior to the VDO being taken ? I don't think they could lay a target to save themselves.

People like this, if they were captured in Iraq or Afghan, would be label terrorists and /or insurgents and would be locked up. Some may find themselves in foriegn prisons including GITMO. See how the shoe never quite fits onto the other foot when it comes to western interests over the best of the rest.

If the minute a civilian takes arms he ceases to be a civilian, how can we have proper civil wars?

In the context of this conflict, yes, that group in the video would certainly be a legit target as far as the government is concerned. I seriously doubt that most casualties, wounded and otherwise effected people were combatants, though. To be clear, the Assad's oppostioin does not seem to uphold higher moral standards.

The estimates and numbers may be off, sure. However, considering the intensity and length this struggle runs, they are not improbable. As far as I'm aware they include both parties, btw.

Not sure why you'd call the people in the video jokers: operating a mortar, without proper training and under stressful conditions isn't trivial.

Western armed forces are generaly less prone to indiscriminate attacks on civilans, employ better recconnaissance and targeting equipment, and follow some protocol when engaging hostiles in civilian concentrations. I'm sure examples of the opposite are available, talking about the general state of things here.

[coma]

It effects civilians when they go out and play with toys they shouldn't be touching. Like these 'civilians'. I wonder if these jokers are in the UN's estimate of 2 million.

Yes, really, they've got only themselves to blame. If the they stayed home, kept their mouths shut and heads bowed non of this would happen, right?

Taking a clip of some untrained people trying to use a mortar and asserting this discredits the OP, is a callous joke by itself. Guess it could also be used to show not all people involved are highly trained foreign terrorists.

To avoid skewing the argument I think it necessary to consider what the likely outcome would be should Assad be removed. Would those formerly bowing their heads set out on the path of an all inclusive democracy or would Islamic extremists try to destabilize any consensus government endorsed by outside influences until said influences lose interest leading to the Islamists gaining control.

I'm not by the way excusing the Russian or Chinese stance, which by supposedly letting the Syrian people choose for themselves means in effect letting Assad the tyrant prevail due to superior force.

P.S Of the two million civilians affected per the OP an estimated 140,000 of them are Christians who have fled their homes with nothing. Iraq is a blueprint of what to expect there, as at least 50% of the Iraqi Christian population has fled post 'liberation'.

How does your post avoid "skewing the argument"?

I am not up for an argument. Just making an observation and posting it .So if you want to argue then can you please find somebody else or argue with yourself.

[Morch]

That post was in reply to Steely Dan.

Cutting one line, out of context, and making a bogus claim - very cool.

[Steely Dan]

How does your post avoid "skewing the argument"?

Most of the people hurt or otherwise effected in this conflict, and similar ones, are civilians. Whether or not they subscribe to a certain religious philosophy does not change that status.

That the outcome of this conflict may very well be even worse for the ordinary populace is quite probable. Still doesn't make most casualties legitimate targets.

I can't recall characterizing all the Assad regime victims as legitimate targets, any more than I would the Christians, Druze or Allawite civilians should the regime fall. Agreed there is a high possibility that things would turn out worse with regime change, especially if Assad's WMD's fell into the hands of Islamists, so does this justify the human and financial cost of intervention? This is the same dynamic as Iraq, winning the war was easy, winning the peace just has not happened. Christians upped and left, Shiites murdered by a resurgent Al Qaeda and the Shiite regime we left in place is more than a little cozy with Iran. I don't believe we have the stomach to do what it takes to cause a better outcome in Syria - The only game changer as far as I can see would be if action against a far more dangerous Iran was contingent on removing the Syrian regime.

Edited August 6, 2012 by Steely Dan

[coma]

That post was in reply to Steely Dan.

Cutting one line, out of context, and making a bogus claim - very cool.

Solly.

[Gary A]

I am of the opinion that Western countries should stay out of Middle Eastern problems. How would you pick a side? How are things in Egypt, Iraq, Libya, Yemen and Afghanistan?

[Exsexyman]

I am of the opinion that Western countries should stay out of Middle Eastern problems. How would you pick a side? How are things in Egypt, Iraq, Libya, Yemen and Afghanistan?

Wonderful! Our new friends the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaida, fresh from killing Americans and Brits are in charge now. What a great job we have done to be sure! Next stop Syria.