Assad vows to recover all of Syria from ‘terrorist groups’

[AlexRRR]

15 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

But isn't that the problem?  Saying iron fist stability is better than anarchy?  But iron fist "stability" is what got us here.  How about good government that takes care of it's people.  like we have in the West.  No more iron fist dictators who kill their own people.

 

Look at it this way, the region has its own political ways and it works for them, your judging them by your own standard.

 

Prior to military intervention the region was stable its not anymore, the spring uprising that followed has created more hot beds, of course its not really about bringing democracy to the region you would have to be a fool to believe that, no one would be interested in the region if it wasn't for the oil and the $.

 

 

 

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, AlexRRR said:

 

Look at it this way, the region has its own political ways and it works for them, your judging them by your own standard.

 

Prior to military intervention the region was stable its not anymore, the spring uprising that followed has created more hot beds, of course its not really about bringing democracy to the region you would have to be a fool to believe that, no one would be interested in the region if it wasn't for the oil and the $.

If it worked for them, there wouldn't be a civil war.  Nor uprisings, which have happened many times in Syria, and all over the ME.  They are tired of dictators for leaders.  I'm sure you'd be feeling the same thing if you lived there.  

 

You did read my links?  This has been going on for many, many years.  The ME hasn't been stable since...well...a long time.  Great reading:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Brotherhood

Quote

The Society of the Muslim Brothers (Arabic: جماعة الإخوان المسلمين‎‎Jami'ah al-Ikhwān al-Muslimūn), shortened to the Muslim Brotherhood (الإخوان المسلمون al-Ikhwān al-Muslimūn), is a transnational Sunni Islamist organization founded in Egypt by Islamic scholar and schoolteacher Hassan al-Banna in 1928.

 

[williamgeorgeallen]

14 hours ago, bark said:

Someone needs to put a bullet into his head.

like they did to saddam? place is a mess now without him.

[bark]

6 minutes ago, williamgeorgeallen said:

like they did to saddam? place is a mess now without him.

Yes true. but that was baby Bush; doing for his old man.

Syria is already a mess. And if they kill him; it will still be a mess.

For me, he should die, for what he is doing to his own people. I'm not saying it will make any difference; as his replacement

may be the same as him. I just think he should pay for murdering women and children.

That's all.

[williamgeorgeallen]

1 minute ago, bark said:

Yes true. but that was baby Bush; doing for his old man.

Syria is already a mess. And if they kill him; it will still be a mess.

For me, he should die, for what he is doing to his own people. I'm not saying it will make any difference; as his replacement

may be the same as him. I just think he should pay for murdering women and children.

That's all.

i think everyone should stay out of it. leave them to sort out their own mess. sorry to the honest citizens but they are getting killed by the thousands by the bombings any way. (dont read my posts about south korea needing to take over north korea)

[bark]

1 minute ago, williamgeorgeallen said:

i think everyone should stay out of it. leave them to sort out their own mess. sorry to the honest citizens but they are getting killed by the thousands by the bombings any way. (dont read my posts about south korea needing to take over north korea)

Didn't read your post about NK and SK. But that would be different.

SK and USA vs NK and China = Nuke war = end of the world.

[craigt3365]

58 minutes ago, williamgeorgeallen said:

like they did to saddam? place is a mess now without him.

As is Egypt, where no outsiders got involved.  So get involved, don't get involved...either way...a mess.  A new paradigm is desperately needed.

 

I'm amazed at how many coups there have been!  Unreal:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_coups_d'état_and_coup_attempts_by_country

[craigt3365]

53 minutes ago, williamgeorgeallen said:

i think everyone should stay out of it. leave them to sort out their own mess. sorry to the honest citizens but they are getting killed by the thousands by the bombings any way. (dont read my posts about south korea needing to take over north korea)

It could have been stopped right at the beginning, with the UN rulings to not ship weapons there and install a no fly zone.  Sadly, a few members voted against it.  With one profiting immensely. 

 

The head of the UN discusses this properly:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/942761-after-a-decade-un-chief-disappointed-in-many-world-leaders/

Quote

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon says he's disappointed by many world leaders who care more about retaining power than improving the lives of their people — and can't understand why Syria is being held hostage to "the destiny" of one man, President Bashar Assad.

 

[augustwest]

If Obama had listened to Assad ,when he said terrorists were attempting to overthrow him, there wouldn't be Million Syrian refuges and hundreds of thousands dead. Not to mention Daesh would have never materialized. Nation building at its worse! You would think the US would have learned from Hussein and Ghadafi . Thankfully Putin got involved and now a ceasefire. When will the west understand that these countries do not want democracy.

[craigt3365]

8 minutes ago, augustwest said:

If Obama had listened to Assad ,when he said terrorists were attempting to overthrow him, there wouldn't be Million Syrian refuges and hundreds of thousands dead. Not to mention Daesh would have never materialized. Nation building at its worse! You would think the US would have learned from Hussein and Ghadafi . Thankfully Putin got involved and now a ceasefire. When will the west understand that these countries do not want democracy.

Wow...speechless.  Amazing how many things Obama gets blamed for!

[ddavidovsky]

45 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Wow...speechless.  Amazing how many things Obama gets blamed for!

 

Well, history shows that America has very often been in the business of propping up dicatators because the alternative (often communism) is something worse. They do have plenty of sway and in this case they made the wrong call.

[craigt3365]

38 minutes ago, ddavidovsky said:

 

Well, history shows that America has very often been in the business of propping up dicatators because the alternative (often communism) is something worse. They do have plenty of sway and in this case they made the wrong call.

Agreed!  But the previous poster seems to have no idea what started the mess in Syria.  And that the US wasn't really involved there.  And really doesn't want to be now.  For better or worse.

[simple1]

1 hour ago, augustwest said:

If Obama had listened to Assad ,when he said terrorists were attempting to overthrow him, there wouldn't be Million Syrian refuges and hundreds of thousands dead. Not to mention Daesh would have never materialized. Nation building at its worse! You would think the US would have learned from Hussein and Ghadafi . Thankfully Putin got involved and now a ceasefire. When will the west understand that these countries do not want democracy.

 

Get real!

 

It was Assad who released Islamists from his prisons to create mayhem, thereby trying to get sympathy from the West. It was Assad who enables Islamists to cross the Syrian border to kill US and other coalition forces in Iraq. It was Assad's government who were State sponsors of terrorism. It was the Assad regime, prior to the Arab Spring demonstration, who tortured and murdered thousands in his prisons. Oh & yes the US made a number of policy mistakes after the GW11 invasion, but to solely blame the US is IMO an error.

[ddavidovsky]

Folks, you do realise this civil war is simply about Sunni vs Shia?

All these complaints of Assad killing his own people. In what sense are they his own people when they are out to kill him in the first place? These groups hate each other.

 

 

 

 

[Morch]

28 minutes ago, ddavidovsky said:

Folks, you do realise this civil war is simply about Sunni vs Shia?

All these complaints of Assad killing his own people. In what sense are they his own people when they are out to kill him in the first place? These groups hate each other.

 

 

 

 

 

And yet earlier in the topic we were told that Assad was popular with the Syrian people....

 

It it true, though, that the concept of nation states is somewhat alien to the region.

[AlexRRR]

11 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

If it worked for them, there wouldn't be a civil war.  Nor uprisings, which have happened many times in Syria, and all over the ME.  They are tired of dictators for leaders.  I'm sure you'd be feeling the same thing if you lived there.  

 

You did read my links?  This has been going on for many, many years.  The ME hasn't been stable since...well...a long time.  Great reading:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Brotherhood

 

 

The world all over hasn't been stable for the last 100 years so singling out the ME isn't a great idea, you would also have to be a babe in the woods to think it was a people revolt, if you really want to get to the nuts and bolts of it all it goes back to the end of world war 1 when the allies caved up the region drawing boundaries and handing territory over to "friends".

 

The Muslim Brotherhood appeared in 1926 some 7 years after the carve up of ME lands....

 

There is much greater depth to the issues at hand in the ME a continueing power play, in the end the result is tension and bloodshed someone is making packet out of arming both sides.

 

Further more all over the world dictators have been tolerated so why isn't Assad? I tell you why because he has a load of oil under Syria, and is with in the sphere of influence should Syria be pro western rather than pro Russian.

[craigt3365]

12 hours ago, ddavidovsky said:

Folks, you do realise this civil war is simply about Sunni vs Shia?

All these complaints of Assad killing his own people. In what sense are they his own people when they are out to kill him in the first place? These groups hate each other.

That's a huge part, for sure.  But it's also about revolting against a brutal dictator.  Which the Syrians have done many times in the past.  If they didn't have this dictator, there might not have been a civil war.  Same in the other countries.  Perhaps....

[craigt3365]

10 hours ago, AlexRRR said:

 

The world all over hasn't been stable for the last 100 years so singling out the ME isn't a great idea, you would also have to be a babe in the woods to think it was a people revolt, if you really want to get to the nuts and bolts of it all it goes back to the end of world war 1 when the allies caved up the region drawing boundaries and handing territory over to "friends".

 

The Muslim Brotherhood appeared in 1926 some 7 years after the carve up of ME lands....

 

There is much greater depth to the issues at hand in the ME a continueing power play, in the end the result is tension and bloodshed someone is making packet out of arming both sides.

 

Further more all over the world dictators have been tolerated so why isn't Assad? I tell you why because he has a load of oil under Syria, and is with in the sphere of influence should Syria be pro western rather than pro Russian.

Babe in the woods?  Really? LOL  I'm well aware of the lines in sand that were drawn to designate countries borders.  For sure, that's what caused a lot of this mess.  I'm also well aware of what created the Muslim Brotherhood.  The impact of westernization was a key one.

 

Sadly, you are right.  Energy reserves are a huge reason for problems in the ME.  And for Syria, the start of a gas pipeline is what interested Russia.  Without that, they might not be there.  Russia is doing the same thing in the Caucuses where a pipeline is being built.  They are stirring things up there to try and stop it.  But that's another topic (I was recently there, saw the pipeline and read the local news talking about it).

[williamgeorgeallen]

22 hours ago, augustwest said:

If Obama had listened to Assad ,when he said terrorists were attempting to overthrow him, there wouldn't be Million Syrian refuges and hundreds of thousands dead. Not to mention Daesh would have never materialized. Nation building at its worse! You would think the US would have learned from Hussein and Ghadafi . Thankfully Putin got involved and now a ceasefire. When will the west understand that these countries do not want democracy.

a lot if interest looking to supply arms to perpetuate war. wonder if thailad really wants democracy.

[ddavidovsky]

14 hours ago, Morch said:

 

And yet earlier in the topic we were told that Assad was popular with the Syrian people....

 

It it true, though, that the concept of nation states is somewhat alien to the region.

 

Nobody said he was popular with [all] the Syrian people. He's popular with some - the Alawites. Maybe with some Sunnis too who have done well under his regime - I have no idea if the sectarian partisanship is absolute but the division is basically what this conflict is about. His regime inevitably favours one side over the other, and being the minority, the suppression of opponents is simply self-preservation when the opposition is so hostile in the first place.

 

The argument being used against Assad in this thread seems to be that without him Syria would be peaceful, harmonious, and progressive. I don't buy that. In fact it's simply impossible given the ethnic divisions. Only 'brutal' authoritarianism - one side or the other - can keep a lid on that.

 

Let's face it, Syria is an artificial creation, a badly thought through concept based on arbitrary lines on a map. It may be too late for partition, but wouldn't that be a nice solution? Big upheaval, yes, but history is full of upheaval and the population is already massively displaced.

 

[i claudius]

On 9/13/2016 at 11:16 AM, canopus1969 said:

The problem being the main terrorist group is Assad and his cohorts  

 

Just like Gaddafi and co were , but look what happens when you oust them ,the rise of terrorism worldwide , these countrys have to have brutal tyrents to hold them together or they just tear each other apart , the only ones they hate more than each other is us , look around , see what has happened when these "tyrants" were deposed , mayhem  worldwide .

[craigt3365]

3 hours ago, ddavidovsky said:

 

Nobody said he was popular with [all] the Syrian people. He's popular with some - the Alawites. Maybe with some Sunnis too who have done well under his regime - I have no idea if the sectarian partisanship is absolute but the division is basically what this conflict is about. His regime inevitably favours one side over the other, and being the minority, the suppression of opponents is simply self-preservation when the opposition is so hostile in the first place.

 

The argument being used against Assad in this thread seems to be that without him Syria would be peaceful, harmonious, and progressive. I don't buy that. In fact it's simply impossible given the ethnic divisions. Only 'brutal' authoritarianism - one side or the other - can keep a lid on that.

 

Let's face it, Syria is an artificial creation, a badly thought through concept based on arbitrary lines on a map. It may be too late for partition, but wouldn't that be a nice solution? Big upheaval, yes, but history is full of upheaval and the population is already massively displaced.

 

Well put. I don't think anybody here thinks Syria would be peaceful without Assad. Just that he's a mass murderer and deserves to go.  Maybe Syria will get better, maybe not.  But it can't get any worse.

 

I also think many don't accept that brutal dictators are the only way to go in this part of the world.  Sadly, there aren't many alternatives given world politics.

[coma]

Well it appears that the US and her cronies will stop at nothing to make sure Mr Assad's attempts to put down a terrorist uprising in his country fail.

 

Will the State department be paying off the families of these murdered men as they did the Italian journalist's family killed in the drone strike in Pakistan ?

 

"Sixty-two Syrian soldiers were killed and a hundred others were injured in these strikes."

 

Air strikes blamed by Moscow and Damascus on the US-led coalition hit a Syrian army position in the east on Saturday, killing more than 60 soldiers, the Russian army said.

 

http://www.9news.com.au/World/2016/09/18/06/07/Russia-says-62-Syrian-soldiers-have-been-killed-in-an-airstrike-carried-out-by-US-led-coalition

 

Edited September 18, 2016 by coma

[tonbridgebrit]

On 13/09/2016 at 5:16 AM, canopus1969 said:

The problem being the main terrorist group is Assad and his cohorts  

Who are the rebel groups in Syria ?

Okay, there's ISIS, they're rebelling against Assad. Surely, we accept that ISIS are not good people, and that ISIS must not be allowed to take-over Syria ?

For the rebels who are NOT ISIS, well, some guys called the Al-Nusra Front are the most effective group. The Al-Nusra Front is Al-Qaeda's branch in Syria. Now, surely, we all accept that Al-Qaeda are not good people. Surely, Al-Qaeda must not be allowed to take-over Syria ?

Syria was previously controlled by Assad's father. Assad is now the boss. Syria wasn't actually a serious threat to America and Europe during the last few decades of Assad's father and Assad's rule.  Surely, having ISIS or Al-Qaeda controlling Syria IS something that is a threat and danger to the West ?  Let's hope that ISIS and the Al-Nusra Front are removed, and Assad is back in power. Planet earth becomes a safer place then.

 

[tonbridgebrit]

On 13/09/2016 at 8:37 AM, craigt3365 said:

Never happen.  The guys's a maniacal mass murderer.  He better hope Russia doesn't give up, or he's done for.

Well, it's a three-way war.  Assad, ISIS, and the third group or side being various groups with the Al-Nusra Front being the most powerful of those various groups.

Right now, Washington has decided to stop backing the Al-Nusra Front, Washington has decided to actually bomb the Al-Nusra Front. Washington is also trying to bomb ISIS. And Russia is still bombing ISIS.

Looks like that the most likely option is, is that ISIS and the Al-Nusra Front are going to be removed, Russian and American bombing will surely do it. That still leaves Assad. Surely, Assad will be back in charge once ISIS and the Al-Nusra Front have been removed ?

I mean, once ISIS and the Al-Nusra Front have been removed by bombing, surely, Washington is NOT going to back some other rebel group to fight Assad ?  Russia isn't giving up. Russia is hoping that the new Syria, with or without Assad, will be aligned with Russia.

That's why Russia has been there for years now.

 

 

[Scott]

Troll post removed.