Mantis has it right. And there is a composition amongst many of these rebels that is "rise up and attain our freedoms/"Why not us?" The Alewite minority comprises 6% of Syrians and has ruled with an iron fist for decades.
Fletcher look up Hama massacre. The apple doesn't fall far.....
https://www.google.com/search?q=hama+massacre&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
What you've witnessed among the rebellion IMO was initially a struggle for freedom by an enslaved populace. After that was underway THEN outside religious elements, jihadis who already believe the entire ME region is one country called Allah Akbar entered the theater of battle.
I'll grant you one thing about Assad. Nation coups and overthrows in the ME are never non-violent. He had all his cronies in positions of abusive power for decades. After so many years of brutality there was probably no way for him to agree in the beginning to leave. There was going to be a mass slaughter of Alewites if the rebellion was victorious.
And if Assad is ever abandoned by Iran and Russia (doubtful - permanent military installations are being constructed there) there well may be a revenge massacre. But I believe most US foreign policy experts agree that Assad was never going to surrender his dictatorship.
Fun Fact: Whenever Assad would start trouble in the Golan the Israeli military would do a buzz around his mansion and make the ground under him shake. It was a 10 minute operation. Now compare that to Jordan, bitter enemies with Israel until a peace treaty, after which King Hussein would fly above Israel in his own copter and wave to the people. Still, you've got trouble in Jordan with terror elements (ambassador Foley execution) but at least there's peace and cooperation between governments now. Having the Muslim Brotherhood out of power in Egypt is a good thing as well. I hope Trump invites al Sisi here before he does Putin.
Fletcher look up Hama massacre. The apple doesn't fall far.....
https://www.google.com/search?q=hama+massacre&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
What you've witnessed among the rebellion IMO was initially a struggle for freedom by an enslaved populace. After that was underway THEN outside religious elements, jihadis who already believe the entire ME region is one country called Allah Akbar entered the theater of battle.
I'll grant you one thing about Assad. Nation coups and overthrows in the ME are never non-violent. He had all his cronies in positions of abusive power for decades. After so many years of brutality there was probably no way for him to agree in the beginning to leave. There was going to be a mass slaughter of Alewites if the rebellion was victorious.
And if Assad is ever abandoned by Iran and Russia (doubtful - permanent military installations are being constructed there) there well may be a revenge massacre. But I believe most US foreign policy experts agree that Assad was never going to surrender his dictatorship.
Fun Fact: Whenever Assad would start trouble in the Golan the Israeli military would do a buzz around his mansion and make the ground under him shake. It was a 10 minute operation. Now compare that to Jordan, bitter enemies with Israel until a peace treaty, after which King Hussein would fly above Israel in his own copter and wave to the people. Still, you've got trouble in Jordan with terror elements (ambassador Foley execution) but at least there's peace and cooperation between governments now. Having the Muslim Brotherhood out of power in Egypt is a good thing as well. I hope Trump invites al Sisi here before he does Putin.
I agree they don't have to mutually exclusive and that wasn't my intent with only providing the two choices. It's true Assad did kill innocents but much of that was after the civil war started. Their were deaths in the beginning that was 100% on Assad concerning protesters but that was <100. I think the real problem I have as an American as I'm not being presented the whole story. We are feeding the masses an agenda.
Fletch here is an account of the beginning of the Syrian uprising:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_uprising_phase_of_the_Syrian_Civil_War
Another piece, focusing more on Assad (the son):
http://www.bbc.com/news/10338256
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_uprising_phase_of_the_Syrian_Civil_War
Another piece, focusing more on Assad (the son):
http://www.bbc.com/news/10338256
Respectfully Fletch,
I've noticed this type of claim to be commonplace here at Rx Poly from different posters throughout the years. "Bush and his stringpullers" was another one that had me shaking my head. I wholly disagree with this conclusion. It is mostly conspiracy theory and while I could see it's purpose and operation in a place like Syria, I just can't see a powerful group holding such sway over our government throughout generations.
Taking and maintaining control over the information our population is "fed" as its proponents claim would mean our president has little power. That a large group of powerful people has conspired to fool the population (in order that they may)?
We've had 4 presidents since the mid 90s. Their personalities and values could not have been more different. Trump is now virtually at war with the press. To claim that there is a cabal of power brokers who control the information we recieve is far-fletched ;-)
Neil Lazarus @awesomeseminars 55m55 minutes ago
#Turkey New Russia-Turkey air strikes in Syria: army - Syrian rebel backer Turkey and Damascus regime ally Russ... http://ow.ly/yxs1508ZLCv
#Turkey New Russia-Turkey air strikes in Syria: army - Syrian rebel backer Turkey and Damascus regime ally Russ... http://ow.ly/yxs1508ZLCv
I think youre taking what i said and putting into a partisan bubble discounts my position. I dont think youre doing it out of ill will or intentionally. As it regards to the POTUS i thank you for saying exactly what i think to be true; he has little power. I think the executive branch has become monolithic and for some time its been irrelevant whos in power. Trump changes everything. This is why the media and even the intelligence community has reached DEFCON1. Im in the results business. As both a small business owner and gambler. I dont pretend to make assumptions based on anecdotal or sympathetic evidence. I would offer youre the same way most of the time. I stated most of the time for a reason but thats irrelevant to this discussion.
First of all i dont know whos even covering Syria. From what i read its virtually nobody. All of our reports here by our media are from second had accounts out of Syria through other sources thus our narrative is not by first accounts its based in Washington. So all credibility depend on "offical" outlets. Reporters who cover the ME/Syria must either use foreign accounts or from the likes of the US State Department or the Pentagon. Remember how many we had in Iraq? This is a story from one of the accounts firsthand out of 2015 that actually counters my argument in saying Syria is targeting civilians. The reason i bring it to light is he says nobody is there. Can that be refuted? his claims about whos doing what, thats damning but there is always two sides. I could present them and they are on the ground and say the opposite. https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/...lists-covering-the-syrian-civil-war-in-aleppo
As far as our POTUS goes Trump isnt included here. But take a look at the last two POTUS. Both pushed regime change. Libya, Syria, Iraq all secular all at odds with our interests. Both administrations toppled secular regimes in the ME in favor of chaos. Our policy has been to promote the very securitarian violence we denounce. We armed "rebels" is Afghanistan we played both sides in Iraq/Iran in the early 80's. We funded the early "rebels" who would later become the (Sunni) Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIL after conquering eastern Syria the leveant) versus the Iraqi (Shiite) government. Now we have/had sponsored Wahhabism and multiple terrorist groups in Syria
If Clinton would have been elected it would have been taken to a whole other level. Think back to her comments about Russia in the debates. She wanted WAR. Consider her leaked email back from '14
[FONT="]“We need to use our diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets to bring pressure on the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL and other radical Sunni groups in the region,”
[/FONT]The destabilization of the ME is not by accident. Little do they know it but the terror groups are pawns, a necessary boogie man and players in a large game they dont understand they are a part of. We both by proxy and by bombs waged war with a democratically elected country who has a Christian population part of a secular nation and sat by and watched a city like Allepo held captive by US funded terror groups for 3 years. Why?
Because the reserve currency status is everything. The MD is where 2/3 of the oil is and we still have OPEC in our pocket. With China trying to establish the yuan backed by Russian/Iranian oil Syria is huge not only strategically but geographically. Think about how our fiat system is built. Think about what happened with the Nixon shock and the subsequent deal with OPEC. Why did we push back iraq in 91? Kuwait was OPEC Iraq was not. We were in a military for dollar as reserve currency alliance with OPEC. Why did we eventually topple Saddam? He traded his oil for euros during or after the oil for food sanctions (i cant recall when exactly). Why did we hit Libya? He wanted out of the Dollar and wanted to trade his oil for gold. Why Iran an enemy? Because they left the dollar were threatened to be kicked out of SWIFT and decided to say fuck it and made their own oil bourse. Make no mistake this has EVERYTHING to do with the US dollar’s global hegemony. Our media has become a propaganda laden tool. Trump, knowingly or not will have his hands full with it against him. Interestingly, his desire to work with Russia is a good sign. The pipeline is a good sign. Because our real enemy isnt Russia or Iran its China. China is the only country that can replace us. SWIFT could be replaced by the: China International Payment System and the yuan can replace the dollar. They have a shit ton of gold and silver too.
Fletch nothing I write here is out of ill will or anything like that. Most is fact. Some is opinion. Sometimes I'm even wrong. It took me a long time and it would be great if the rest of the cyber-debate-world would catch up to me but I like to give the posters I engage with room to breathe and feel whatever they want to feel. With the exception of screaming hate-filled hyenas of course.
The conclusions you've drawn I may disagree with or know little about. You seem to believe our foreign policy is driven by our currency and oil rather than our security. You use our many mistakes to bolster this argument.
CNN's Arwa Damon has been in Syria from the beginning. I think they recently sent her to Mosul but it might be worth it to you to check out her youtube videos from when the Syrian uprising started.
You are right about Qatar and SA, and the Sunni nations. They need us to counter Iran's goal to turn the ME into a Shia crescent. And they have Russia's backing. The Saudis want to install a Sunni gov't in Yemen, which is now a lost Iranian proxy/terror state.
I know you didn't bring it up but our protection of Kuwait and SA from Saddam was part of the path to 9/11. OBL was flexing his muscles and ego after they drove the Soviets out of Afg. al Queda became pissed when instead of the Arab Sunni nations turning to them for protection from Saddam they appealed to Bush41. That was the moment AQ decided to hit the US.
A couple of questions for you:
There are negotiations over Syria going on now. IYO who is sitting at the other end of the table opposite Assad and Russia?
What was the impetus for Clinton intervening to stop Milosovich? Was there an ulterior motive there as well?
Sorry if I missed anything. That was a lenghthy post.
The conclusions you've drawn I may disagree with or know little about. You seem to believe our foreign policy is driven by our currency and oil rather than our security. You use our many mistakes to bolster this argument.
CNN's Arwa Damon has been in Syria from the beginning. I think they recently sent her to Mosul but it might be worth it to you to check out her youtube videos from when the Syrian uprising started.
You are right about Qatar and SA, and the Sunni nations. They need us to counter Iran's goal to turn the ME into a Shia crescent. And they have Russia's backing. The Saudis want to install a Sunni gov't in Yemen, which is now a lost Iranian proxy/terror state.
I know you didn't bring it up but our protection of Kuwait and SA from Saddam was part of the path to 9/11. OBL was flexing his muscles and ego after they drove the Soviets out of Afg. al Queda became pissed when instead of the Arab Sunni nations turning to them for protection from Saddam they appealed to Bush41. That was the moment AQ decided to hit the US.
A couple of questions for you:
There are negotiations over Syria going on now. IYO who is sitting at the other end of the table opposite Assad and Russia?
What was the impetus for Clinton intervening to stop Milosovich? Was there an ulterior motive there as well?
Sorry if I missed anything. That was a lenghthy post.
I've always found you to be respectful and more patient with disagreements than anyone here including myself. So youre a gentleman through and through . My cryptic comment was 100% about defending certain stances of certain people that rhyme with one of my favorite meals, Stew.
As far as who's sits across from Syria and Russia across the table I'm not sure what you mean?
When I was compiling my list of nations we topple I had nothing for Clinton. I thought about Yugoslavia but I just don't have any data to back up and claim other than a humanitarian effort. I've read a book a while back but meh. So I can't offer anything substantial to counter the official narrative.
How do you reason the US is after its security first and foremost despite jumping into bed with Muslims sects who practice whabbisim? Why topple secular regimes in favor of chaos?
Damn Fletch I just realized I owe you at least two replies. Don't want to "half-ass it" but I'm exhausted right now. Took quite an AT$ whipping in the wallet in Hoops, pretty much got the whole board capped with a lot of WRONG.
I returned to this thread to post a different article and saw your post above. Thanks for the compliment. On the other topic..... We will always differ on the question of whether America is a benevolent power I suppose.
Anyway, back to the Saudis. In wahhabism the Saudis are now (right or wrong?) considered the "moderates." The following article explains why:
http://www.newstatesman.com/world-a...-arabia-exported-main-source-global-terrorism
I returned to this thread to post a different article and saw your post above. Thanks for the compliment. On the other topic..... We will always differ on the question of whether America is a benevolent power I suppose.
Anyway, back to the Saudis. In wahhabism the Saudis are now (right or wrong?) considered the "moderates." The following article explains why:
http://www.newstatesman.com/world-a...-arabia-exported-main-source-global-terrorism
Shadowy Iranian General Visits Moscow, Violating Sanctions - Lucas Tomlinson (Fox News)
Iranian Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani, a shadowy Iranian general responsible for the deaths of nearly 500 Americans, traveled to Moscow Wednesday to meet with high-ranking Russian officials.
The Quds Force, which Soleimani heads, is the special operations wing of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, responsible for supporting terrorist proxy forces across the Middle East.
UN Resolution 1747 prohibits Soleimani to travel, and any country that lets him transit or travel is also defying sanctions.
Didnt read that article yet (will do now) but interestingly enough i wrote something yesterday but didnt have time to sumbit it yet to that other site i submit things for or my blog but here it is anyway regarding "Moderate Muslims":
National Review ran a story on Wednesday, February, 15 regarding a professor from Georgetown University named Jonathan Brown, who gave a speech defending slavery in Islam. In his speech is was said by multiple accounts (Andrew Harrod who wrote about this 1 week ago and does fantastic work on Islam & Jihad) that he spent much time condemning Western Civilization slavery while exonerating slavery in the middle east where Islam is ramped. All this despite the fact that The West abolished slavery some 170+ years ago. Allow me to take this a bit further because as we all know the National Review does not have the guts to speak the truth.
In practice, Islam is a disease.
If you're a person of Islamic faith that doesn't make you a disease. It just makes your religious text you worship one. Now if you can't separate the two then well, the shoe fits.
The West was built upon Judeo-Christian values. I am not a Jew so I won't pretend to know Judaism. I will say however the New Testament was clearly a collection of books and accounts for the individual's relationship with his God. Not the church. The individual. That individual mindset and the ability to separate the two gave us the fertile ground for a Constitution & Bill of Rights. It gave us the power and confidence to have a Separation of Church and State and Freedom of Religion. Because the story of Christ wins on ideas.
Islam, on the other hand, is the religion built upon the words of an illiterate warlord who took wives as young as 6 years old. The very same book that is interwoven with almost 500 passages of rule of law and judiciary revelations. Following the Koran thus creates a problem if you live in the West. Like Prof Jonathan Brown (who supports Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel), It forces you to have to explain things like slavery and stoning a woman for walking at night alone and being raped to a college kid in the US in 2017. But apparently, it's not that hard to do after all. Brown (who is white and was an evangelical) himself was converted at the very same university in 2010 by his Islamic studies professor.
When Jesus said to his fellow Jews: “Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and give to God what is Gods” it put Jesus and the story of Jesus above anything man made. It did not attempt to set legislation or laws because those things are insignificant to Jesus. The Koran and its Sharia is about conquest and about rule of law mixed in with spirituality. This creates an impossible roadblock for the West at our most fundamental levels.
Jihadists sometimes refer to a group of “secular Muslims” and those are Muslims I support. If you're willing to stand up and denounce the Korans role in governmental affairs and laws much like a Christian can do here then I applaud you. But if not; do not call yourself a moderate. There is no moderate Muslim. Show me a moderate Muslim and will show you either an ignorant fool or a liar (Al-taqiyya).
One of the article's contentions is that the Saudi version of Wahhabi Islam while still strict is less violent, less exportive and more of a return to community. ISIS is more about blowing up thepeople who practic this new version of Islam which began in the 18th century.
Jonathan Brown is an idiot.
Labeling Islam a disease is a declaration of war. I know how and why you arrive there but is the next step fighting this war globally or empowering the moderates? The second Sam Harris-Bill Maher video breaks down the number of radicals and why to try to empower the moderates.
(I already see and bolded your likely response to the above i.e. impossible roadblock)
Jonathan Brown is an idiot.
"There is no moderate Muslim."
Does Islamic State in Sinai Have an Ability to Hurt Israel? - Judah Ari Gross
Despite last week's rocket attack on Eilat from Sinai, the IDF and independent military analysts say an impending large-scale confrontation between Israel and the Islamic State-affiliate in Sinai is not likely. Israel is certainly on the IS list of targets, but the terrorist group is simply far too busy fighting Egyptian forces to open another front with Israel, according to an intelligence officer in the IDF Southern Command. He noted that IS views Muslims who do not follow their radical view of Islam as worse than non-Muslims.
"Will the Sinai Province suddenly take the position that Israel's going to be the principal target and that they'll start marching towards al-Quds [Jerusalem]? No," the intelligence officer said. "But does the Islamic State in Sinai have an ability to hurt Israel? Yes." (Times of Israel)
Does Islamic State in Sinai Have an Ability to Hurt Israel? - Judah Ari Gross
Despite last week's rocket attack on Eilat from Sinai, the IDF and independent military analysts say an impending large-scale confrontation between Israel and the Islamic State-affiliate in Sinai is not likely. Israel is certainly on the IS list of targets, but the terrorist group is simply far too busy fighting Egyptian forces to open another front with Israel, according to an intelligence officer in the IDF Southern Command. He noted that IS views Muslims who do not follow their radical view of Islam as worse than non-Muslims.
"Will the Sinai Province suddenly take the position that Israel's going to be the principal target and that they'll start marching towards al-Quds [Jerusalem]? No," the intelligence officer said. "But does the Islamic State in Sinai have an ability to hurt Israel? Yes." (Times of Israel)
Let me take it a step further, Islam isnt a disease it more of a virus. It infiltrates under subversion and then uses its sheer numbers and deception to achieve conquest until it replicates so fast it jams the hosts ability to combat it. That is up to people of that faith to denounce. They MUST denounce the political and judicial aspects of the religion or then if its a declaration of war to suggest that be done without complying then i fired the first of many salvos and not ashamed to do so.
I found that article very well written and filled with alot facts and history i wasn't aware of. One was the embracing of extremism to rebuild their place in the world in the 19th century. It obviously has backfired because other than a few they have barely been able to hold together a stable government. Outside of oil what have they contributed to the world for everyone? Ill wait. But in the meantime ill just as soon as die because it would take you another 200 years to find anything worthwhile mentioning to give that any credence.
Another interesting quote from that article is a piece of info i have been using as my offense against Islam and our misguided FP since i have been here:
We essentially traded one monster for another. But we didnt have to. We own the monopoly game. We are the banker and everybody knows the banker always wins in the end (if they dont youre not playing it right). We could have printed them (USSR) right out of existence and it would not have take a bullet, just strokes of pens.
As i have stated before in post #27
Less violent than IS? S.A. is indeed that but its by proxy. They dont use their 130+ billion is arms we sold them to fight wars. Thats right, Mr Nobel Peace prize himself sold more arms (200 billion) in his eight years than anyone in history. Nick cage would be jealous. We back them and sell them arms while they continue to sponsor a Sunni uprising throughout the ME that even attacks their own Shia brothers and sisters. Thats the very definition of a snake. Sunnis are the majority and are systematically eradicating the minority shai but the kingdom doesnt mind because in the end they have Mecca they will gladly be the last ones left. Then what? Maybe thats our strategy, fire bomb the ME and radicalize 95% of it then together with S.A. torch it? But it appears that is too rational. Are FP and are clandestine operation/execution are shit. Either by design, lack of vision or incompetence. Ill let you decide, brother
:toast:As i have stated before in post #27
Less violent than IS? S.A. is indeed that but its by proxy. They dont use their 130+ billion is arms we sold them to fight wars. Thats right, Mr Nobel Peace prize himself sold more arms (200 billion) in his eight years than anyone in history. Nick cage would be jealous. We back them and sell them arms while they continue to sponsor a Sunni uprising throughout the ME that even attacks their own Sunni brothers and sisters. Thats the very definition of a snake. Sunnis are the majority and are systematically eradicating the minority shai and everyone else of Islam who doesn't support their caliphate claim. In the end there can be no Ummah (unification) amongst the Caliphate is The Kingdom because the Kingdom will never give up power and eventually IS/The Caliphate will come calling and maybe thats what they want. The Kingdom doesnt mind because in the end they have Mecca they will gladly be the last ones left. Then what? Maybe thats our strategy, fire bomb the ME and radicalize 95% of it then together with S.A. torch it? But it appears that is too rational. Are FP and are clandestine operation/execution are shit. Either by design, lack of vision or incompetence. Ill let you decide, brother
Had to fix this.
Point for you Fletch:
Al-Qaeda Extremists Are Leading the Syrian Insurgency - Shiraz Maher
On Feb. 9, Syrian rebel commander Hashem al-Sheikh announced the creation of a powerful, extremist-dominated entity known as Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), or the "Committee for the Liberation of the Levant." One of the main groups that joined the new committee is Nur al-Din al-Zenki, once backed by the CIA as "vetted," though this designation was later revoked. Far more significant was the folding into HTS of Jabhat Fateh al-Sham (JFS), which until July was known as Jabhat al-Nusrah - and which represented al-Qaeda on the ground in Syria.
Capitalizing on ordinary Syrians' hatred of Islamic State (IS), al-Qaeda has pursued an audacious line of messaging that seeks to portray the group in Syria as a responsible actor that follows a "middle path." Al-Sheikh, the HTS leader, declared Shias "the enemy," cursed Alawites (the sect to which Assad belongs) and called for hostilities against the "forces of Zoroastrianism" (used as a pejorative reference to Iran).
This marks a dangerous pivot in the Syrian Revolution. The ascendency of HTS heralds an end for the opposition's backers in both the West and the Gulf, who will shy away from supporting an alliance that so brazenly incorporates a former al-Qaeda affiliate. Already, the U.S., Saudi Arabia and Turkey have suspended support to moderate rebel groups, fearing that supplies will fall into the hands of extremists. The writer is a senior research fellow at King's College London's International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation. (New Statesman-UK)
Full: http://www.newstatesman.com/world/2017/03/between-twin-barbarisms
Al-Qaeda Extremists Are Leading the Syrian Insurgency - Shiraz Maher
On Feb. 9, Syrian rebel commander Hashem al-Sheikh announced the creation of a powerful, extremist-dominated entity known as Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), or the "Committee for the Liberation of the Levant." One of the main groups that joined the new committee is Nur al-Din al-Zenki, once backed by the CIA as "vetted," though this designation was later revoked. Far more significant was the folding into HTS of Jabhat Fateh al-Sham (JFS), which until July was known as Jabhat al-Nusrah - and which represented al-Qaeda on the ground in Syria.
Capitalizing on ordinary Syrians' hatred of Islamic State (IS), al-Qaeda has pursued an audacious line of messaging that seeks to portray the group in Syria as a responsible actor that follows a "middle path." Al-Sheikh, the HTS leader, declared Shias "the enemy," cursed Alawites (the sect to which Assad belongs) and called for hostilities against the "forces of Zoroastrianism" (used as a pejorative reference to Iran).
This marks a dangerous pivot in the Syrian Revolution. The ascendency of HTS heralds an end for the opposition's backers in both the West and the Gulf, who will shy away from supporting an alliance that so brazenly incorporates a former al-Qaeda affiliate. Already, the U.S., Saudi Arabia and Turkey have suspended support to moderate rebel groups, fearing that supplies will fall into the hands of extremists. The writer is a senior research fellow at King's College London's International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation. (New Statesman-UK)
Full: http://www.newstatesman.com/world/2017/03/between-twin-barbarisms
