Poll: Should the international community intervene directly in Syria?
Yes.
No.
Unsure/undecided.
[Show Results]
 
Syria-What should be done?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-09-2013, 05:14 PM
RE: Syria-What should be done?
(10-09-2013 04:54 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  I am leaning towards the idea that Assad's forces used them it has been independently confirmed by a human rights organization.

Where can I find the documentation?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2013, 05:15 PM
RE: Syria-What should be done?
(10-09-2013 05:14 PM)Julius Wrote:  
(10-09-2013 04:54 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  I am leaning towards the idea that Assad's forces used them it has been independently confirmed by a human rights organization.

Where can I find the documentation?

In the article I linked in that comment.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2013, 05:25 PM
RE: Syria-What should be done?
(10-09-2013 05:15 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(10-09-2013 05:14 PM)Julius Wrote:  Where can I find the documentation?

In the article I linked in that comment.

Thanks for the link. It is an interesting read and is the most credible evidence presented so far.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2013, 05:28 PM
RE: Syria-What should be done?
(10-09-2013 05:25 PM)Julius Wrote:  
(10-09-2013 05:15 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  In the article I linked in that comment.

Thanks for the link. It is an interesting read and is the most credible evidence presented so far.

Thats why I am leaning that way now. Still against any direct military action in Syria though.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2013, 05:31 PM
RE: Syria-What should be done?
Quote:I am leaning towards the idea that Assad's forces used them it has been independently confirmed by a human rights organization.

Today in the news, Assad agreed to put all his chemical weapons under international control. Remember the background. Yes, he's a dictator and will do anything to hold onto his power, and I'm obviously not condoning his actions. All dictators are evil, and he's been brutal. But he's not a madman like Gaddafi. Everything he's done so far has been logical to hold onto his power. Remember, Assad is secular, pro-Western and by Syrian standards "a liberal". He was previously an opthomologist in London, where he met his wife, who was born and raised in London, and has a degree in computer science and, until recently, was praised for being a humanitarian. She's been featured in Vogue and dresses like a model. No head scarves or anything like that. 10% of Syria was Christian, and Christians in Syria never had a problem.

But remember, the Assad's are a minority group, Shia, which are the "secular" ones in the Islamic world. The majority of Syrians are the more devout Sunni, like Saudi Arabia, Osama bin Ladin, al Qaeda, etc. And the Sunni majority doesn't even consider the Assad's to be Muslim--he's an infidel just like Christians and atheists. It's been widely reported that much the Syrian rebels are part of Al Qaeda and want the Assad's out so they can impose sharia law.

So far, when the rebels have conquered Christian towns, they've burned all the churches and the Christians have fled. The Christians in Syria are begging for us not to attack Assad since if the rebels get the upperhand they'll all be killed.

There is no good answer. Assad's a brutal, cruel, dictator, part of a minority ruling elite that rules with an iron fist to oppress the majority in his country. So, we naturally think we should support the freedom fighters that want to overthrow him. But the enemy of your enemy is not necessarily your friend--especially when it's a bunch of Al Qaeda jihadists.

It's impossible to say who used the chemical weapons, but I think it's highly unlikely it was Assad. And I'll remind everyone again that the last time there was a major chemical weapons attack the US also said it had proof that it was launched by a Shia group (Iran), when in fact it was all lies and propaganda and they knew all along they were US weapons that Reagan gave Saddam to wipe out the Kurds since he was too spread out fighting 2 fronts. So is it possible the US launched the chemical weapons? It sounds like a wild conspiracy theory, and I have seen zero evidence of it, but it was also considered a wild conspiracy the last time it happened to the Kurds and only recently did leaks reveal that the crazy theory was right all along.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2013, 05:37 PM
RE: Syria-What should be done?
(10-09-2013 05:31 PM)frankksj Wrote:  
Quote:I am leaning towards the idea that Assad's forces used them it has been independently confirmed by a human rights organization.

Today in the news, Assad agreed to put all his chemical weapons under international control. Remember the background. Yes, he's a dictator and will do anything to hold onto his power, and I'm obviously not condoning his actions. All dictators are evil, and he's been brutal. But he's not a madman like Gaddafi. Everything he's done so far has been logical to hold onto his power. Remember, Assad is secular, pro-Western and by Syrian standards "a liberal". He was previously an opthomologist in London, where he met his wife, who was born and raised in London, and has a degree in computer science and, until recently, was praised for being a humanitarian. She's been featured in Vogue and dresses like a model. No head scarves or anything like that. 10% of Syria was Christian, and Christians in Syria never had a problem.

But remember, the Assad's are a minority group, Shia, which are the "secular" ones in the Islamic world. The majority of Syrians are the more devout Sunni, like Saudi Arabia, Osama bin Ladin, al Qaeda, etc. And the Sunni majority doesn't even consider the Assad's to be Muslim--he's an infidel just like Christians and atheists. It's been widely reported that much the Syrian rebels are part of Al Qaeda and want the Assad's out so they can impose sharia law.

So far, when the rebels have conquered Christian towns, they've burned all the churches and the Christians have fled. The Christians in Syria are begging for us not to attack Assad since if the rebels get the upperhand they'll all be killed.

There is no good answer. Assad's a brutal, cruel, dictator, part of a minority ruling elite that rules with an iron fist to oppress the majority in his country. So, we naturally think we should support the freedom fighters that want to overthrow him. But the enemy of your enemy is not necessarily your friend--especially when it's a bunch of Al Qaeda jihadists.

It's impossible to say who used the chemical weapons, but I think it's highly unlikely it was Assad. And I'll remind everyone again that the last time there was a major chemical weapons attack the US also said it had proof that it was launched by a Shia group (Iran), when in fact it was all lies and propaganda and they knew all along they were US weapons that Reagan gave Saddam to wipe out the Kurds since he was too spread out fighting 2 fronts. So is it possible the US launched the chemical weapons? It sounds like a wild conspiracy theory, and I have seen zero evidence of it, but it was also considered a wild conspiracy the last time it happened to the Kurds and only recently did leaks reveal that the crazy theory was right all along.

You're right it is stupid for him to have done this but the evidence I linked earlier is pretty damning. Now there is a chance that it was not authorised and done by someone in the field against orders (In another thread someone mentioned that the Germans had picked up Syrian radio chatter of a field officer asking to use chemicals and High Command refusing) If the Russian led plan works great wonderful everyone wins and we don't have to get involved in what is looking more and more like an intractable multi-sided civil war with no good western option. Plus the fact that the report was by an unaffiliated 3rd party Human rights group lends to it's credibility.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2013, 05:43 PM
RE: Syria-What should be done?
frankksj,

I feel your pain about there being no good answers.

Some people say you need to choose a side, but I don't believe that is always true. Sometimes it's better to sit back and watch a cesspool like the Mideast explode in violence and not let any of the poo get on you than it is to take a side.

For example, we stepped into Iraq to give those people "Freedom", and what happened? Well, the adventure cost the better part of a Trillion Dollars and thousands of live and in the end, the Iraqi still don't like us and is and Iran is Iraq's newest best friend. How about that for stepping into an exploding cesspool?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2013, 05:46 PM
RE: Syria-What should be done?
Quote: Plus the fact that the report was by an unaffiliated 3rd party Human rights group lends to it's credibility.

Remember, if the rebels did it, they only benefited if Assad got blamed. They would have had an invested interest in making sure that it was 100% iron clad that all evidence pointed to Assad, because if they themselves were implicated, it would only hurt them. That could mean paying off one of Assad's generals to do it, or secretly taking over Assad's launchers. So it's hard to put your faith in any evidence, no matter how credible, since the evidence trail would have had to be falsified for it to do any good.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2013, 05:51 PM
RE: Syria-What should be done?
(10-09-2013 05:46 PM)frankksj Wrote:  
Quote: Plus the fact that the report was by an unaffiliated 3rd party Human rights group lends to it's credibility.

Remember, if the rebels did it, they only benefited if Assad got blamed. They would have had an invested interest in making sure that it was 100% iron clad that all evidence pointed to Assad, because if they themselves were implicated, it would only hurt them. That could mean paying off one of Assad's generals to do it, or secretly taking over Assad's launchers. So it's hard to put your faith in any evidence, no matter how credible, since the evidence trail would have had to be falsified for it to do any good.

Deciding 100% it can't have been Assad based on no evidence is no better than saying it was on no evidence. It will probably never be 100% but it is looking more and more like it was his forces, whether he gave the order or not.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2013, 05:53 PM
RE: Syria-What should be done?
Quote:Some people say you need to choose a side, but I don't believe that is always true.

Couldn't agree more. Canada isn't picking sides. Has that hurt the Canadians?

But more importantly what I think is hypocritical is that the US _only_ picks sides if there's something in it for us. Millions of people died in Rwanda and many other genocides and we said it was none of our business. But, the US has been itching for a war with Iran for years, they have a mutual defense treaty with Syria and must attack the US if the US attacks Syria, so the one that benefits the most by attacking Syria is the US since that means it will automatically lead to a war with Iran.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: