What were you guys saying about RT news?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-06-2013, 06:36 AM
RE: What were you guys saying about RT news?
(18-06-2013 11:47 PM)I and I Wrote:  You states that the secularists has no backing, this is not true, Assad and his government are secular and they are getting support from Russia and Iran.

You know damn well I meant the likes of the FSA.

Assad and his top cronies are all Alawites, by the way. What a coincidence that the dictator's own minority should end up on top of a 'secular' regime!

(18-06-2013 11:47 PM)I and I Wrote:  You also lied about the groups attempting to overthrow Assad, they are not Syrian anymore at this point, and for some time have been foreign militants.
(18-06-2013 08:43 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Of course, the Islamists do have plenty of outside support. They've received weapons from (and, er, actually were themselves from) several other countries ...

(18-06-2013 11:47 PM)I and I Wrote:  You act as if Assad is breaking some international law by trying to stop foreign forces from toppling its government.

It's against international law to gun down civilians in the streets.

Which, as you may recall, is how this started.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
19-06-2013, 02:20 PM
RE: What were you guys saying about RT news?
(19-06-2013 06:36 AM)cjlr Wrote:  
(18-06-2013 11:47 PM)I and I Wrote:  You states that the secularists has no backing, this is not true, Assad and his government are secular and they are getting support from Russia and Iran.

You know damn well I meant the likes of the FSA.

Assad and his top cronies are all Alawites, by the way. What a coincidence that the dictator's own minority should end up on top of a 'secular' regime!

(18-06-2013 11:47 PM)I and I Wrote:  You also lied about the groups attempting to overthrow Assad, they are not Syrian anymore at this point, and for some time have been foreign militants.
(18-06-2013 08:43 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Of course, the Islamists do have plenty of outside support. They've received weapons from (and, er, actually were themselves from) several other countries ...

(18-06-2013 11:47 PM)I and I Wrote:  You act as if Assad is breaking some international law by trying to stop foreign forces from toppling its government.

It's against international law to gun down civilians in the streets.

Which, as you may recall, is how this started.

There is no law against fighting a foreign force or people who fight with this foreign force that is attempting to overthrow a government. Refute that statement.

Assads government is a secular government structure. Refute that statement.

The free Syrian army does not exist at this point in any significant way relative to the Alqaeda fighting in Syria. Refute that statement.

The Alqaeda forces in Syria have bragged about killing civilians, killed civilians and targeted more civilians than assads forces ever did. Refute that statement.

When did Assad gun down people in the streets? Dates please.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-06-2013, 03:42 PM
RE: What were you guys saying about RT news?
(19-06-2013 02:20 PM)I and I Wrote:  When did Assad gun down people in the streets? Dates please.

Here's your starting point:
http://www.hrw.org/node/99345/section/5.

(19-06-2013 02:20 PM)I and I Wrote:  There is no law against fighting a foreign force or people who fight with this foreign force that is attempting to overthrow a government. Refute that statement.
I didn't say there was. Irrelevant.

(19-06-2013 02:20 PM)I and I Wrote:  Assads government is a secular government structure. Refute that statement.
Ba'athism is officially secular. If you believe the state line of authoritarian dictatorships then I've got a beautiful vacation home in a certain "Democratic People's Republic" to sell you.

Here is an obit of Assad Sr. First internet-ready source I found mentioning the - shall we say coincidental? - demographics of the regime's leaders.

Or do you have another explanation as to why a single religious minority (the Alawites, to whom Assad and his father belong, are about ~10% of Syria's population) just happens to constitute the large majority of senior government and military positions?

But I guess they're often considered an ethnic group more than a religious one. In which case the regime could well be described as secular - and racist.

(19-06-2013 02:20 PM)I and I Wrote:  The free Syrian army does not exist at this point in any significant way relative to the Alqaeda fighting in Syria. Refute that statement.
I didn't say they were. Irrelevant.

(19-06-2013 02:20 PM)I and I Wrote:  The Alqaeda forces in Syria have bragged about killing civilians, killed civilians and targeted more civilians than assads forces ever did. Refute that statement.
That's three statements.

As to the first:
I didn't say they hadn't. Irrelevant.
As to the second:
I didn't say they hadn't. Irrelevant.
As to the third:
That's an unprovable assertion (I'd bet against it, but nobody can possibly have the hard numbers). Irrelevant.

Since you don't seem to understand my opinion when couched in my usual blend of wit and subtlety, let me give you my straight and actual opinion, that you might at least have the option of responding to something I really said. You love straw more than an Ecuadorian hatmaker.

I do not support radical islamist militias. I do not approve of my government (or any other) supporting them with weapons. I do not approve of Bashar al-Assad. I do not approve of my government (or any other) supporting his regime with weapons. I do support sending food and humanitarian supplies into a conflict zone - I support it regardless of which 'side' ends up controlling or receiving more of them, so long as they're substantially used.

I was going to make some final crack about who's enjoying whose figurative cocks, but, then I realized I have dignity.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
19-06-2013, 05:16 PM
RE: What were you guys saying about RT news?
I like RT but it's not without it's own biases. It's common for foreign news coverage to look down upon the west. In fact the videos I usually see of them in English don't cover their own country, odd as it is. Despite a lot of the political events in Russia now they don't cover anything controversial (that we could tsk at) or recent that much. They mostly look into other places.

Bury me with my guns on, so when I reach the other side - I can show him what it feels like to die.
Bury me with my guns on, so when I'm cast out of the sky, I can shoot the devil right between the eyes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-06-2013, 06:03 PM
RE: What were you guys saying about RT news?
(19-06-2013 03:42 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(19-06-2013 02:20 PM)I and I Wrote:  When did Assad gun down people in the streets? Dates please.

Here's your starting point:
http://www.hrw.org/node/99345/section/5.

(19-06-2013 02:20 PM)I and I Wrote:  There is no law against fighting a foreign force or people who fight with this foreign force that is attempting to overthrow a government. Refute that statement.
I didn't say there was. Irrelevant.

(19-06-2013 02:20 PM)I and I Wrote:  Assads government is a secular government structure. Refute that statement.
Ba'athism is officially secular. If you believe the state line of authoritarian dictatorships then I've got a beautiful vacation home in a certain "Democratic People's Republic" to sell you.

Here is an obit of Assad Sr. First internet-ready source I found mentioning the - shall we say coincidental? - demographics of the regime's leaders.

Or do you have another explanation as to why a single religious minority (the Alawites, to whom Assad and his father belong, are about ~10% of Syria's population) just happens to constitute the large majority of senior government and military positions?

But I guess they're often considered an ethnic group more than a religious one. In which case the regime could well be described as secular - and racist.

(19-06-2013 02:20 PM)I and I Wrote:  The free Syrian army does not exist at this point in any significant way relative to the Alqaeda fighting in Syria. Refute that statement.
I didn't say they were. Irrelevant.

(19-06-2013 02:20 PM)I and I Wrote:  The Alqaeda forces in Syria have bragged about killing civilians, killed civilians and targeted more civilians than assads forces ever did. Refute that statement.
That's three statements.

As to the first:
I didn't say they hadn't. Irrelevant.
As to the second:
I didn't say they hadn't. Irrelevant.
As to the third:
That's an unprovable assertion (I'd bet against it, but nobody can possibly have the hard numbers). Irrelevant.

Since you don't seem to understand my opinion when couched in my usual blend of wit and subtlety, let me give you my straight and actual opinion, that you might at least have the option of responding to something I really said. You love straw more than an Ecuadorian hatmaker.

I do not support radical islamist militias. I do not approve of my government (or any other) supporting them with weapons. I do not approve of Bashar al-Assad. I do not approve of my government (or any other) supporting his regime with weapons. I do support sending food and humanitarian supplies into a conflict zone - I support it regardless of which 'side' ends up controlling or receiving more of them, so long as they're substantially used.

I was going to make some final crack about who's enjoying whose figurative cocks, but, then I realized I have dignity.

How can you have dignity when you are against a secular government and support the radical groups trying to overthrow it?

The Syrian government is secular, there are no religious groups imposing political rules on other religious groups. You are agreeing with this yet trying to argue against it at the same time, Syria so far is the most secular government in the Middle East, Lebanon may be more so, but it certainly beats out any of the other fascist religious scum governments like Saudi Arabia or Israel.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-06-2013, 08:16 PM
RE: What were you guys saying about RT news?
(19-06-2013 06:03 PM)I and I Wrote:  How can you have dignity when you are against a secular government and support the radical groups trying to overthrow it?
(19-06-2013 03:42 PM)cjlr Wrote:  ... let me give you my straight and actual opinion ...
I do not support radical islamist militias. I do not approve of my government (or any other) supporting them with weapons.

Is it that you're incapable of understanding me? Or do you just not want to? You must like straw more than a Scarecrow cosplay contest at a Wizard of Oz convention.

(19-06-2013 06:03 PM)I and I Wrote:  The Syrian government is secular ...
Every credible source will attest to the Alawite domination of Syria's upper echelons. You can argue that's not a religious distinction if you like (and I already acknowledged that), but then it's just racism instead. Is that supposed to be better?

(19-06-2013 06:03 PM)I and I Wrote:  You are agreeing with this yet trying to argue against it at the same time, Syria so far is the most secular government in the Middle East, Lebanon may be more so, but it certainly beats out any of the other fascist religious scum governments like Saudi Arabia or Israel.

Also irrelevant. Secular ≠ good. Assad is a murderous and repressive dictator (are you seriously trying to deny that?). What do any of those other countries matter?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
20-06-2013, 01:06 AM
RE: What were you guys saying about RT news?
(19-06-2013 08:16 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(19-06-2013 06:03 PM)I and I Wrote:  How can you have dignity when you are against a secular government and support the radical groups trying to overthrow it?
(19-06-2013 03:42 PM)cjlr Wrote:  ... let me give you my straight and actual opinion ...
I do not support radical islamist militias. I do not approve of my government (or any other) supporting them with weapons.

Is it that you're incapable of understanding me? Or do you just not want to? You must like straw more than a Scarecrow cosplay contest at a Wizard of Oz convention.

(19-06-2013 06:03 PM)I and I Wrote:  The Syrian government is secular ...
Every credible source will attest to the Alawite domination of Syria's upper echelons. You can argue that's not a religious distinction if you like (and I already acknowledged that), but then it's just racism instead. Is that supposed to be better?

(19-06-2013 06:03 PM)I and I Wrote:  You are agreeing with this yet trying to argue against it at the same time, Syria so far is the most secular government in the Middle East, Lebanon may be more so, but it certainly beats out any of the other fascist religious scum governments like Saudi Arabia or Israel.

Also irrelevant. Secular ≠ good. Assad is a murderous and repressive dictator (are you seriously trying to deny that?). What do any of those other countries matter?

You are singling out Syria amidst much more repressive governments like Saudi Arabia and Israel which are both working to undermine Assad, that makes then relevant to the discussion. The much more repressive peeps are throwing stones and pointing fingers at the much less oppressive peeps. This is relevant and pure bullshit hypocrisy on your part and the west. Why do you defend such blatant hypocrisy? How can you criticize Assad when your tax dollars go to Saudi Arabia and Israel? Are you against oppressive governments or for them?

How can you pretend to be against killing civilians when you ignore the crimes of the groups trying to overthrow Assad.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-06-2013, 08:16 AM
RE: What were you guys saying about RT news?
(20-06-2013 01:06 AM)I and I Wrote:  You are singling out Syria ...
Nope, try again. I wasn't the one who brought up Syria in this thread. Nonetheless they can be singled out, insofar as they're the only ones fighting a civil war right now.

(20-06-2013 01:06 AM)I and I Wrote:  ... amidst much more repressive governments like Saudi Arabia and Israel which are both working to undermine Assad, that makes then relevant to the discussion.
Nope, try again. Other people doing other things does not make the actions of either Assad's thugs or the opposition islamist thugs any less repulsive.

(20-06-2013 01:06 AM)I and I Wrote:  The much more repressive peeps are throwing stones and pointing fingers at the much less oppressive peeps. This is relevant and pure bullshit hypocrisy on your part and the west.
Nope, try again. Other people doing other things does not make the actions of either Assad's thugs or the opposition islamist thugs any less repulsive.

(20-06-2013 01:06 AM)I and I Wrote:  Why do you defend such blatant hypocrisy?
Nope, try again.
(19-06-2013 03:42 PM)cjlr Wrote:  I do not support radical islamist militias. I do not approve of my government (or any other) supporting them with weapons. I do not approve of Bashar al-Assad. I do not approve of my government (or any other) supporting his regime with weapons.

(20-06-2013 01:06 AM)I and I Wrote:  How can you criticize Assad when your tax dollars go to Saudi Arabia and Israel? Are you against oppressive governments or for them?
Nope, try again. I certainly didn't vote for my government. But -
(18-06-2013 08:43 PM)cjlr Wrote:  ... backed by everybody's favourite reactionaries in ... Saudi Arabia
I think I see what's confused you here. You see, when I said 'favourite', I meant to imply a figurative meaning in direct contrast to the literal meaning. This is called sarcasm.

(20-06-2013 01:06 AM)I and I Wrote:  How can you pretend to be against killing civilians ...
Oh, I assure you, I'm not just pretending.

(20-06-2013 01:06 AM)I and I Wrote:  when you ignore the crimes of the groups trying to overthrow Assad.
Nope, try again. Didn't do that.

You like straw more than the keenest of cob stitchers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
20-06-2013, 04:31 PM
What were you guys saying about RT news?
You are choosing sides and Assad is not the side you are choosing correct? What other sides are there to choose from oh dear pretend atheist?

Any evidence that Assad is a dictator? What makes him or any leader a dictator? Are the criteria that fit Assad unique to Assad to single him out apart from any other world leader?

You are full of shit because you are picking and choosing when to apply the dictator standards yet at the same time don't apply those to what an Alqaeda led government would look like.

If you believe Assad shouldn't be in power because he kills civilians then what side should be in power? The other radical groups that admit to targeting civillians and bomb civilian sites?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-06-2013, 05:37 PM
RE: What were you guys saying about RT news?
All right, I and I. It's been fun, but if you continue to prove incapable of an honest discussion, then, I really can't be bothered continuing.

(20-06-2013 04:31 PM)I and I Wrote:  You are choosing sides and Assad is not the side you are choosing correct? What other sides are there to choose from oh dear pretend atheist?
Well, first of all, I'd say I am an atheist. Though, whether I am or not does not seem to me to have any bearing on our discourse here.

Second of all - reading comprehension ain't exactly your strong suit, is it? I'm not choosing sides. I never said I was choosing sides. In fact I said I wasn't choosing sides:
(19-06-2013 03:42 PM)cjlr Wrote:  I do not support radical islamist militias. I do not approve of my government (or any other) supporting them with weapons. I do not approve of Bashar al-Assad. I do not approve of my government (or any other) supporting his regime with weapons.
It's like every sentence in your post is a new straw man.

(20-06-2013 04:31 PM)I and I Wrote:  Any evidence that Assad is a dictator? What makes him or any leader a dictator? Are the criteria that fit Assad unique to Assad to single him out apart from any other world leader?
He is at the head of an authoritarian minority-run single-party undemocratic state. I'd call that a dictator. Whether that's unique or not is - here's that word again - irrelevant.

(20-06-2013 04:31 PM)I and I Wrote:  You are full of shit because you are picking and choosing when to apply the dictator standards yet at the same time don't apply those to what an Alqaeda led government would look like.
Nope, try again. Didn't do that. Though perhaps in your world, omitting mention of is equivalent of implicitly supporting. I won't pretend to know what goes on in your abject mind. Also - what was it a wise man once said? Oh, yes:
(20-06-2013 08:16 AM)cjlr Wrote:  Other people doing other things does not make the actions of either Assad's thugs or the opposition islamist thugs any less repulsive.

(20-06-2013 04:31 PM)I and I Wrote:  If you believe Assad shouldn't be in power because he kills civilians then what side should be in power? The other radical groups that admit to targeting civillians and bomb civilian sites?
Hmm... Maybe, neither of the two bloodthirsty, rapacious factions currently fighting over the country? Fuck, what a stumper. I had to really put my mind on that one.


Allow me to paraphrase our discussion:
cjlr: I believe A.
I and I: how can you support B?
cjlr: I didn't say B. I said A.
I and I: cocks cocks America cocks propaganda cocks
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like cjlr's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: