Our friends, the Syrian 'rebels'

Post Reply New Topic

I do not believe these are movements for democracy nor do I believe they are organic. They are being used as pawns by powers beyond their comprehension and they do not care how much blood has to be shed to achieve their objectives.

Assad isn't an angel but it's hard to paint him as a monster when we were calling the guy a 'reformer' a few short years ago before this civil war, was he any worse than these Gulf dictators that are trying to remove him? How can we decry the actions of one dictator but wholeheartedly support another? Where was the outrage when our great ally Saudi Arabia marched into Bahrain to squash their rebellion? Our Major Non-NATO ally Pakistan was harboring Osama Bin Laden for over a decade and along with the Saudis were instrumental in bringing the Taliban to power. How would our friends the Syrian rebels pay us back? We already got a taste from the militias in Libya when they murdered our ambassador and 3 other Americans. The intervention in Libya has destabilized the region and has given al-Qaeda a base of operations in northern Africa. The stakes in Syria are much graver for our own national security, regional stability, and the people of Syria. The interests of our so called allies and even our own government aren't in the interest of the American people. A lot of people in this country are starting to come to the realization that these 'humanitarian' wars are anything but, there is always an ulterior motive. The idea that we must destroy these countries in order to save them is BS. We try to paint these conflicts as black and white, good vs evil but that is almost never the case.

If I remember correctly, MEMRI had some of his stuff. The man has balls of steel - he's brilliant and he's a wit, too.

Oh, The_Face_of_Boo? The article I meant is here:

The enemy of my enemy is my friend. That's a rule of thumb in wars.

A pretty terrible one. Look at WWII, for starters. Stalin's Russia defeated Nazism, then proceeded to commit genocide and repress people.

Are you denying there's a form of democracy in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya now?

The enemy of my enemy is my friend. That's a rule of thumb in wars.

Islamists and FSA both have the same enemy in Syria today (as the FSA has no other ally on the ground), so they would be a defacto allies now, but they would clash if Al-Assad falls.

The same reason why US and Taliban were allies.

And what makes you think the FSA which I wouldn't describe as being made up of seculars, liberals, and moderates could defeat these Islamists elements which by most accounts are more numerous, better organized, better equipped, and all around better fighters? How will the SNC which has no real presence in Syria govern these groups? Do you think the foreign fighters in Syria will just leave if they win? What effect do you think this will have on the stability of Lebanon, Iraq, and Jordan? I don't see any end in sight to the bloodshed in Syria, Assad will not be defeated and his base of support will not abandon him because they know the fate that waits them at the hands of these rebels and the power behind him in Iran and Russia have interests of their own as well. This is a tar baby that should be avoided at all costs. Is this worth starting World War 3?

Arrest [edit]

Samaha was arrested on 9 August 2012 due to his involvement in transporting explosives into Lebanon with the help of the Syrian Security Chief Ali Mamlouk and his attempt to destabilize the country.[20] The other reason for his arrest was "inciting sectarian strife" in Lebanon.[21] Samaha was arrested based on the instructions from the acting public prosecutor of Lebanon.[22]
In December 2012, 14 March MP Okab Sakr claimed that Jamil Al Sayyed, who is one of Samaha's close confidants, had been in the car with Samaha along with a third person while transferring explosives from Syria to Lebanon to carry out terrorist attacks.[23][24] Samaha had close links with various senior Syrian political and intelligence aides, including top adviser to President Assad, Butheina Shaban in relation to this activities.[25][24]

One of Samaha's lawyers is Sayyed's son, Malek Sayyed.[26][27] Samaha confessed on 10 August to the Internal Security Forces Information Branch that Syrian President Bashar Assad wanted bomb attacks in Lebanon.[28] Najib Mikati, the Lebanese Prime Minister, stated in September 2012 that Samaha admitted his involvement of plotting terror attacks in Lebanon.[29] According to leaked interrogation transcripts, Samaha suggested that the bombs were meant to target Lebanese Christian leaders in order to raise sectarian tensions.[30]

The intelligence branch of the Lebanese Internal Security Forces (ISF), headed by Wissam al-Hassan who was assassinated on 19 October 2012, played a central role in his arrest.[31][32] Samir Geagea argued that al-Hassan was assassinated due to his involvement in the arrest of Samaha.[33]

I's not going to be easy for both Christians and Muslims once Bashar is down. But at least with Bashar out of the way, there is a better chance to true peace.

.

Americans Oppose U.S. Military Involvement in Syria

PRINCETON, NJ -- Sixty-eight percent of Americans say the United States should not use military action in Syria to attempt to end the civil war there if diplomatic and economic efforts fail, while 24% would favor U.S. military involvement.

Americans are not optimistic that the conflict between government and rebel forces in Syria will be solved through diplomatic and economic means. The May 28-29 Gallup poll finds that Americans do not believe such efforts will resolve the conflict, by 58% to 27%.

Thus, Americans seem to have a clear preference for keeping the U.S. military out of the Syrian conflict, given their opposition to such involvement even though they expect that diplomatic efforts will fail to bring peace.

Sen. John McCain recently visited Syria; he has favored providing arms to the anti-government forces there. To date, the Obama administration's actions have been limited to participating in third-party peace talks and providing food and medical aid to anti-government forces. However, the administration says it is keeping its options open.

Forty-nine percent of Americans say they are following news about the Syrian conflict "very" or "somewhat" closely. That is below the historical average of 60% for more than 200 news events Gallup has measured since 1992.

There are relatively modest differences by subgroup in the percentage who say the United States should use military action in Syria. Republicans are somewhat more likely than Democrats to support U.S. military action, 31% to 20%. College graduates are less inclined to support U.S. military involvement than those without a college degree.

An example of Assad terrorism:




It's very hypocrite of you to claim that Al Assad protectsChristians, his regime was the fiercest enemy and killer against Lebanese Christians - Why do you think Mcalevera hates him for example?