It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Who is Syria's Assad REALLY fighting against?

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 31 2011 @ 06:15 PM
link   
I ask this question seriously, and honestly.
I'm not uninformed, I'm well aware of what the MSM has to say on the topic, and have seen many of the raw videos, blogs, and other info out there on the topic.

HOWEVER...

recent action in Lybia has me questioning just who Assad is REALLY fighting against. The impression that I got from Libya is that Al-Qaeda operatives triggered the response from Gaddafi... which was hurriedly interpreted by MSM and no doubt assisted by NATO-allied press as "Gaddafi strikes innocent civillians!".

Essentially, I view Lybia as a NATO-assisted plot by Al-Qaeda to overthrow the establishment (for more information see Egypt, State of).

Is this what's going on in Syria also?
If so, can someone provide credible evidence to suggest that this is the case?

I'm not denying that there is a grassroots component in each of these "revolutions". Clearly there is... but I don't believe that either Gaddafi or Assad are foolish enough to open fire on their own citizens without a significant reason for doing so - something far more significant than "hey, they don't like me, my feelings are hurt."

thoughts?



posted on Oct, 31 2011 @ 06:21 PM
link   
When you have the support of the leader.....news.antiwar.com...

I think it would be safe to say there are some "mixed" in with the crowd.



posted on Oct, 31 2011 @ 06:24 PM
link   
yeah, I've seen some similar posts.
I guess I'm just wondering whether this whole thing was set up by AQ or if they simply saw an opportunity and jumped on it.

frontpagemag.com...

I find it really alarming that the US is supporting the "Arab Spring", while up to this point it's been an entirely negative movement, giving credence and credability to Islamist movements in Tunisia, Egypt and Lybia... and even allowing them to be democratically validated in those places. It's insane. How do they think that this is going to end?



posted on Oct, 31 2011 @ 06:25 PM
link   
it was painfully obvious this was an eventuality.

go back 2001 when they removed the taliban forcefully. then Saddam. They're going for gold!

absolutely no opposition to their world order. NONE.



posted on Oct, 31 2011 @ 06:29 PM
link   
Right now the middle east is in real chaos, more than ever, Syria and Iran are the last 2 countrys wich still stand againts the corrupt western world.

He is a dictator, and a portion of is population is anti Assad, he used to be real close to the brithish, he is now an enemie of the western allies.

So lets think who in its right mind would want the middle east in so much chaos, who could profit from strong countrys behing attacked from part of there owen population, who needs the oil, who needs more control over the region, who needs chaos to eb able to install more corrupt governements.

Theres a minority of people, countrys, thast need this chaos to steal..

just my 2 cents



posted on Oct, 31 2011 @ 06:31 PM
link   
It shouldn't matter if Al Qaeda is just jumping on opportunity. If the USA was actually in the mid east fighting "terrorist"s they would be helping Syria fight the protests because they are being backed by the exact same group that supposedly attacked the US and that the US went to war for.

The fact that the US is even thinking about helping the protesters shows they have no qualms with it being back by their "nemesis" which shows you the hypocrisy of the whole NATO interventions.



posted on Oct, 31 2011 @ 06:34 PM
link   
The more I see out of the middle east, the more I agree with those sentiments.
It's like the US and her allies aren't seeking to benefit from a strong, vibrant middle east, but to capitalise on its downfall. They don't care who is in leadership as long as they get oil, or gold, or whatever happens to be popular this week.

It's insane. To support your enemies in order to rape the land for its resources is utter foolishness. So what happens now, they just take a back step and watch it all go to hell, now that they have what they want?

ugh.



posted on Oct, 31 2011 @ 06:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Awen24
 



but I don't believe that either Gaddafi or Assad are foolish enough to open fire on their own citizens without a significant reason for doing so - something far more significant than "hey, they don't like me, my feelings are hurt."

thoughts?


It's the *Threat*

*Power*, too, sometimes becomes too *normal* and *addictive*

Read up on Abu Bashar al-Assad...en.wikipedia.org...

^^^Killing hundreds if not thousands of Syrian muslims in their own mosques during worship because of the threat of rebellion....had been going on for decades during his tenure...

Maybe "Arab Spring" is inciting some to rebel, but according to the Assads, has been happening all during the reign...ruthless and looking like hitlers at times...
edit on 31-10-2011 by BurningSpearess because: to end quoted

edit on 31-10-2011 by BurningSpearess because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join