It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Assad historical speech (06/01/2013) The TRUTH speaks

page: 12
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 06:16 AM
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

I believe they have the right to self-determination also, but I do not see that happening. To say 10,000 people who protest represent the entire Syrian population is ridiculous. That was all that was protesting an with that, there is a possiblity armed men were amongst the protesters and fired the first shots. We know nothing about what the Syrian people want and like you will fight for your medias opinion, I will head down the opposite track and find an alternative view which will try to show you that what you believe may be false.

60,000 people have apparently died in Syria, most likely more now but to say that Assad has ransacked his own peoples homes whilst raping them and killing their children is just as stupid as saying the Syrians are determining their political future. This is simply not true. The SAA have family and children in that country also who must be protected against any invader. Do you think they would be running around killing their country men? Of course not, they are fighting against a foreign force and that foreign force do not have the Syrian peoples best interests at hand. Do the foreigners have family in Syria or are they just their to clean up any regime support? With the death toll at 60,000, they must of found a few of them already.

Maybe you and DontReally should take a look at some of the footage from Syria. Not just FSA propaganda, footage from both sides of the conflict. You say you want to know my position? Ok..

Your government are nothing but a pack of terrorist sponsoring dogs, along with the likes of France, Britain, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Canada, Australia, Turkey and the rest of Europe. Your (and my) government do not care about human life, they would rather serve their own agenda and make it look like a peaceful cause on the world scene. If they cared about the Syrian people, why arm dangerous groups? Why send criminals to fight their proxy war? Why sit back and allow children and women to be raped and then mutilated? How do you call this help and self determination? A 14 year old girl hung herself after being gang raped by Rebels in Syria, where was her future?

You watch hundreds of thousands of people die in Iraq based on the same lies yet you think this war is legitimate? What about Libya? One of the highest standards of living in Africa until the invasion. How do you call that self determination? Now they don't have the luxuries they had beforehand and most likely have to bowel to a central banking system which will turn them into a western modelled democracy which will screw the population over and make more dictators, this time Islamic Extremist.

Human rights is not a factor in Syria. If it was, we would be in every Islamic state under Sharia law including Saudi Arabia, Bahrain (Just about every state in the Middle East). Bahrain cracked down on their civilians, how many did they kill again? Saudi Arabia sent their army to Bahrain to assist in that crackdown.. Are we going to go into those countries next and liberate the people? No, because they suck on our rods unlike Syria, Iran, North Korea.

It must really hurt the West being hated by the likes of the countries above, countries who stand up for their values, countries who refuse to be dictated to, countries who would rather wave a middle finger at your leaders even after crippling sanctions. Whats my position? I hope Assad wastes every last terrorist and then hunts their families down and gives to them exactly what they have given to his people in front of them. I have never supported terrorism and just because the media will use phrases like "Armed Rebel" which is a nice word for terrorist, I still wont support them. You can if you feel its the right thing to do but just remember, A child is likely getting raped right now, A woman has just been raped and watched her child get gunned down, I don't wish that upon anyone and if terrorists will chop my body to pieces and then demand money from my family to get them back, Assad is my horse.

You can back the a/holes who have threatened Israel, you can back the a/holes who praise Osama, you can back the a/holes who run around high on what ever the hell it is, knock yourself out. They are criminals.
edit on 11-1-2013 by DarknStormy because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 06:50 AM
reply to post by DarknStormy

Thank you for stating your position, I am not going to say you are wrong rather that we are looking at the Syrian issue form two different sides.

What I would say is that although I can accept your position, it is very much akin to the position that the Russians have taken, I think that there are a couple of points you are ignoring.

War Crimes are being committed by both sides, I recognise that the FSA has committed acts which could be interpreted as “humanitarian crimes”, particularly against ethnic minorities in Syria. You on the other hand don’t seem so willing to accept findings of human rights groups who highlight the atrocious crimes committed by the Assad regime yet in the same breath will happily highlight the crimes committed by Rebel forces reported by these very same groups.

In addition to this based on your earlier posts I would have to say that you are wrong to brand the FSA as “terrorists” in the sense that they are Islamic extremists. Yes there are elements of the FSA that has sympathies with terrorist groups however they are not under the direction of an extremist ideology. The FSA is a nationalistic movement it is not an Islamic extremism movement. There are groups amongst the rebel movement who are “terrorists” one such group is Al-Nusra, which is essentially “Al-Qa’ida in Syria” their relationship with the FSA is fickle as they oppose any western assistance and the FSA disagrees with many of their tactics. Another key difference is that Al-Nusra does not receive any support form America or other western states.

So while yes I can accept your position that Syria should basically just be left to get on with it and we should all keep out of it. I do think that you also should accept that Assad has committed crimes against humanity, the FSA is not a foreign force of Islamic extremists and furthermore like I said in my previous post you need to also look at the demographics and history of the country which show that Assad does not have the support of the majority.

posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 07:10 AM
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

I can agree that Assad has killed people, I don't agree that he has killed 60,000. I can agree that the FSA may have every right to fight Assad, I don't agree with Extremists. I can agree that maybe some Syrians are with the FSA, no evidence suggests that the whole country is though. I don't agree with rape, murder for political gain, I don't believe it is our fight and we shouldn't be funding those groups. Imagine if someone done that to our countries and we had to watch our friends and family brutally tortured. Because we don't know whats actually happening over their, we cannot simply take one side without criticising the other. It may seem like I do, but I also see something else playing out. Human righs are the last thing on our leaders minds and external groups is not givng Syrians a fair go.

posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 02:57 PM

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin

So what do you think should be done, what is your solution to the problems in Syria, do you think that all external states who seek to influence the outcome of this civil war (including Russia) should just leave them all alone to fight it out for themselves even if that means that we could see another massacre worse than that of the Hama massacre in the 1980’s.

Hah! Once you are backed into a corner with no arguemnts, you just steer the conversation away by a diferent approach; And still you dare to justify terrorists in Syria, the same terrorists we have exposed for massacres they've done. You are intentionally deaf to our arguments.

In all of your posts on this thread you haven't said anything usefull, you are just pereptuating arguing and steering this conversation away from truth and bringing more fog on this clear case of un jusified attack on Syria. I believe that you are paid to spread disinformations. It can't be more clear.

I don't expect that your next response have any sanity in it, since you are obviously intentionally perpetuating already debunked arguments. You know that lies repeated long enough becomes truth, despite arguments against it and you are repeating those lies!

posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 05:22 PM
reply to post by DarknStormy

Besides the fact that not a single authority on this subject (outside of Russia or radical circles) would vouch your views, please, just address this basic issue. Think it over a bit. Don't sidetrack as you always do. What about the demographics of Syria?

75% of Syrians aren't being represented in the Assad government. Sunnis are excluded from positions of power in the military, judiciary, parliament and cabinet. How can you not see this as of primary importance? This is why people would laugh at you, why any rational, sane, reasonable person would question your intellectual maturity.

Syrians aren't Syrians. What the hell you even meant by that statement is disconcerting. Do you even know the history of Syria? Here's a very quick rundown: it was an arbitrary creation of the French after WWI. Prior to WWI, and since the Islamization of the Levant, Syria, along with all other Arab Muslim lands, has been demarcated according to religious and tribal affiliations. How you think things can be this way for 1300 mother Fuc-king years, deepening differences between rival sects (like Sunnis and Shi'ite) becoming inherited complexes entrenched in the very political workings of Islamic society, only to become completely irrelevant with the arbitrary creation of Syria by the French colonialists, only goes to show how stupid you are.

Syria, AS ALL EDUCATED PEOPLE KNOW, is ruled by a despotic government.

I don't need to answer you again. You idiotically choose to preach the narrative of the ruling power, the minority led Alawi government.

Talking to you, I am simply astounded at how inanely stubborn people can be.

I will be sure to avoid your future posts like the plague. This type of stupidity, and intransigence, is indicative of someone whos led more by emotion in his thinking than reason.

posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 05:51 PM
reply to post by dontreally

If you have read my previous posts on this thread thus far you will know that I agree with what you have to say and I can sympathise with your frustration.


Your attempts at intellectual dominance are putting you on the defensive, you know what you’re talking about that is clear. It’s the way you are talking about it that’s just abrasive and is only going to end up getting you banned and your opposition isn’t going to take in what you have to say if you just call everyone “stupid” and presume to educate everyone else.

I agree with what your saying but really dude you need to chill out, what differance does it make to you if some members chose to embrace ignorance.

posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 05:58 PM
reply to post by Fichorka

I believe that you are paid to spread disinformations. It can't be more clear.

I don’t get paid for it, it’s more of a volunteers thing I do in my spear time, CIA budget is a little low these days so they take volunteers you should apply I think you would be really good at it, if you want I could give you my “handlers” contact details.

Other than that I don’t really have much else to comment on that previous post of yours so to try to get something meaningful out of you that we can discuss let me ask you a very simple question.

What is your position on Syria.

posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 08:06 PM
reply to post by dontreally

Who the f##k are you? Some armchair activist who doesn't know the first thing about whats happening in Syria right now. You put up facts that are irrelevant right now and will not save the soul of a child who at this very minute is likely being raped. You ignore anything that will make your argument look ridiculous whilst banging on about something that happened 1300 years ago. We are not in the dark ages, this is 2013, people are dying and whether Assad is good, bad, dictator, saviour, it doesn't matter.

Our governments are funding know terrorists, have recognised terrorists in Syria yet you continue to play this Alawite, Sunni/Shiite crap. Very well, there are different groups in Syria and things may not be great between them, but who are you to tell me that you and your authorities know anything about what is happening inside that country? You know who the most hated people are coming from Syria? Western Media outlets. Why? Because they lie about Syria. You don't know squat about that country right now and even if the likes of Hilary Clinton and William Hague pretend to be friends with the Syrians, the Syrians hate them. They hate people like you.

The funny thing about this subject is the oppression of your very own in Syria, from rebels or Islamic Extremists. Did you realise only a week or so ago, A christian man was beheaded and fed to a dog by rebel forces? He wont get to see the birth of his child because of those barbarians. With that, 300,000 Christians are now refugees because rebel forces made them leave their homes. Lets talk about the 14 year old girl who was brutally gang raped by rebels. Well theres not much to talk about, they found here hanging.

Your argument has caused the deaths of 60,000 Syrians and the death toll is still rising. I bet you would of been a war pusher in Iraq also, your argument has cost 500,000 lives. Your argument is a disgrace to humanity. You pretty much sponsor terrorism, the deaths of women and children. F##k I hope you never have to go through some of the things above you ignorant c##t. Who are your authorities? Point a few of them out and lets see how credible you actually are. After seeing what you present, you haven't studied at all, Wikipedia is trash and anyone who has any degree of education knows this. Yes, I studied, Counter terrorism was my choice, what was yours? Justifying genocide and torture? Congratulations hero.
edit on 11-1-2013 by DarknStormy because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 10:09 AM
A new book is coming out whose very title contains the PERTINENT fact that you childishly refuse to accept:

In case you cant read the title:

Religion and State in Syria: The Sunni Ulama from Coup to Revolution (Cambridge Middle East Studies)

I'll break it down for you. Religion is the most important thing in the Muslim world: it's been this way for over a millenia. Historically speaking, the state has been aligned with Sunni Islamic interests, partially enacting the Shari'a (Islamic law). The Ulama - is Arabic for "religious scholars". You see, in a religious land, the people of prominence are ISLAMIC SCHOLARS. You see the connection now between the importance of demographics and the massive opposition to Al Assads rule??

About the book: This book is the first comprehensive study of Syria's religious scene and its most influential actors, the Sunni ulama. It shows how the determinedly secular, non-Sunni Ba'thist regime has been compelled to bring the clergy into the political fold in recent years. This book affords an entirely new perspective on this troubled country as it stands at the crossroads of political, social, and religious fragmentation.

The facts are these. Syria's government is non-Sunni, representing a group that makes up no more than 10% of the population. That is what we call non-democratic, or, simply put: tyranny. I know you like to pull on peoples heart strings, claiming that I support the activity of the terrorist elements within the Free Syrian Army, but that's just not true, or even relevant. What's relevant is the fact that the demographics simply do not match up. The people do not feel their interests are represented by the Assad regime. Even though Assad has had to make some token exceptions to keeping out Sunnis and Islamists from his government, the fact remains, he keeps them under leash. He knows that his little Shia aligned minority wouldn't be able to survive if Sunnis took their rightful 75% of the positions within his parliament and military. He would lose control and he would be pushed out.

I don't like Islamists any more than I like Assad (literally, I despise both equally). Again, I do not see things in black and white as you do. I'm not going to support a dictatorial regime because the status qua means "stability". It also means oppression for the vast majority of Syrians - the Sunni. So, given that they have a right to rebel against a government who refuses to abdicate power, unfortunately, that means civil war. One thing however is undeniably clear: Assad is a dictator representing the interests of his own little clique.

One more note on widespread killings. I acknowledge that there have been some massacres of Christian communities by radical Islamist factions. However, don't jump to the other extreme and imagine Assad - whose regime is on the verge of destruction - is all of a sudden immune to the crimes all crumbling regimes have committed once they have their power challenged. The vast majority of deatsh are the result of aistrikes. Anyone who challenges this is simply not thinking straight.

edit on 12-1-2013 by dontreally because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 10:17 AM
reply to post by DarknStormy

Rather than ms doing what “Dontreally” is doing, ramming his truth down your throat, let me ask you a very simple question to give you the opportunity to enlighten us as to your opinion on this issue of Assad’s support without having to be defensive.

So, tell me....

Do you believe that Assad has the majority of popular support amongst the Syrian people or do you believe that he is a leader who does not have the support of the people, and what are your reasons for believing so?

posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 10:35 AM
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

What a ridiculous question.

Look at the demographics. 75% are Sunni. Alawi make up a mere 12%.

What more need be said?

My truth was initially proffered quite delicately. But darknstormy simply refuses to accept facts, lest the facts undermine his general tune of gushing support for Al Assad.

At this point in the conversation, it's too late, by normal standards at least, for him to abort his support. Don't get me wrong, it would be an incredible testament to his maturity if he were able to do so, but people don't generally respond in those ways.

To put it pithily, the fact of his supporting Assad is flagrant enough. The sheer disproportion of demograpics should show without difficulty that the Al Assad regime, from its very foundations 40 years ago, was based on a power grab from a minority group who then saved himself from popular uprising by forming military and diplomatic ties with the Soviets. Whats happening today was INEVITABLE.

posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 10:56 AM
reply to post by dontreally

Dude I agree with you don’t try speaking to me like you are to other posters.

Your previous posts only put people on the defensive; I know that Assad does not have the support of the Majority I am not disagreeing with that.

What I am attempting to do is give “Darknstromy” the opportunity to clearly state his views without having to get defensive as a result of your attempts, I stress that word, attempts, at intellectual elitism and bullying.

Yes the Alawites do not represent the religious majority of Syria something that is very important in politics in that part of the world. Now you and I both know that Assad is not the popular leader of Syria just like his father before him.

That said however you have to get used to the fact that on ATS some members won’t accept that all we can do is inform. It is very arrogant however for us to presume their ignorance because they disagree with us and to try to force them to change their views.

Some people I believe on this site will ignore uncomfortable facts because they contradict their conspiracy view of the world. Take this for example, some members are arguing that Assad is the popular leader. Ask yourself why they believe this, they believe this because they also believe they the west is responsible for the Arab spring because it is all part of the grand plan of the New World Order that was also responsible for killing JFK, 9/11 and most recently taking their guns.

You’re not going to change their views, just like you’re not going to convince a member of Al-Qa’ida that blow themselves up to kill women and children is wrong.

What you can do however is discuss their views and present them with counter arguments, but if they’re not going to change their views then what difference does it make to you. By forcing your truth down their throats the way you are you just annoy people.

The reason I was asking the aforementioned member for his views was to give him the opportunity to state his opinion without being defensive so I could then discuss it with him.

posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 11:00 AM
reply to post by dontreally

How is Assads regime on the verge of destruction? The longer this goes on, the more Extremists that operate in that country killing scores of people are only going to turn them back to Assad. Think about it. You have these groups running around torturing, raping, murdering in the name of Allah. Do you actually believe that the Syrian people are going to openly support people who would most likely rape their daughter in front of them?

2nd, the Syrian army are a well trained unit and they are not going to let a bunch of buffoons over run that country. As it has been reported over the last few weeks, the FSA and their minions are crapping themselves when the SAA are near. They run like little girls, they aren't taking nothing except life right now. Many people know this, I don't understand why it is so hard to digest with you. It is well known that the Extremists are also committing atrocities and then reporting to their western puppet media outlet "Al-Jazeera" that Assad forces are committing he crimes. The rebels have openly admitted it. How can you deny that?

3rd, The book you have put up looks as though it would be an interesting read, but why should I look at something like that when its obvious you cannot look at an opposite poin of view? I understand Assad may need to go, but under the circumstances, I think it would be better for him to hang around simply because if those Extremists get power in that country, we are going to see a bloodbath which will make Assad look like a saint. If they are willing to kill scores of people now (from all ethnic groups in Syria), they will certainly do the same after they obtain power. With that said, how have we relieved the Syrians of an Oppressive dictator if that was to occur? All we are doing is getting rid of someone who doesn't comply with the west and putting in another bunch of murderers who will comply. The logic is ridiculous and thats why I am against the uprising. Not the initial uprising, the one now that has been compromised by ruthless barbarians.

posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 11:09 AM
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

Why do I think the Syrian people support Assad?

- They would take Assad over any group of Extremists which would rather murder and rape innocent children and women.

- Even though Assad may need to change things inside his government, he is more stable than a bunch of groups who at the moment can't even organise themselves to stop fighting each other.

- Syria was peaceful before the uprising, I'm sure they would rather have their peaceful country back. Don't you think that this has proven to them that outside forces really don't care about their well being? When I say that, I mean arming known criminals and terrorists? I understand the US may not be, but what about the Saudis and their friends?

- When people are running around beheading civilians, raping civilians, murdering civilians, do you expect them to pledge their support to those groups? I don't. I disagree that the Syrian people as a whole are against Assad. If anything,, they are against watching their friends and family get butchered.

posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 11:23 AM

Originally posted by dontreally
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

My truth was initially proffered quite delicately. But darknstormy simply refuses to accept facts, lest the facts undermine his general tune of gushing support for Al Assad.

Ok, where have I said that what your saying is wrong? I understand the groups in Syria.. It doesn't mean squat though. Its like saying Obama should be ousted because he is black and the majority of americans are caucasian.

But when it comes to facts, lets turn back the clock and this is why I will not change my views. Roughly 10 years ago, it was a well known fact that Saddam Hussein had WMD's. After the deaths of over a Million people and still no legitimate reason for invading, where are these WMD's?

You see, I stand by my views because somewhere down the track, maybe this will all come out and bite people like yourself in th arse. We have been lied to so many times throughout the past yet you still expect me to believe what the media will force down my throat? That is the only place this BS is coming from. Time after time, they are caught lying. Whats to say they aren't doing it right now concerning Syria? You can roll over and get a scratch on your stomach if you want, I wont.

posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 11:27 AM
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

Dude I agree with you don’t try speaking to me like you are to other posters.

Ok. Can I ask you a question? What's more bothersome to you: the tone in which I've been speaking to darknstormy (which has been growing more aggressive) or the untruth that darknstormy is spreading?

Also, if you agree with me, why did you describe my argument as "MY truth", as if there were some discrepancy between the objective facts and my telling of them?

If my explanation aligns with the facts, THATS ALL THAT SHOULD MATTER. Granted, I've allowed myself some leeway in attacking darknstormy, mainly because I find his argument so arrogant in its abuse of the basic facts that I don't care to show him the normative respect I would usually show. Indeed, it isn't "good" in leading him to a proper response, but that's mainly due to my belief that hes already so far out in left field that it would be pointless to continue speaking to him with the usual decor. He wont budge.

That being said, I probably should have restrained myself a little more. I let my passion get the better of me.

I stress that word, attempts, at intellectual elitism and bullying.

Intellectual elitism? Take a step back from the foray and look at this thread. Do you think I would parade things like my degree in political science and the general agreement that demographics are primary amongst academics if I weren't utterly astounded by the stupidity of what darknstormy is claiming? It's not intellectual elitism. It's amazement that ATS could tolerate such a wanton abuse of logic, and that this type of inanity could be rewarded with stars, creating the dismal perception that darknstormy has an intellectually defensible position.

It's the sheer irony that fuels my acerbic responses. As said, it would have been better to speak more genially. But I don't think your mind is any more in the right place by caring more about my "tone" and a perceived intellectual "elitism" than the nonsense that darknstormy is arguing.

It is very arrogant however for us to presume their ignorance because they disagree with us and to try to force them to change their views.

I don't get what you mean. If someone is claiming something unfactual, and you make an effort to apprise him of that, and he still refuses, I think ignorance, nay, a basic intellectual ignorance of how reason works, would be the only explanation left.

By forcing your truth down their throats the way you are you just annoy people.

Maybe my impish side takes over after I figure that out???

I get what you mean. Self control is of course important. But there are always two sides: the other side is the fact that this site USED to be far better than this. I realize people have bizarre views; I also realize that this site is a home for people with bizarre views. But the in the middle east forum? If the motto of this site is to mean anything, ignorance should be opposed, not accommodated with tact.

In any case, the fact remains, this site pushes away intellectuals, particularly those with a knowledge of political subjects. I love the idea of being able to go online in your free time to debate politics; I understand that that means even ignorant people get a say; but I utterly hate seeing ignorance being rewarded instead of knowledge. And it's not for the reason you would suspect - my ego (of course to a little degree), but mainly my desire to see people acting intelligently, reasonably, and responsibly. When facts are ignored, how irresponsible is that? It's ridiculous. Its the root crime. When people don't challenge their own suppositions, when they let some "fact" they've picked up fester without critique, disputing reason because it affects them too deeply?? I'm a philosophically minded guy. My idealism always shows up in situations like these. I want people to take control of themselves - to stifle their egocentrism; to let themselves accept a position because the basic, undiluted facts - easy facts, like demographics, and not philosophically oriented "facts", which are much more colored by emotional bias, FORCE them to.

I understand people don't always respond that way, but I don't want to stop hoping that they should.

posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 11:28 AM
reply to post by DarknStormy

Some of them are very fair points.

To counter your argument I would say that Assad has never been elected into office and as such his popularity has never actually been tested.

Yes Syria could be described as being “Peaceful” but only to an extent i would use the world "stable, Assad is a dictator even before the up risings he was committing crimes against his own people just like his father did.

I do think what you say about the people of Syria preferring the stability of a dictator to the instability of a extremist government. But Assad has never stood in a fair election so this hypothesis cannot be tested.

The culture of Syria would suggest if it ever came to a vote, Assad would lose against a Sunni opponent however again he has never allowed this, he has given all the wealth and senior positions in government to a minority as such the Syrian people are rebelling after years of being subjected to this his rule and the rule of his family.

To me it would seem that your biggest objection is that you don’t think the opposition could provide a stable government. So would you agree with this as a solution, Assad steps down and hands power over to a deputy under the agreement that said deputy will facility an election in which opposing forces can also run that is to say a Sunni party with Sunni leadership amongst others. Furthermore that in the transitional period between Assad stepping down that a time that elections are called a ceasefire between the FSA and Syrian government is agreed for say the 6 months or so it would take for elections to take place under external monitoring to ensure that the peace is kept and that the elections are fair.

edit on 12-1-2013 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 11:34 AM
Assad will step down in a few weeks/months, why are we talking about him now.

posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 11:37 AM
reply to post by dontreally

What facts have you brought to the argument? The fact that Alawites are a minority group and Sunnis are most of the population? Does that mean Syria is against Assad? Certainly not. All it shows is that their are different groups in Syria. There are different groups in every country.

posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 11:46 AM
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

So what are you going to say when the same thing happens in Iran? That the Iranian people openly support the US/Israel occupation? Even Western backed Militias bringing unrest to Iran? Seriously, I'm saying this now because its going to happen one way or the other. This isn't about dictatorship, if it was, we would be in Saudi Arabia where Sunnis oppress Shia and who ever else they see fit, Bahrain where they kill for fun and any other country where oppression exists.

If this was about the Syrian people, we wouldn't be arming criminals. Just like if it was about the Iraqis, we wouldn't of killed roughly a million of them. The same as Afghanistan, where some guy was meant to be hiding in the mountains yet he is found in Pakistan in a mansion.. Lie afer lie.. The biggest terrorist in modern history was a business partner of George Bush and you expect me to believe that the Syrians want Assad ousted? They don't care what we think let alone what we are causing, they want here counry back.
edit on 12-1-2013 by DarknStormy because: (no reason given)

top topics

<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in