• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Syria and UN Security Council Decision

Status
Not open for further replies.
JihadJane said:
Tragically delusional rubbish!
Click to expand...


That sentence struck me as well. Almost comical in its naivety.

Apropos comical: "Al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri has voiced his support for the Syrian uprising in a new video message ... criticised the Syrian regime for crimes against its citizens ... condemned [it] as anti-Islam ... pernicious, cancerous regime that suffocates the free people in Syria."

And a new UN resolution gets prepared by the other peace-loving force for good Saudi Arabia, which contains the same parts that Russia and China condemned as "one-sided" and led them to veto. Russia already announced to veto again should there be a vote. In other news, Pentagon plans US-backed war against Syria.

Unbelievable.
 
Last edited:
Childlike Empress said:
That sentence struck me as well. Almost comical in its naivety.

Apropos comical: "Al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri has voiced his support for the Syrian uprising in a new video message ... criticised the Syrian regime for crimes against its citizens ... condemned [it] as anti-Islam ... pernicious, cancerous regime that suffocates the free people in Syria."

And a new UN resolution gets prepared by the other peace-loving force for good Saudi Arabia, which contains the same parts that Russia and China condemned as "one-sided" and led them to veto. Russia already announced to veto again should there be a vote. In other news, Pentagon plans US-backed war against Syria.



Unbelievable.
Click to expand...

Didn't you just claim Al-Qaeda were the ones shelling the cities?
 
JihadJane and Childlike Empress would be more convincing in claiming that I am "deluded" in thinking the west tries to prevent genocides, if they weren't supporting a murderous thug who is shelling his own people with artilery as I am writing this.

If they cannot see a genocide when it's happening right in front of their eyes, and indeed openly support those who actually commit it right now, how can they possibly judge whether anybody else indirectly prevents or supports genocide elsewhere?
 
Last edited:
Weird Science said:
JihadJane and Childlike Empress would be more convincing in claiming that I am "deluded" in thinking the west tries to prevent genocides, if they weren't supporting a murderous thug who is shelling his own people with artilery as I am writing this.
Click to expand...

Juvenile, but propagandistically effective, If-you're-not-with-us-you're-against-us crap.

You've moved the goalposts. You said that the West was consistent in its goal of trying to stop mass murder. This is delusional rubbish.

What would the US government (or any government anywhere) do if there was a foreign-backed, armed attempt to overthrow the government?

The West intervenes when it serves their perceived economic interests.

If they cannot see a genocide when it's happening right in front of their eyes, and indeed openly support those who actually commit it right now, how can they possibly judge whether anybody else indirectly prevents or supports genocide elsewhere?
Click to expand...

When you write that genocide is "happening right in front of their eyes" do you mean on the TV?

What usually happens when "the West" violently intervenes is that many more people (mostly civilians) are violently killed, critical infrastructure is destroyed and even more lethal chaos is created. That's how "the West's" destabilization campaigns normally work out.
 
Last edited:
Well, it certainly seems that Assad's claims that al-Qaeda are involved in this are not wrong. Ayman al-Zawahiri is now calling on al-Qaeda to oust his government. This is according to Ha'aretz, so we are talking about proper news sources now:

http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-...d-to-support-assad-opposition-forces-1.412458

New video of terror group's chief Ayman al-Zawahri urging the ouster of Syria's 'cancerous regime' follows report of al-Qaida links to recent series of bombings in the country.
Click to expand...

The suicide bombing attacks in Damascus certainly appear now to be the work of al-Qaeda.

My own view is that it would be a very bad and stupid idea for the West to arm these people.
 
It is amusing, in a sad sort of way, that the same folks who constantly claim Al Quaeda & co. are brave freedom fighters are now trying to pretend the reason they support Assad's massacres is their sudden discovery that al Quaeda are nasty folks. Didn't they shout that all those bad things said about Al Queda are just evil imperialist Islamophoic propaganda last week?
 
Weird Science said:
It is amusing, in a sad sort of way, that the same folks who constantly claim Al Quaeda & co. are brave freedom fighters are now trying to pretend the reason they support Assad's massacres is their sudden discovery that al Quaeda are nasty folks. Didn't they shout that all those bad things said about Al Queda are just evil imperialist Islamophoic propaganda last week?
Click to expand...

Yes, those people do sound very confused. Let's not make the same mistake of considering al-Qaeda to be freedom fighters now.
 
Childlike Empress said:
That sentence struck me as well. Almost comical in its naivety.

Apropos comical: "Al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri has voiced his support for the Syrian uprising in a new video message ... criticised the Syrian regime for crimes against its citizens ... condemned [it] as anti-Islam ... pernicious, cancerous regime that suffocates the free people in Syria."
Click to expand...

So the protesters are terrorists because Al-Queda supports them?

Aren't you usually crying over civilian deaths when it's the other way around?

McHrozni
 
angrysoba said:
Yes, those people do sound very confused. Let's not make the same mistake of considering al-Qaeda to be freedom fighters now.
Click to expand...

Indeed so. This is one of the reasons the west is reluctant to intervene in internal disputes in Arab or Muslim lands -- it's hard to not support someone worse than the guy now in power.

But the reason the west is thinking of intervention now is not that they have any illusions about Al Queda, or don't know that the Islamists will use any upheaval to try and further the Islamic revolution; it's that Assad is now butchering his own people with tanks and artillery, which must be stopped even if the instigators, or some of those killed, are sympathetic to Islamists.

To try and stop this mass murder might further the Islamists' cause, but -- similarly -- winning WWII furthered the communists' cause; It's a choice between two evils. But the correct choice was clear nontheless, as in this case.

It might not have been so if it were a case of Assad, say, cancelling one of his predetermined from the start elections because his cronies couldn't get the required 100.2% approval rate as they were ordered.
 
Weird Science said:
JihadJane and Childlike Empress would be more convincing in claiming that I am "deluded" in thinking the west tries to prevent genocides, if they weren't supporting a murderous thug who is shelling his own people with artilery as I am writing this.

If they cannot see a genocide when it's happening right in front of their eyes, and indeed openly support those who actually commit it right now, how can they possibly judge whether anybody else indirectly prevents or supports genocide elsewhere?
Click to expand...
But just watch them go nuts if Israel cuts Gaza off from cheese doodles, now that's real genocide!
 
JihadJane said:
What would the US government (or any government anywhere) do if there was a foreign-backed, armed attempt to overthrow the government?
Click to expand...
Is the US government run by a brutal unelected dictator in this hypothetical?
 
angrysoba said:
Yes, those people do sound very confused. Let's not make the same mistake of considering al-Qaeda to be freedom fighters now.
Click to expand...
I don't think there's any danger of that. Al Qaeda is just trying to hijack the revolution and become relevant again. I doubt they have much support in Syria.
 
angrysoba said:
The suicide bombing attacks in Damascus certainly appear now to be the work of al-Qaeda.
Click to expand...


And the bombings on Friday in Aleppo. And the sources for this are U.S. officials. There it is again, the closest surveilled terror network in history. And interesting how the timeline gets fixed again...

McClatchy said:
The international terrorist network's presence in Syria also raises the possibility that Islamic extremists will try to hijack the uprising, which would seriously complicate efforts by the United States and its European and Arab partners to force Assad's regime from power.
Click to expand...


As if this hasn't happened months ago already, to the knowledge of Russia and China and everybody who paid attention. The denial of which being a reason for their veto against the UN resolution. Sunni extremists armed by Saudi Arabia and Qatar through Turkey with training of western "intelligence". I think I mentioned it before. :rolleyes:
 
Childlike Empress said:
And the bombings on Friday in Aleppo. And the sources for this are U.S. officials. There it is again, the closest surveilled terror network in history. And interesting how the timeline gets fixed again...




As if this hasn't happened months ago already, to the knowledge of Russia and China and everybody who paid attention. The denial of which being a reason for their veto against the UN resolution. Sunni extremists armed by Saudi Arabia and Qatar through Turkey with training of western "intelligence". I think I mentioned it before. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
CE, you now accept the existence of an Islamic terrorist group called al Qaeda, yes?
 
Pardalis said:
What's rubbish is constantly referring to Thierry Meyssam, Sibel Edmonds and World Socialist Website.
Click to expand...


What's rubbish is being lied to over and over again and accepting it instead of searching for outlets which are more committed to the truth. Here's a recent interview with unembedded british journalist Lizzie Phelan about the situation as she found it (in Libya and Syria) and how it gets reported in "the West".


If you prefer to read it, here's a transcript.

[...] (S.P) – This is an important question. Why do people continue to believe these channels though they have been proven to be lying on various occasions? CNN declared that it has broadcasted footage from Syria that was untrue, not only that, they broadcasted footage of the Syrian army attacking towns while in fact it was footage of the Syrian army being attacked by insurgents in some areas. They acknowledge this and yet people still believe them. Al Jazeera on many occasions they lied about the case of Zeinab Hosni. They said she was killed, but she was alive. Why do people keep believing these channels?

(L.P) – I call it because of Western cultural supremacy and that unfortunately the culture of the West is so deeply embedded in peoples minds and hearts that even though we know that it is lying because it looks a certain way and because we have grown up believing that this is right. Essentially it is brainwashing. And as I said it is the power of marketing, you know people spend a lot of money understanding how to make people believe that black is white and white is black. [...]
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom