Syria - the beginning of the end for the anti-Assad brigade?

[Royal24s]

Forgot to say, welcome back Bob. How the fuck do you get past the welcome thread. The question needs to be asked.

Obviously that loophole again.

My Lord do I have permission to use your emoticon. I just can't be arsed any longer to reply to Royals, Heenan's and The Ticks repetitive posts and awful accusations. Reading them has started to upsets me. I can't believe that anyone can support what has gone in Aleppo, particularly in the last few days to keep this shit of a dictator in power.

The point is that the "rebels" are the very same Saudi themed jihadists who swept through various neighbouring countries and established the Islamic state. Same ideology and often same people who chop people's heads off on video and perform terrorist atrocities throughout the world.
Assad is no better or worse than most rulers in the region but is vilified in the cause of furthering Saudi Wahabiist agendas against Iranian Sunni agendas in the region. Each are client states of the USA and Russia respectively.
Objectively , it is not Assad but these IS terrorists who are responsible for the events in Allepo since they have invaded and occupied part of an independant State. It is hard to imagine what you think that State should do other than attack them and repel them by military means, and I'm afraid that will always result in carnage.
By regional standards Assad is quite a popular leader and certainly more welcome than the IS lunatics who are executing people and perpetrating horrible acts there every day.
Like most things in the region and in the world actually, it's fairly complicated and you can't understand it by watching a brief synopsis on tv - particularly one created from a biased perspective .
For historical and political reasons which I very much doubt you'd understand , the West has allied itself gradually with the wrong side here and we should admit that rather than continue to tie ourselves in knots with this ridiculous redefining of the conflicts.

[Zambo]

For historical and political reasons which I very much doubt you'd understand , the West has allied itself gradually with the wrong side here and we should admit that rather than continue to tie ourselves in knots with this ridiculous redefining of the conflicts.

You are correct, I don't understand, why anyone would support the ruling of Syria by Assad. The West are therefore very much on the right side, or should be. Our politicians are just gutless twats hiding behind all of the propaganda.

[paolo]

place in order of most deaths caused

obama
gadaffi
bush junior
assad
blair
saddam

place in order of financial cost of campaign

place in order of financial misery caused


although nothing to do with any of it, some will vote for trump

[Zambo]

Shocking

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-38314291

and the timeline and the tweets

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-mi ... t-38308826

and the headlines

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-38310833

People of Aleppo's message to the world

GOODBYE

Civilians lined up in the street and executed

Britain and the West blamed for lack of leadership

[Zambo]

Assad's victory draws near - Rejoice. Putin should be up for the Nobel Peace Prize

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-38297511

[Royal24s]

For historical and political reasons which I very much doubt you'd understand , the West has allied itself gradually with the wrong side here and we should admit that rather than continue to tie ourselves in knots with this ridiculous redefining of the conflicts.

You are correct, I don't understand, why anyone would support the ruling of Syria by Assad. The West are therefore very much on the right side, or should be. Our politicians are just gutless twats hiding behind all of the propaganda.

Because its better than Syria being ruled by Isis , which is the only alternative, and we have no legitimate right to choose their government for them.
If there were some popular demand fir democracy then your position would at least be arguable, but there isn't .

[The Tick]

Your jihadi buddies have failed, zambo. Get over it.

[Zambo]

For historical and political reasons which I very much doubt you'd understand , the West has allied itself gradually with the wrong side here and we should admit that rather than continue to tie ourselves in knots with this ridiculous redefining of the conflicts.

You are correct, I don't understand, why anyone would support the ruling of Syria by Assad. The West are therefore very much on the right side, or should be. Our politicians are just gutless twats hiding behind all of the propaganda.

Because its better than Syria being ruled by Isis , which is the only alternative, and we have no legitimate right to choose their government for them.
If there were some popular demand fir democracy then your position would at least be arguable, but there isn't .

The war should be against dictators and ISIS. And ask the people of Syria if they want a democracy or not compared to what they had or have now.

Was it a wonder the people rose up. The Assad regime in Syria, in its ruthless quest to remain in power, refused to acknowledge peaceful protesters' demands for freedom and dignity. If it did, and if it met those demands, Islamists would not be able to hijack the demonstrations.

[Royal24s]

Tick

I think they probably have at this point, but far more important to highlight what has really been going on here to the general public so that it's not repeated or continued elsewhere .
This springs from the Obama closeness to Saudi and it is to be hoped that this covert interventionist stuff will wither on the vine under Donald Trump.
It always mystified me, given your stance on Syria, that you opposed him, when he was the last hope of ending these duplicitous policies which have immediate and grave consequences in the region, but also others in the wider world.

[Royal24s]

For historical and political reasons which I very much doubt you'd understand , the West has allied itself gradually with the wrong side here and we should admit that rather than continue to tie ourselves in knots with this ridiculous redefining of the conflicts.

You are correct, I don't understand, why anyone would support the ruling of Syria by Assad. The West are therefore very much on the right side, or should be. Our politicians are just gutless twats hiding behind all of the propaganda.

Because its better than Syria being ruled by Isis , which is the only alternative, and we have no legitimate right to choose their government for them.
If there were some popular demand fir democracy then your position would at least be arguable, but there isn't .

The war should be against dictators and ISIS. And ask the people of Syria if they want a democracy or not compared to what they had or have now.

Was it a wonder the people rose up. The Assad regime in Syria, in its ruthless quest to remain in power, refused to acknowledge peaceful protesters' demands for freedom and dignity. If it did, and if it met those demands, Islamists would not be able to hijack the demonstrations.

Well, firstly you can't enter a war and start fighting both sides unless you're intending to be quickly defeated.
Secondly, the only people who rose up against Assad were Islamists sponsored by Saudi and Western intelligence as part of the so called " Arab Spring", which was all one grand scheme to gain geo political control of the region and the oil country by country then run it from behind a curtain whilst Saudi had direct control as a client and could do all sorts of barbaric things to preserve power without the West being blamed.
I know this because I was told about it before they even started in Egypt, and I must say that my opinion upon the outcome was pretty much correct.
As for asking people in Syria what sort of government they'd like , well there's actually no chance that they'd want one like ours because they generally regard western society as very corrupt and evil. You would be offering them gay marriage, feminism and broken families for example and for some reason they are not attracted by these or other aspects of our broken culture. You see, this is reality rather than a projection of our own view of our social setup or our own bbc led illusion that other peoples would like to live as we do.
Moreover, we can't in practical terms go round the world offering to short circuit their political systems and put new government's in place for them. It is a most naive view to believe that this is what really motivates our government to start wars- in fact it's just a currently popular " cover story" when they have some other agenda in mind which would not gain any public support.
Did you believe in WMD 's ?

[Zambo]

Of course the people of Syria wouldn't want a government like ours, but they want one which would treat them fairly so they can live a half decent life. Look what a dictator's regime has brought them now.

With regard to WMDs, it's easy to form an opinion now, but looking at Hussein's use of chemical weapons previously, and his pursuing of a biological and nuclear weapons program, it's easy to see why people thought it was very possible.

[Royal24s]

No it's not. I said it was impossible in a very public media the very night it was suggested. That's because I bothered to know a bit about what I intended to speak about.
For purely logical reasons it was clear from the outset that he simply could not have been in possession of functional biological or chemical weapons .
You mean it was possible if you believed misleading accounts , just as it is possible now for you to see the Syrian conflict in a completely distorted way.

[Rossco]

It's a mess no doubt. But ISIS/Al Qaeda fill the void if the government forces lose. And that isn't good for anyone anywhere in the long run. These things already have enough strong holds around that part of the world.

I hope and pray that they are crushed everywhere they go in any region of the world. They reap what they sow. They sow hate, war, death. So little wonder that is all they reap.

[Zambo]

No it's not. I said it was impossible in a very public media the very night it was suggested. That's because I bothered to know a bit about what I intended to speak about.
For purely logical reasons it was clear from the outset that he simply could not have been in possession of functional biological or chemical weapons .
You mean it was possible if you believed misleading accounts , just as it is pitiable now for you to see the Syrian conflict in a completely distorted way.

Yeah, my bad. I keep forgetting my place and that you are on a different plain. You would have been fully up to speed way before anyone else. Don't you feel guilty though that you didn't contact Bush to stop the war?

[Royal24s]

It's a "different plane", and I think Bush was well aware of the realities actually.

[Royal24s]

But yes it would better if you knew your place.

[Rossco]

True to form. Once they get exposed,worried or scared they show there true colours and come out from the dark to show themselves.. Seen it once with one of their true brethren. These things are little different. Just wearing meat suits to hide behind.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/743 ... -caliphate

Course the liberal wing will try to twist and change and do their thing. Moderate blah, blah, blah etc, etc, etc. That piece of marxist filth Corbyn there as always and supporting the invaders who have no interest in anything not of their false religion and false god they follow. Blaming Russia....oh so popular these days that is with these liberal type...and the irony of that as well Well labour do know whom they get their votes from. The Brit version of the democratic party.

Lines in the sand and all that. Biblical things happening everyday, all day

[Zambo]

It's a "different plane", and I think Bush was well aware of the realities actually.

Nope in your case it's plain. That's why I said plain and not plane.

[Royal24s]

It's a "different plane", and I think Bush was well aware of the realities actually.

Nope in your case it's plain. That's why I said plain and not plane.

Used as a noun,( which is how you used it if you don't understand simple grammar ), the word "plain" can only mean an area of land. See, this is an example of why you really shouldn't try to be clever.

[Zambo]

It's a "different plane", and I think Bush was well aware of the realities actually.

Nope in your case it's plain. That's why I said plain and not plane.

Used as a noun,( which is how you used it if you don't understand simple grammar ), the word "plain" can only mean an area of land. See, this is an example of why you really shouldn't try to be clever.

Well that's correct Royals, you are on a different area of land to the rest of us, it's called cloud cuckoo land.

[Royal24s]

Oh yeah, I'm known for being impractical and theoretical. Why don't you just drop it, because it's boring and there's no chance that you're going to win.

[Zambo]

Oh yeah, I'm known for being impractical and theoretical. Why don't you just drop it, because it's boring and there's no chance that you're going to win.

Win? That happened a long time ago, this is just me being playful.

[paolo]

phpBB [video]

[Hillman avenger]

The suggestion that we want to impose our culture and values (eg re "democracy") is stating the obvious, but why the passing nasty about the BBC had to be included is a further demonstration of obsession.
If any organisation promotes understanding of other cultures, rather than critcism of them, it's the BBC.Indeed much of the crap on here is people complaining about them doing that very thing.
I can only imagine that this comment springs from ignorance. When people without irony tell you they go to Fox News you can appreciate they don't monitor what the BBC actually delivers. I probably hear about 4-6 hours of Radio 4 a day as well as BBC tv output andI find the suggestion that it encourages cultural imperialism laughable.
I aso doubt very much that the lack of enthusiam arab societies might show for"western democracy" has very much connection at all with feminism, gay marriage and the rest of Royals' pet prejudices
I find it remarkable that the view is held that gay partnerships did not exist before we recognised them in law. As if people had spent a lifetime wanting to be gay but now felt as it was "legal" they could start to do something about it.Grow up.

[Royal24s]

The suggestion that we want to impose our culture and values (eg re "democracy") is stating the obvious, but why the passing nasty about the BBC had to be included is a further demonstration of obsession.
If any organisation promotes understanding of other cultures, rather than critcism of them, it's the BBC.Indeed much of the crap on here is people complaining about them doing that very thing.
I can only imagine that this comment springs from ignorance. When people without irony tell you they go to Fox News you can appreciate they don't monitor what the BBC actually delivers. I probably hear about 4-6 hours of Radio 4 a day as well as BBC tv output andI find the suggestion that it encourages cultural imperialism laughable.
I aso doubt very much that the lack of enthusiam arab societies might show for"western democracy" has very much connection at all with feminism, gay marriage and the rest of Royals' pet prejudices
I find it remarkable that the view is held that gay partnerships did not exist before we recognised them in law. As if people had spent a lifetime wanting to be gay but now felt as it was "legal" they could start to do something about it.Grow up.

Well that's your opinion regarding the BBC . I beg to differ , and I doubt we shall agree on that.
As far as gay marriage etc is concerned , I wasn't of course stating my own opinions there, and this isn't the place to discuss them. Obviously though , since you simply refer to the opinions of others as " prejudices" whether or not you know what they are, I think you're probably the one whose prejudiced , strictly speaking.
Anyway, try not to be shocked here Hillman, but in the Moslem countries of the Mid East, they don't actually like these things in general, even if you think that makes them bad. It's reality, like the extinction of the doh doh and the Labour Party, and my point was that they're very unlikely to welcome the enforcement of these ideas by conquest, however marvelous you believe them to be. These sick bastards persist in the outdated and fascist idea of marrying women, Hillman, and we can't change that. If they watched the BBC perhaps they'd see the truth like you, but apparently they don't .
We all know that you're willing to fight to the last drop of someone else's blood to protect the Bush legacy in the Mid East, but it's over - let it go !