Take a look at the inner workings of Syrian governance for the last 30 years and its very easy to see how things went wrong - was the uprising in Hama also a foreign conspiracy? Is the systematic violence and complete political suppression within Syria a foreign conspiracy? Was Bashars release of Islamists early on in the protests a foreign conspiracy? Do we disregard the very early events that led up to the uprising? The jailing of the teens, the defections within the Army and government?
The people who suggest foreign conspiracy either have a geopolitical bias to that set of powers (Russia/Iran/Syria) and thus seek a narrative or who have very poor understanding of Syria itself.
Assad's and his father's rule is a cookie-cutter dictatorship, and their previous actions fit in that context. You STILL can't divorce the establish fact that Saudi Arabia and Qatar have funded ISIS/Al-Nusra as a proxy force to topple Assad. The reasons why Assad being toppled is good for Israel should also be common sense by now,
as detailed in this Department of State memo:
The best way to help Israel deal with Iran's growing nuclear capability is to help the people of Syria overthrow the regime of Bashar Assad.
and...
Washington should start by expressing its willingness to work with regional allies like Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar to organize, train and arm Syrian rebel forces. The announcement of such a decision would, by itself, likely cause substantial defections from the Syrian military. Then, using territory in Turkey and possibly Jordan, U.S. diplomats and Pentagon officials can start strengthening the opposition. It will take time. But the rebellion is going to go on for a long time, with or without U.S. involvement.
So chalk it up to a casualty of this agenda that Syria is now overrun with jihadist rebels that behead, rape, murder, and cause chaos on the Syrian people... because
reasons.
BlastProcessing said:
Oh shit, liberal icon Tulsi Gabbard? I can certainly trust the opinion of someone who took a secret trip to Syria to personally meet with Assad and refused to say who payed for the trip, then had to pay for it herself after criticism.
You mean one of the few politicians with the common sense
to investigate things on the ground versus what the Pentagon was telling you? What do you have against fact-finding missions, aside from your own conjecture that she is somehow a Putin-loving Assad sympathizer? Does anyone that question the official story a treasonous pig to you? That's a scary anti-critical thinking mindset that has worked for many regimes in the past. As a military war veteran, the last thing she wants is another baseless regime-change war like Iraq (and the corporations running the media want to destroy her for that).
ClosingADoorAnother said:
classic conspiracy and fake news tactic. Question the accepted view.
You say this like it as bad thing to do... nobody ever taught you to do that?
ClosingADoorAnother said:
Then when confronted, come with a bunch of links to random websites and Youtube videos. When dismissed, turn the question around and blame the other for not having evidence themselves.
I would love to have been confronted with counter-arguments to the arguments presented in the links, but I can't expect people with tunnel vision that are not open to even read/research dissenting views to come back at me with real counter-point. Instead, people attack the sources, label me a potential ISIS drone (nice petty tactic to silence dissent), and people hunker down in the mindless "our peeps would never lie to us" position.
ClosingADoorAnother said:
You didn't back up your argument, you went to a bunch of websites that fit your views and then present them as facts, ignoring the mountains of articles to the contrary.
Show me the mountains of evidence pointing to the Syria fight not being about gas for Qatar/France. Show me the evidence that the Saudis haven't funded ISIS. Show me the evidence for Israel being the paragon of human rights that wants Assad gone because of their love of children. Show me the evidence against Tulsi Gabbard's findings that there is no such thing as "moderate" rebels being supported by the US in the region. We can go on and on...
ClosingADoorAnother said:
Also, you are ignoring points of my previous post that don't fit your views. You draw parallels between the seven countries on the fly ban list now and named some time ago in your conspiracy level Youtube video. But this ignores Egypt and Tunisia. So what was the interest of the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia to get rid of a stable and friendly regime there? What was the interest in Tunisia?
Tunisia was the base of operations to go after Qaddafi in Libya, and Egypt, as the next-door neighbor to Saudi Arabia, got their own fancy Muslim Brotherhood installed to descend the country into worse chaos than before:
Five years after Egypts Arab Spring: We didnt need a revolution
Now, thousands of Islamists and scores of secular activists are languishing in jails, more than at any period during Mubarak's reign. Some have been shot dead in the streets. Freedoms have been curbed, and the police are increasingly accused of torture, forced disappearances and arbitrary arrests.
You can also read this about Saudi Arabia's
fun games with the Arab Spring:
Islamists across the region are working in Riyadh's favor. As with the fall of former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, the Saudis gained newfound influence with the Muslim Brotherhood and its even more hard-line Salfi allies, who reportedly take funds from the Saudis. The Muslim Brotherhood has vaulted to prominence in the post-Mubarak era. It draws hundreds of thousands to rallies. It looks set to sweep forthcoming elections. After all, it is telling that Muslim Brotherhood members took refuge in Saudi Arabia during the decades of persecution under former Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser. Today, the party makes a good partner for Riyadh, as it never utters even a whisper of criticism of what more radical Islamist outfits denounce as the Saudi royal family's treacherous ties with the West. If Saudi Arabia desperately backed Mubarak to his last days, in post-revolutionary Egypt the kingdom is now closely connected to the country's new political power brokers.
It is all inter-connected, which I guess DOES support using the term "conspiracy".
