Support NeoGAF

[fixedpoint]

This is a direct result of Obama's complete failure to deal with Assad back in 2012. If Obama had acted swiftly and removed him all of this mess would have been avoided. Now ISIS and God knows what else are out there murdering and terrorizing innocent people while Putin continues with his expansionist plans.

Good thing Mother Base is relatively nearby in the Seychelles, right?

 

[ryutaro's mama]

This is a direct result of Obama's complete failure to deal with Assad back in 2012. If Obama had acted swiftly and removed him all of this mess would have been avoided. Now ISIS and God knows what else are out there murdering and terrorizing innocent people while Putin continues with his expansionist plans.

LOL

Oh man. This is amazing. With the Double R avatar and all. Has to be a joke post.

Almost had me.

 

[FlyingSaucer]

Russia is gearing up its support of Assad in Syria with Soldiers and Hardware

"In response, USA set to gear up their support of their ISIS puppet"

Can someone clue me in as to who the good guys are in Syria?

Tricky question.

Yes, at least the civilians as some people already answered; but their numbers are quickly dwindling...

 

[antonz]

This is an interesting line of thought. For Assad, at least, it might make more sense to bomb his non-ISIS opposition into submission first, and then bank on outside assistance when he's suddenly the lesser evil.

The Russians tend to make it easy for people to track them with geolocating etc. and right now the Russians are basically creating a defensive line far from the fighting. I suspect that will be the main strategy. Crush resistance in the Government regions then push out.

It is exactly why Innocent people outside of the fighting are the ones who will suffer the most. Russia still fights like its 1930s and 40s and will devastate everything in their path

 

[TheRealTalker]

Syria is currently a hell hole

torture, death, starvation

people mostly the youth who had their parents killed and live in a living hell turn to darkness and revenge

 

[Coriolanus]

Tricky question.

Yes, at least the civilians as some people already answered; but their numbers are quickly dwindling...

What? The Kurds are dicks too? News to me.

 

[FlyingSaucer]

What? The Kurds are dicks too? News to me.

I wouldn't dare to post a cynic comment, so I imagine our allies the Turks are bombing them for a perfectly valid reason.

 

[Mii]

I fail to see how empowering the same government that destroyed the entire country is a good idea. ISIS can be dealt with without betraying the Syrian people by letting the murderous regime remain in power. More support has to be given to Rebel forces besides ISIS. If anything, empowering Assad would also empower ISIS who would take advantage of the populations frustration that the regime is still in power. No one like ISIS, yet neither do people like living under a murderous thug like Bashar.

The rebel argument is a pipe dream. Most non-ISIS are Nusra (Al-Qaeda). It's also not uncommon for Nusra and ISIS to put aside their differences sometimes to fight the few remaining rebels and Assad. The Kurds only care about fellow Kurds. The small remaining portion aren't going to have their fortunes changed with a few more U.S. weapons that will probably just end up in ISIS hands. And if we're going to wait for a secular rebel uprising, we'll be waiting many years without resolution, which means a worsening refugee situation.

Supporting Assad means there will be, of all options on the table, existing government functions that could support the nation (at this point ISIS is a government in the eastern half of Syria, and something would need to take its place after its fall, and currently the only other one is Assad. unless we wait for the unlikely secular rebels to slowly build up a region to govern, but again, that will take years at this rate)

Plenty on the western part of the country support Assad and see him as their protection as minorities from Sunni extremists. The majority Sunni population certainly has reason to not like him, but the same dynamics existed for Saddam Hussain, and clearly the removal of him was the biggest geopolitical blunder of the last 50 years. It was his removal that created ISIS, which is mostly remnants of Republican Guard combined with Al Qaeda. Removing Assad might see the same thing happen.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

No. If Obama had taken Assad out ISIS would not have been able to get a foothold in Syria. He could have stopped them long before they became organised by giving real aid to opposition forces.

You mean like how we helped take out Gaddafi? So are you willing to give him credit for that even though it ended up creating the EXACT same problems? Destability, civil conflict, etc.

The fact is we've seen what intervention can do and any idiot that thinks it's some magical cure hasn't been paying attention. Unless you just want ground troops to stay there forever because as soon as they leave there's no guarantee all hell won't break loose.

 

[DXB-KNIGHT]

Strange? Russia and the West basically were taking a stance of no one should interfere in the Syrian issue.
This means that all Assad is about to fall.

 

[reckless]

Strange? Russia and the West basically were taking a stance of no one should interfere in the Syrian issue.
This means that all Assad is about to fall.

What? The U.S and its allies have been busy bombing ISIS, while providing weapons and training to some rebel groups.

Russia and Iran have been advising and supplying Syria pretty much the entire time.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

We don't need to oust Assad, we just need to start shooting down their military aircraft so they can't bomb citizens anymore and set up aid stations in Syria.

Strange? Russia and the West basically were taking a stance of no one should interfere in the Syrian issue.
This means that all Assad is about to fall.

Well, yeah, he only controls 1/6 of Syria at this point and he's hated by everyone in the country and pretty much every human rights organization.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

LOL

Oh man. This is amazing. With the Double R avatar and all. Has to be a joke post.

Almost had me.

Let's not forget when he wanted to intervene and strike against Assad the Republicans in Congress were against it except for McCain and Graham. The American people were against it in many polls as well. Including Repubs.

Keep in mind this is the same poster that puts the blame of Guantanamo still being open squarely on Obama as well. He's all over the place and seems to think the Presidency is a dictatorship.

 

[Mii]

How do you think supporting the government that literally started the war will have any remotely stability? The one that allegedly let loose al qadea members during the war, barrel bombed his own civilians, and have a mass torture program. To support him will cause the US to lose many Middle eastern allies and possibly have them even further increase support of the rebellion. Arguably, I can say supporting a government that started the rebellion through violent means, a one that lost so much already, and is hostile to the US is just as stupid as supporting the rebels if not more.

It is so easy for westerners to say that BS when they aren't a target by they own government . Tell the Syrian civilians and rebels that hate Assad to tell him he is a better option to ISIL. FYI the US is involved in a program to equipment and train their own rebels to fight ISIL. The issue is that the rebels don't see them as a big treat in comparison to the government.

Saddam Hussain.

Sometimes a ruler can be hated and it can lead to a better situation for its people than their removal. And these sorts of dictators can find ways through severe exertion of power to maintain control.

As I mentioned, it is in fact Saddam's removal that has created this ISIS mess. Do we want to figure out what happens after an Assad removal? How does the Assad power structure respond to the removal of Assad? Do they do their own form of Al-Qaeda in Iraq -> ISIS?

The fastest way to stability is with Assad. There isn't a viable alternative available without waiting many years, time we're starting to see we don't have given the refugee crisis.

We don't need to advertise our support. But we can step aside and let Russia and Iran do the supporting. We just need to step aside and let them.

 

[DXB-KNIGHT]

What? The U.S and its allies have been busy bombing ISIS, while providing weapons and training to some rebel groups.

Russia and Iran have been advising and supplying Syria pretty much the entire time.

Iran advising?
Many Iranian, Afghan sent by Iran and the terrorist group Hezbollah were either captured or killed during the Syrian crisis.

Russia interfering means on thing the Assad regime clock is ticking and that's good.

 

[reckless]

Iran advising?
Many Iranian, Afghan sent by Iran and the terrorist group Hezbollah were either captured or killed during the Syrian crisis.

Yeah, i was just pointing out that other countries have been involved in Syria since pretty much the start.

Russia interfering means on thing the Assad regime clock is ticking and that's good.

Or it helps bolster Assad's regime and lets him win. None of us have any idea how this is going to end.

 

[xbhaskarx]

...I mean, who would you want to win? You have Assad, you have Al-Qaeda, you have ISIS.

Its almost as bad as the 2016 Presidential election.

What if we just build a big wall around Syria, and force Mexico to pay for it?

 

[T-Dot]

The rebel argument is a pipe dream. Most non-ISIS are Nusra (Al-Qaeda). It's also not uncommon for Nusra and ISIS to put aside their differences sometimes to fight the few remaining rebels and Assad. The Kurds only care about fellow Kurds. The small remaining portion aren't going to have their fortunes changed with a few more U.S. weapons that will probably just end up in ISIS hands. And if we're going to wait for a secular rebel uprising, we'll be waiting many years without resolution, which means a worsening refugee situation.

As of June 2015, there are at least 40,000 Free Syrian Army rebels (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Syrian_Army). By comparison, they are estimated 6,000 people in the Nusra Front as of November 2104. If handled properly, the FSA can be strengthened to eclipse the Nusra Front.

What I do agree with you on though is that there is a chance that a fully secular uprising will last years and worsen the situation. A political solution with Assad gone would be ideal.

Supporting Assad means there will be, of all options on the table, existing government functions that could support the nation (at this point ISIS is a government in the eastern half of Syria, and something would need to take its place after its fall, and currently the only other one is Assad. unless we wait for the unlikely secular rebels to slowly build up a region to govern, but again, that will take years at this rate)

Those existing institutions can still be intact without the Assads in the picture.

Plenty on the western part of the country support Assad and see him as their protection as minorities from Sunni extremists. The majority Sunni population certainly has reason to not like him, but the same dynamics existed for Saddam Hussain, and clearly the removal of him was the biggest geopolitical blunder of the last 50 years. It was his removal that created ISIS, which is mostly remnants of Republican Guard combined with Al Qaeda. Removing Assad might see the same thing happen.

The regime preys on the fears of minorities. Playing the sectarian card is what helped the Assads remain in power for so long.

I think the solution in Syria, if a secular uprising is unfeasible, would be to take the same measure that Lebanon took when it ended its civil war with the Taif agreement (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ta'if). Like Lebanon, each religious sect would ideally have a share of political power and say. However, there would be changes. The demographics are different in Syria. In Lebanon's confessional system, power is allocated to each group based on their population's number. Syria is a lot less diverse as a majority of Syrians are Sunni. A modification I would make would be to have each sect have an equal proportion of members in parliament. I personally don't like this approach, as Lebanon itself is still unstable, not to mention that it inflames already existing sectarianism. But I see no other option to protect minorities in Syria without letting the Assads have complete control over the control. It will take generations for Arabs to get over this sectarian bullshit sadly

 

[Abinash117]

Saddam Hussain.

Sometimes a ruler can be hated and it can lead to a better situation for its people than their removal. And these sorts of dictators can find ways through severe exertion of power to maintain control.

As I mentioned, it is in fact Saddam's removal that has created this ISIS mess. Do we want to figure out what happens after an Assad removal? How does the Assad power structure respond to the removal of Assad? Do they do their own form of Al-Qaeda in Iraq -> ISIS?

The fastest way to stability is with Assad. There isn't a viable alternative available without waiting many years, time we're starting to see we don't have given the refugee crisis.

We don't need to advertise our support. But we can step aside and let Russia and Iran do the supporting. We just need to step aside and let them.

Is Assad Saddam Hussian? If the answer is yes than well look what happened to him and what occurred during his reign. Again, Assad wasn't stability and you didn't refute that he is. You claim that dictators find ways to maintain power and what do you think they commonly do and as a result of that what happens down the road?

Let me tell you something. The US barely directly supports the rebellion and mostly done so through TOW missiles and that has been given to only a few vetted groups. The thing is the SAA is a borderline terrible military has not gotten a single long term victory during this whole year, despite the support it has gotten. Going by your idea is basically the same thing to what is going on now. I'm sure you know that groups other than US is supporting the rebels. What about them? You think they just stop? What of the rebels, ISIL, the Islamists, you think they just stop? They won't until Assad is gone. Saying that the fast way for stability is for Assad to stay is ignorant. Because all would it cause is both Russia and Iran to pour tons of resources to the black hole that is the Syrian government, therefor causing Turkey and the gulf nations to support the opposition and maybe even ISIL, and thus causing more refugees and disstabilizing the region. Hell I bet if Assad does win I doubt many would want to go back.

So how would supporting Assad make a lick of sense by going by what I said in this post and during my last one? Just saying he will proved stability is ignoring what has been happening during his reign. Now going by what could happen could happen if Assad is gone, no one knows.

 

[gutter_trash]

Nonsense. If that was true they would have risen up 10 years ago. It doesn't matter if Assad is against ISIS. He should have been removed in 2012. Instead Obama sat back and allowed a void to be created a vacuum which was filled by ISIS

so you are advocating that the Salafist-Al-Queda rebel factions take over ISIS?

because that is bassicly what you are saying

 

[gutter_trash]

Saudi Arabia supporting ISIS? I'm sorry but you know nothing man...

ISIS was responsible for one huge explosion in a military base in Saudi Arabia two weeks ago.

Syria has devolved into chaos with 4/5 different militias killing each other, Assad is slaughtering civilians in hundreds everyday, true dictator.

how about 2 years ago, Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia have been funding Rebels in Syria to oust Assad because Assad was too close to Iran for their linking

nothing to do about freedomz, but all about this sect hating that sect, this denomination hating that one

 

[damisa]

There is no solution outside splitting the country around ethnic/religious lines. You don't understand the level of hate and distrust these groups have for each other.

 

[T-Dot]

There is no solution outside splitting the country around ethnic/religious lines. You don't understand the level of hate and distrust these groups have for each other.

My family has plenty of Druze and Christian friends, and they get along fine. Granted, my mother is bigoted against the Alawites but that's mostly because of their support for Assad, not their religion.

We're not all religious zealots who hate each other

 

[damisa]

My family has plenty of Druze and Christian friends, and they get along fine. Granted, my mother is bigoted against the Alawites but that's mostly because of their support for Assad, not their religion.

We're not all religious zealots who hate each other

Would your family vote for a non-Assad Alawite president to replace Assad? Maybe they would, but from the people I know there would be no chance at all

 

[T-Dot]

Would your family vote for a non-Assad Alawite president to replace Assad? Maybe they would, but from the people I know there would be no chance at all

If he didn't support Assad's murder of 250K Syrian, then I would be open to it.

My mother wouldn't. Her bigotry is fed by the violence the regime inflicted on people, and how supportive the Alawites are of it.

You have to understand why these people aren't open to another Alawite president, and dislike the Alawites in general. It's not because they're Alawites per se; it's because a majority of them backed the man who destroyed the country and killed their relatives. Hatred isn't so much about who people are, as it is about how groups are treated by one another. If Group A mistreats Group B, chances are that B is going to hate A's guts and not trust any A members.

 

[superdeluxe]

Yay. Cold War all over again. Proxy Wars incoming.

 

[Jaladinozozo]

Well sectarian violence has been going on in these regions since the first century of Islam so there is no reason it's somehow going to resolve now when it is at its worst despite the entire history and knowledge of mankind available on a 4-5 inch screen.

Basically things are fucked and the best thing anyone can do is stay out and let these sects figure things out for themselves.

The more other countries intervene, the worst things get.

Best thing to do is probably provide humanitarian relief and aid to both sides and all civilians that need it, stop sending weapons, stop arming anyone, worry about our own problems and stop dumping so much of our resources into this neverending conflict.

 

[Sijil]

Good, maybe we can finish this bullshit. The so called Syrian opposition have shown catastrophic failure in trying to show that they are able to rule a multi ethnic and multi religious country, they're now mostly lead by religious zealots.

The so called FSA has disappeared with nothing but islamists on the ground. So it's either Assad, Nusra or ISIS, yeah I'll choose Assad.

If he didn't support Assad's murder of 250K Syrian, then I would be open to it.

My mother wouldn't. Her bigotry is fed by the violence the regime inflicted on people, and how supportive the Alawites are of it.

Yeah I bet your mother is the type that supported Saddam Hussein's murder of 200k Shia in Iraq, stop trying to make excuses for her, I lived through the suicide car bombs in Beirut and we didn't go on a Sunni killing rampage.

Also regarding the number of casualties at least half of them are pro government forces. But whatever let's put all the blame on Assad, not the mass murdering Nusra, Al Quaeda and other Islamic fronts that have taken over.

Well sectarian violence has been going on in these regions since the first century of Islam so there is no reason it's somehow going to resolve now when it is at its worst despite the entire history and knowledge of mankind available on a 4-5 inch screen.

Basically things are fucked and the best thing anyone can do is stay out and let these sects figure things out for themselves.

The more other countries intervene, the worst things get.

Best thing to do is probably provide humanitarian relief and aid to both sides and all civilians that need it, stop sending weapons, stop arming anyone, worry about our own problems and stop dumping so much of our resources into this neverending conflict.

Too late, the current conflict only escalated so far because of the direct intervention of Western powers thinking Assad can be overthrown like Gaddafi, to restore balance Russian intervention is necessary alongside Iranian.

 

[Jaladinozozo]

Also regarding the number of casualties at least half of them are pro government forces. But whatever let's put all the blame on Assad, not the mass murdering Nusra, Al Quaeda and other Islamic fronts that have taken over.

Do you have any sources to back this up? Majority of the civilian casualties have been from airstrikes which the groups you mentioned are not even capable of.

 

[T-Dot]

Well sectarian violence has been going on in these regions since the first century of Islam so there is no reason it's somehow going to resolve now when it is at its worst despite the entire history and knowledge of mankind available on a 4-5 inch screen.

Basically things are fucked and the best thing anyone can do is stay out and let these sects figure things out for themselves.

The more other countries intervene, the worst things get.

Best thing to do is probably provide humanitarian relief and aid to both sides and all civilians that need it, stop sending weapons, stop arming anyone, worry about our own problems and stop dumping so much of our resources into this neverending conflict.

I think the West should at least mediate between the sects, and help the country transition to a confessional form of government like Lebanon's. It won't kill off sectarianism sadly, but at least it will be better than a single sect controlling the government, butchering the majority and scaring other minorities into backing it ("the big bad Sunni's are going to impose Sharia on you if were not around").

 

[Sijil]

Do you have any sources to back this up? Majority of the civilian casualties have been from airstrikes which the groups you mentioned are not even capable of.

http://www.syriahr.com/en/2015/08/m...ced-since-the-beginning-of-syrian-revolution/

Pro Regime casualties nearing 100K and these are just forces and armed militia men, SOHR which opposed to the regime did not distinguish between pro regime and anti regime civilians. Tho you can be sure that these so called rebels have committed mass murder with the use of suicide car bombs and heavy rocket attacks.

Also SOHR, which is the primary source for the casualty figures, have admitted that they count anti government militia men, or civilians that have taken up arms, as civilian casualties instead of combatant further blurring the line.

 

[params7]

I see little wrong with this. As it stands now, with Assad gone, the power vacuum in Syria will bring extreme instability among the various extrme FSA units, including ISIS.

It was my stance two years ago on Gaf that America should stay out of Syria. And I was probably among two or so other posters here in the minority with such opinion but clearly we had stronger grounding in reality given what happened with Iraq and Saddam. Isis didn't rise then but AL Noosra showed us this was not just Syrian people fighting Assad but foreign insurgents as well with foreign agendas.

Let Assad and Russia finish ISIS. Handle Assad with diplomacy. Lesser of the two evils.

 

[T-Dot]

Yeah I bet your mother is the type that supported Saddam Hussein's murder of 200k Shia in Iraq, stop trying to make excuses for her, I lived through the suicide car bombs in Beirut and we didn't go on a Sunni killing rampage.

Also regarding the number of casualties at least half of them are pro government forces. But whatever let's put all the blame on Assad, not the mass murdering Nusra, Al Quaeda and other Islamic fronts that have taken over.

My mother thinks that Saddam Hussein was a tyrant who butchered his own people and started a pointless war with Iran. Also, I'm sorry to hear that you went through all that bullshit in Lubnan, but pretending that all the sectarian violence in Lebanon is only perpetrated by one group isn't the solution. Everyone is at fault here.

Also, I never defended groups like the Islamic Front and Nusra. As a secular liberal, I find them reprehensible.

Your visible sectarian attitude isn't helping us, it has damaged our society.

http://www.syriahr.com/en/2015/08/mo...an-revolution/

Pro Regime casualties nearing 100K and these are just forces and armed militia men, SOHR which opposed to the regime did not distinguish between pro regime and anti regime civilians. Tho you can be sure that these so called rebels have committed mass murder with the use of suicide car bombs and heavy rocket attacks.

Also SOHR, which is the primary source for the casualty figures, have admitted that they count anti government militia men, or civilians that have taken up arms, as civilian casualties instead of combatant further blurring the line.

The Islamists are capable of nasty things, that I agree with. But the regime has killed a far greater number of people through chemical attacks and barrel bombings. Assad started this mess, and is mostly responsible for it, so let's not act like he's only part of the problem.

 

[Trojita]

Nonsense. If that was true they would have risen up 10 years ago. It doesn't matter if Assad is against ISIS. He should have been removed in 2012. Instead Obama sat back and allowed a void to be created a vacuum which was filled by ISIS

And a void wouldn't be there if Assad was fully taken out? The power vacuum would have been even bigger.

 

[Sijil]

My mother thinks that Saddam Hussein was a tyrant who butchered his own people and started a pointless war with Iran. Also, I'm sorry to hear that you went through all that bullshit in Lubnan, but pretending that all the sectarian violence in Lebanon is only perpetrated by one group isn't the solution. Everyone is at fault here.

Also, I never defended groups like the Islamic Front and Nusra. As a secular liberal, I find them reprehensible.

Your visible sectarian attitude isn't helping us, it has damaged our society.

Only one group used suicide car bombs to murder defenseless women and children, if someone wants a fight in Syria then fight in Syria but to take revenge on women and children in Lebanon to cover their defeats in Syria? There's only one group to blame for this which is your regular Nusra nut jobs.

You call me sectarian and yet I've never attacked a single sect, how odd....In the end it's not my fault that groups like Al Quaeda, ISIS and their affiliates are the ones gaining popularity on the ground in the Middle East instead of the moderates.

The rebels are capable of nasty things, that I agree with. But the regime has killed a far greater number of people through chemical attacks and barrel bombings. Assad started this mess, and is mostly responsible for it, so let's not act like he's only part of the problem.

I'm hoping this is a typo.

Regardless, Assad was at fault, no mistake about that. But given the current situation and everything laid out I see him as the best option, I do not support him out of love for his regime but out of hate for the other armed groups. In the end his government remains the only mutli religious and ethnic entity in Syria. The West has dealt with far more brutal people before and are giving tons of ammo to help the Saudis against the Yemenis, dealing with Assad isn't below their morals.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

I see little wrong with this. As it stands now, with Assad gone, the power vacuum in Syria will bring extreme instability among the various extrme FSA units, including ISIS.

It was my stance two years ago on Gaf that America should stay out of Syria. And I was probably among two or so other posters here in the minority with such opinion but clearly we had stronger grounding in reality given what happened with Iraq and Saddam. Isis didn't rise then but AL Noosra showed us this was not just Syrian people fighting Assad but foreign insurgents as well with foreign agendas.

Let Assad and Russia finish ISIS. Handle Assad with diplomacy. Lesser of the two evils.

Millions of families have had their lives destroyed by Assad. Even if we beat ISIS, another terror group will be able to attract thousands of men who desperately want revenge if Assad is still dictator in the future.

 

[Kin5290]

why?
Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar, and UAE have been funding Sunni rebels and ISIS to overthrow Assad.

Assad is against ISIS
Iran is against ISIS.

IMO, gotta squash ISIS first

Nominally, Assad is against ISIS.

In reality, Assad's forces have mostly been sitting back while ISIS chips away at the anti-Assad rebels. So supporting Assad's side is actually a terrible idea.

 

[Sijil]

Nominally, Assad is against ISIS.

In reality, Assad's forces have mostly been sitting back while ISIS chips away at the anti-Assad rebels. So supporting Assad's side is actually a terrible idea.

Factually false, Assad forces are actively engaged against ISIS in operations in Deir Ezzor, the Palmyra country side and the whole eastern Homs country side, while ISIS is laying siege to Kuweiris airbase east of Aleppo and let's not forget the 500+ soldiers that ISIS killed a around half a year ago in the eastern province when they took over the regime airbases. You think the Christians, Shia and Alawaites in Northern Aleppo are going to be safer when ISIS reaches them, instead of getting killed by rocket fire they'll get killed by beheading.

 

[FlyingSaucer]

I see little wrong with this. As it stands now, with Assad gone, the power vacuum in Syria will bring extreme instability among the various extrme FSA units, including ISIS.

It was my stance two years ago on Gaf that America should stay out of Syria. And I was probably among two or so other posters here in the minority with such opinion but clearly we had stronger grounding in reality given what happened with Iraq and Saddam. Isis didn't rise then but AL Noosra showed us this was not just Syrian people fighting Assad but foreign insurgents as well with foreign agendas.

Let Assad and Russia finish ISIS. Handle Assad with diplomacy. Lesser of the two evils.

Sounds perfectly reasonable.

 

[T-Dot]

Only one group used suicide car bombs to murder defenseless women and children, if someone wants a fight in Syria then fight in Syria but to take revenge on women and children in Lebanon to cover their defeats in Syria? There's only one group to blame for this which is your regular Nusra nut jobs.

You call me sectarian and yet I've never attacked a single sect, how odd....In the end it's not my fault that groups like Al Quaeda, ISIS and their affiliates are the ones gaining popularity on the ground in the Middle East instead of the moderates.

The regime, if you remember, used several car bombs in Beirut to further it's goals even before the war started. They've assassinated several Lebanese intellectuals. Sunnis aren't the only ones using car bombs.

The Nusra are an awful bunch, but let's not paint the regime as any better in that regard.

Also, you assumed that my own mother supported a tyrant like Saddam because she is Sunni. I find that pretty rude.

I'm hoping this is a typo.

I said that Nusra have done horrible things, and that I agree that they are bad. I fail to see how you could interpret that as me saying otherwise.

Regardless, Assad was at fault, no mistake about that. But given the current situation and everything laid out I see him as the best option, I do not support him out of love for his regime but out of hate for the other armed groups. In the end his government remains the only mutli religious and ethnic entity in Syria. The West has dealt with far more brutal people before and are giving tons of ammo to help the Saudis against the Yemenis, dealing with Assad isn't below their morals.

The majority of Syrians are not going to accept Assad. Plain and simple. Imposing him on the population will only legitimize his criminal genocidal behavior and sow further discord that enables groups like Nusra to flourish.

Also, Assad's government is not "multi religious and ethnic", it's an Alawite government. Following the same framework as Lebanon's confessional system (minus the proportional representation given the Sunni's demographic majority), a more inclusive government could take form in Syria without the Assad's representing the Alawites. Note how I said "more inclusive", a confessional system will still have problems, but not as much as a Alawite oligarchy.

Also, just because the West are bankrolling the Saudi's slaughter in Yemen doesn't make it okay. Supporting dictators have only furthered sectarianism and turmoil in the region. Who do you think put the Shia killing Saddam in power in the first place?

 

[nephilimdj]

I actually wonder how this complicates the US backed airstrikes, does this now mean a huge area is now void of strikes? I assume Russia will place tech in areas to fuck with rockets.
I also assume makes the black market gap larger, like how Russia and China were taking NATO tech during the Kosovo war.

 

[Sibylus]

May as well take in as many people are willing to leave, because anyone with the power to end this war either are not willing to become embroiled, or seem perfectly fine turning Syria into a crater in order to "win" it. If Russian involvement isn't decisive, preserve the Syrian people and let the monsters contend for the country's ashes.

 

[Frozenprince]

Fuck them. Bashar Al-Assad and his family are monsters that should have already been tried at the Hague for war crimes.

 

[Abinash117]

I actually wonder how this complicates the US backed airstrikes, does this now mean a huge area is now void of strikes? I assume Russia will place tech in areas to fuck with rockets.
I also assume makes the black market gap larger, like how Russia and China were taking NATO tech during the Kosovo war.

Russia most likely is only going to do logistical and intelligence support with some minimum ground and air support. Pro gov forces need far far more support and they been getting foreign support for awhile, and now the gov is in a bad spot they require something more than weapons and training.

 

[Joni]

The time to takedown Assad was back in 2013 when the proof of the chemical attacks was there. When the moderate rebels still had a chance. Supporting Assad in all-out war against ISIS is probably the fastest way to restore order in the country. Any country claiming Assad still has to go, lost its superiority on the situation by not acting in 2013.

 

[Frozenprince]

The time to takedown Assad was back in 2013 when the proof of the chemical attacks was there. When the moderate rebels still had a chance. Supporting Assad in all-out war against ISIS is probably the fastest way to restore order in the country. Any country claiming Assad still has to go, lost its superiority on the situation by not acting in 2013.

Which is why nobody has intervened. The FSA is basically gone at this point. Al Nusra and ISIL control the majority of the central country, the Assad regime controls the coast, most of the north that's not Kurdish and chunks of the south. Basically every metro area, aside from Hama, Homs, and Al-Raqqua

 

[GSG Flash]

Syria pre-civil war was a hell of a lot better place than it is right. Heck, it was a hell of a lot better than the majority of the Middle East and the Muslim world, it was good enough that even Top Gear went in openly and did a portion of an episode there. How many refugees were coming out of Syria then? Syrians actually enjoyed a decent quality of life.

Unfortunately, certain Gulf Arab countries, that I will not name, decided they wanted to take advantage of the Arab spring by supporting a manufactured uprising and install a puppet government in Syria. They did this by flooding the country with weapons that any crazy asshole fundamentalist could grab a hold of. The consequence of their actions? The fucked up situation Syria and Syrians are in right now.

If Russia's support for Assad leads to stability and some semblance of the peaceful life that Syrians, in general, enjoyed before the civil war, who am I to argue against that? It could lead to a path where Assad can be removed without the whole country falling to pieces and innocent civilians bearing the brunt of it like they are now.

 

[Sijil]

The regime, if you remember, used several car bombs in Beirut to further it's goals even before the war started. They've assassinated several Lebanese intellectuals. Sunnis aren't the only ones using car bombs.

The Nusra are an awful bunch, but let's not paint the regime as any better in that regard.

Also, you assumed that my own mother supported a tyrant like Saddam because she is Sunni. I find that pretty rude.

That's debatable,first if we are going to assume that the regime is indeed responsible for those attacks even tho that has yet to be proven most of the regime generals that could've been responsible for carrying such operations were Sunni, such as Rustom Ghazali, Hassan Turkomani or Ali Mamluk, actually a large number of generals under Assad and his inner circle, such as Walid Al Mualim, are Sunni which underscores the baseless accusation that the regime is sectarian.

I assumed your mother supported Saddam Hussein because of your proclamation that she was bigoted towards Alawittes/Shia, not due to her sect.

I said that Nusra have done horrible things, and that I agree that they are bad. I fail to see how you could interpret that as me saying otherwise.

I understood that as if you were in agreement with their actions.

The majority of Syrians are not going to accept Assad. Plain and simple. Imposing him on the population will only legitimize his criminal genocidal behavior and sow further discord that enables groups like Nusra to flourish.

Also, Assad's government is not "multi religious and ethnic", it's an Alawite government. Following the same framework as Lebanon's confessional system (minus the proportional representation given the Sunni's demographic majority), a more inclusive government could take form in Syria without the Assad's representing the Alawites. Note how I said "more inclusive", a confessional system will still have problems, but not as much as a Alawite oligarchy.

Also, just because the West are bankrolling the Saudi's slaughter in Yemen doesn't make it okay. Supporting dictators have only furthered sectarianism and turmoil in the region. Who do you think put the Shia killing Saddam in power in the first place?

The majority of the Syrian population at this point want a ceasefire, a return to normality. The armed opposition tried to remove Assad and so far they failed, life's tough we can't all get what we want, if they're going to resort to terror because of it then they're going to loose whatever sympathy they have, except from the rest of the Arab world where fundamentalist groups are popular.

Assad's regime was far more inclusive that Lebanon's, the grand majority of the officer's cadre in the army, the grand majority of the government employees were Sunnis, that's a given considering that the Syrian population is over 75% Sunni. Assad's current top generals are Sunni, his former defense minister, who was killed, was a Christian, his political entourage and advisers are mixed, Sunnis, Christians and Alawites. I'm not going to say that Alawites didn't get preferential treatment, but the Sunnis had way better representation in Syria.

I'm just saying to those who think it reprehensible to support Assad, the West isn't above dealing with dictators. They're currently dealing with dictators with more blood on their hands than what Assad is being accused of. If Russian support for Assad would bring balance to the playing field which in turn would bring stability and force the big boys in the UN to find a settlement then so be it. Like I said the people want peace and security first and foremost at this point, all talks about democracy and liberty went out the door two years ago.

 

[T-Dot]

Syria pre-civil war was a hell of a lot better place than it is right. Heck, it was a hell of a lot better than the majority of the Middle East and the Muslim world, it was good enough that even Top Gear went in openly and did a portion of an episode there. How many refugees were coming out of Syria then? Syrians actually enjoyed a decent quality of life.

Unfortunately, certain Gulf Arab countries, that I will not name, decided they wanted to take advantage of the Arab spring by supporting a manufactured uprising and install a puppet government in Syria. They did this by flooding the country with weapons that any crazy asshole fundamentalist could grab a hold of. The consequence of their actions? The fucked up situation Syria and Syrians are in right now.

If Russia's support for Assad leads to stability and some semblance of the peaceful life that Syrians, in general, enjoyed before the civil war, who am I to argue against that? It could lead to a path where Assad can be removed without the whole country falling to pieces and innocent civilians bearing the brunt of it like they are now.

I won't disagree with you that Syria was a functioning and stable society before all this shit happened. That is obvious. But for all that stability, there was a cost to peoples freedom. Those people who were brave enough to criticize the regime were tortured by the mukhabarat (secret police).

Also, it was Bashar Al Assad who caused the war by massacring protesters. The gulf states do have designs on the country but let's not pretend that it's all a conspiracy plotted by the gulfies. The regime murdered people in mass in 2011, and that was what spiraled the country on a path to war.

It's hard to convince me that a man who has bombed hospitals, killed children with chemical weapons, and other atrocities is fit to preside over a stable society. People in Syria will not rest until the man who has wronged them is put behind bars. Letting Assad stay would only sow further chaos, and would help further the rise of those crazy asshole fundamentalists.

Also...

It could lead to a path where Assad can be removed without the whole country falling to pieces and innocent civilians bearing the brunt of it like they are now.

I'm curious as to how you think this is possible?

I'm just saying to those who think it reprehensible to support Assad, the West isn't above dealing with dictators. They're currently dealing with dictators with more blood on their hands than what Assad is being accused of. If Russian support for Assad would bring balance to the playing field which in turn would bring stability and force the big boys in the UN to find a settlement then so be it. Like I said the people want peace and security first and foremost at this point, all talks about democracy and liberty went out the door two years ago.

If Russia finances Assad, more Syrians are going to be killed. Plain and Simple. He can't be trusted. You can't bring stability to a country when most of the population are out for vengeance for the crimes the regime committed.

More arms Assad gets from Russia = more civilians killed = more relatives of civilians killed who take up arms to get vengeance = less stability and more war. Assad needs to be taken out of the picture.

I understand the rationale for the whole "dictatorships bring stability" mantra (although I highly disagree with it), but if your going for that approach, why not someone else? Assad has no credibility left among the Syrian people, he is Louis XVI on the eve of the French Revolution. If people want peace and security first as you said, then they should settle for an new up-comer who is more benevolent rather than the old washed-out tyrant. A Napoleon to Bashar's Louis XVI.

 

[maniac-kun]

Maybe Assad is the lesser evil if you have to chose between him and the IS or the other islamist groups.