People who do you support, ISIS, so called moderate rebels like Al Nusra (Al Qaeda), or Assad?

a reply to: DrumsRfun

Cia decades long plan in place to balkanization and sow the seeds of sectarian hate to all of Israel neighbor countries.

a reply to: DrumsRfun

As much as I don't want to support either party well I find Jihadists taking power more scarier. While Assad is a dangerous man he focused on his turf and didn't threaten everyone. With Jihadists they'll threaten everyone. Just ask how our UK members and other Europeans how they are faring with Radical Islam coming into their borders.

None of them...we should all pull out and mind our own G-dang business for a few years...then start poking the hornets nest again.

a reply to: skunkape23

No, has nothing to do with gender

International Revolutionary People’s Guerrilla Forces

Why the f# would anyone support Al Qaeda!!?? Or even Assad for that matter?? This is NOTHING but a energy war masking an inevitable economic collapse!!!

How about we redirect our focus on the CONUS and the F#ing MYRIAD of problems we have here and will face in the near future!!

People buying into this sh# are completely lost!

I support getting the heck out of the Mideast and focussing on our own domestic issues.
I have had enough of the last 16 years of wars and secret wars and all the bs excuses for them.

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
a reply to: skunkape23

No, has nothing to do with gender

International Revolutionary People’s Guerrilla Forces

Thanks for the update.
I don't care what you're packing in the naughty region.
Wermins can pull a trigger or push a button well as any man-humanoid.
I don't really care for that word "guerilla."
Makes me think of gorillas...which would be a back-step in evolution for us proud Homo Sapiens.

I am with you

a reply to: starwarsisreal

I support anyone against usa invasions. If that happen to be isis, the devil, Rusia, North Korea, Pakistan, i do not care

a reply to: starwarsisreal

Why do we have to support either? If I was absolutely forced to choose, I'd support Assad because he's the elected leader of Syria and because outsiders clearly don't have the Syrian people's best interests in mind. But this is really oversimplifying the situation in Syria.

1. The original 2011 protests against Assad were peaceful. The protesters wanted a new constitution.

2. A second angle to the original protests involved the billionaire Lebanese family, the Hariri's. Their family's patriarch was the Prime Minister of Lebanon (or President, i forget) until he was assassinated in 2005. Many groups pointed towards Assad and/or his allies as the perpetrators, with the UN inquiries and investigations lasting through 2009 or 2011. So the Hariri family helped back the original Syrian protests in order to oust Assad.

3. Assad's forces crushed many aspects of the original protests with overwhelming force.

4. At the same time, Assad rejected a proposed Qatar-backed natural gas pipeline to Europe that would go through Turkey in favor of an Iranian pipeline. This pipeline would've been key to Europe finally being able to break free of Russian energy. (note: Europe would still buy Russian energy but it wouldn't be life or death anymore.)

5. The GCC nations got involved and started backing militias and sending mercenaries to Syria. The fighting was now in full force with many of the groups you mentioned getting those initial funds and arms. Powerbrokers in both Kuwait and Qatar were reportedly giving to the group that would become ISIS at this time.

6. As the fighting continued, the Assad govt met many of the original goals of the peaceful protestors. They even put a new constitution up for a referendum, which was adopted in 2012 (oops, you're not supposed to hear about this).

7. The peaceful protests got drowned out and those protestors became excluded from the negotiating table. Now the goal was to force Assad to go and for the GCC backed groups to create the govt of their choice as its replacement, completely ignoring the new Syrian Constitution & the will of the Syrian people.

8. Syrians saw for themselves that most of the Wahhabi "rebel" groups were outsiders; were destroying Syrian's infrastructure indiscriminately; and were completely ignoring the will of the Syrian people by aiming to create the govt of their choosing. The majority of Syrians rejected Wahhabism, foreign determination of their govt, and a fake Wahhabi caliphate, so guess who they started supporting? Assad!

9. In July of 2014 Assad was overwhelmingly reelected as the President of Syria in Syria's first contested elections.

10. 2 months later the US, Jordan, and at least 4 of the GCC nations officially started attacking Syria (HERE). Officially they were supposed to be taking down ISIS but you know...

11. I don't feel like looking into this anymore lol! But you can add to the timelines for yourself. European nations kept joining in (supposedly against ISIS); Russia jumped in; Iran & Hezbollah jumped in; Israel jumped in, etc. The narrative was often ISIS because of terrorist attacks that our govt's convenient kept letting through in order to garner public support, even though it should be clear from the above points that ISIS was just the pretext.

Why would it take all of the world's most powerful nations several years to take down a terrorist group that had less than 30,000 people total? And this was after the Turkey-ISIS oil trade scandal; the "Israel giving medical care to Al-Qaeda fighters" scandal; the constant "oops, we trained real rebels but they immediately defected to ISIS with all of the new weapons we gave them" scandals, etc. Now some GCC nations are trying to convince us that Al Nusra has become legit and people are seemingly falling for it.

Hmm, didn't mean to type all of this. No one's reading all of this lol. This is awkward... In short, Assad's the lesser of many evils. I'd rather see all outsiders leave Syria, all of the paramilitaries and mercs disarmed, and then see a new wave of elections there. Let the Syrian people decide their fate after that.

a reply to: Mousygretchen

totally gree.

originally posted by: Mousygretchen
a reply to: skunkape23

I support assad and the sovereign nation of syria.

I think around 400k have died there, most civilians, so I'm not sure what is right do you?

a reply to: enlightenedservant
This was an excellent breakdown and timeline of events. Its good to see some people use data to get the real picture out there now and then. Don't stop fighting the information war! (yes, it has to be a war ...)
a reply to: Xtrozero

and the overwhelming majority of them died on land outside of government jurisdiction held by rebels. That should speak volumes right there as to the nature of the foreigners that have invaded the land.

a reply to: starwarsisreal

I don't "support" any of them, save by accident with my tax money.

Isis is reprehensible on every level, I wouldn't piss on 'em if their heads were on fire.

The rest of 'em? Not my business, and I'd just as soon my country leave it alone. Let them settle their own issues...the oil will still be there when the dust settles.

a reply to: worldstarcountry

Thanks. Though I've realized that most people don't really care about what's going on in Syria. There's so much juicy geopolitical drama going on with it, but it gets ignored for the BS "Sunni vs Shiite" & "chemical red line" narratives. The "billionaire Hariri family vs Hezbollah" angle alone should make people salivate. Oh well...

ETA: I should've said the "billionaire Hariri children vs Assad with Hezbollah somewhere in between" angle. This is because I think Hezbollah operatives were officially named as the culprits behind the elder Hariri's assassination. But many people claim that the signs point to Assad instead.

Just remember that Syria used to occupy Lebanon while Hezbollah (which is in Lebanon) is an ally to both Assad and Iran. Hezbollah also protects Lebanon when Israel attacks, which makes a lot of Lebanese people support them. Oh yeah, and one of the Hariri sons is now the sitting Prime Minister of Lebanon (or the President, I forget). In other words, it's a confusing mess of money, power, family, and murder.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

When it all blow up in their faces and this war come to usa soil, and make no mistake it will. I bet you people will start to feel different and then it is too late

a reply to: therealfreeworld

I doubt it.

But if you're so all fired hot to fight 'em, hop a plane.

I feel no screamin' need to fight 'em. If they come knockin', then I'll worry about it. Not until. I'm done with the Middle East war express.

a reply to: starwarsisreal

In what way are they moderate?

For what reasons do the US govt refer to them as "moderates."

is it that they are more moderate in their military tactics than ISIS?

is it because they are more moderate in their policies for Syria after the proxy superpower wars is over? If this is the case then why have we never heard what these policies are?

why are we, the west, continually supporting the 'moderates.' when we have never been told what is so evil about the current Syrian regime?

Exactly what is/was the Syrian regime guilty of for them to be declared a part of the 'axis of evil.?

Why has the US and its vassal states never discussed the reason they refer to these people as moderates in the media to anywhere near commensurate to the number of times they refer to them as moderates?

Why have we never heard any interviewer or 'anchor' ever discussed this with the 'spockspersons' they talk to on camera?

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: therealfreeworld

I doubt it.

But if you're so all fired hot to fight 'em, hop a plane.

I feel no screamin' need to fight 'em. If they come knockin', then I'll worry about it. Not until. I'm done with the Middle East war express.

Same here. I'm so sick of the BS. They should just have the warmongers fight it out in a ring or cage, while leaving the civilians out of it. The winners could then get the business deals of their choice without any lives or infrastructure being lost. In fact, they could make it pay-per-view like a major boxing or UFC event, with the proceeds going towards some world hunger initiative. Win-win scenario in my book.

a reply to: starwarsisreal

Not a fan of either choice but under Assad, every Arab group, whether Moslem or Christian seemed to be living in relative peace.

Not necessarily as bad as Saddam, but even under Saddam, there was relative peace and stability in Iraq.

Same could be said for Libya.

So far, our government has done nothing but destabilize the ME, which IMHO has to be by design.

I doubt our public servants are actually this stupid.