What if Assad is telling the truth?

JustinDee

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

What a load of pretentious crap. Clearly you are staunchly pro-west. Its impossible to argue with someone who believes that the Americans et al are here to bring the Syrian people freedom and liberty and gummy bears. Not because they actually present valid points, but because they constantly ad hominem you or your sources. Or accuse you of "wiki-wagging" when you quote one paragraph from an article on Tartus for reference

You weren't presenting any "valid points". You were retroactively lifting conveniently selected lines in a strange defence of the Russian govt's official overseas megaphone.
I'm not "pro" anything, whatever-your-name-is. Pigeon-holing is a lame retort.

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

(P.S I typed in "pamphletic diatribe" into google to see what the hell it meant, and the first result that came back was your post in this very thread. So clearly you are the first to use that precocious phrase on the internet. Good job!)

Pardon myself for any originality I might put out there. If you want an explanation, it is referring to selective and convenient quoting or reference to a chosen 'cause du jour' ie. cherry-picked second-hand information with a convenient tilt.

Eggy Baby!

You weren't presenting any "valid points". You were retroactively lifting conveniently selected lines in a strange defence of the Russian govt's official overseas megaphone.
I'm not "pro" anything, whatever-your-name-is. Pigeon-holing is a lame retort.

"Lifting conveniently selected lines"? Like what?

You call pigeon-holing a lame retort, having just accused me of being anti-western and using anti-west "pimplogtilitic diastrobe"?

Pardon myself for any originality I might put out there. If you want an explanation, it is referring to selective and convenient quoting or reference to a chosen 'cause du jour' ie. cherry-picked second-hand information with a convenient tilt.

Also called "using sources". The only time I can recall doing this is when I lifted a paragraph off Wikipedia to illustrate how the Soviet Union and it's successor our dear old Russian Federation has been associates with Syria for a long time.

Pardon myself for any originality I might put out there.

Also called "making up things to try and shock and awe me". I bet the Webster's Dictionary you ate this morning was tasty!

JustinDee

Jesus, what a begrudging and deluded tirade. Its called an education, whoever you are.

Spare me the 'just good friends' bilge about Russia's tinkering with the region. It just belies any credibility and your apologetics just won't wash.

cyberhog

So Assad gave a speech on June 3 and blamed foreign powers for creating divisions.

"Today, a year-and-a-half on, everything is clear and masks have fallen down. The international role in this crisis is now very clear."

He said Syria is facing a "plan of destruction" and a "war conducted from abroad."


It's hard to disagree with the man when we see the head of Foreign Affairs with the SNC mixing with the world's elite at the Bilderberg conference.

JustinDee

cyberhog wrote: »

So Assad gave a speech on June 3 and blamed foreign powers for creating divisions

Oh dear. Foreign powers such as Russia and China have already contributed more than enough to ensure divisions are maintained. It is no coincidence that he continually omits these two superpowers when whingeing about 'outsiders'.

AlekSmart

cyberhog wrote: »

So Assad gave a speech on June 3 and blamed foreign powers for creating divisions.

"Today, a year-and-a-half on, everything is clear and masks have fallen down. The international role in this crisis is now very clear."

He said Syria is facing a "plan of destruction" and a "war conducted from abroad."


It's hard to disagree with the man when we see the head of Foreign Affairs with the SNC mixing with the world's elite at the Bilderberg conference.

Interesting stuff sure enough.....is our man Sudds still hovering around Bilderberg these days ?

Somewhat incredible to see this gent agreeing with Mr Al-Assad.......

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0605/un-observer-says-foreign-actors-at-work-in-syria.html

Whats the odds on Maj Gen Mood being redeployed in the immediate future.....?

plasmaguy

Did anyone seriously expect Assad to come out and say something along the lines of "It's a fair cop, you got me, it was me who ordered the Houla Massacre" ?

Seriously, how naive are some people to believe Assad the Liar?

How many more of his lies are people willing to believe?

Of course the biggest lie of all is some people believing he is complying with the Annan peace plan.

If Assad pulled all his forces back to barracks, there would be no massacres.

The guy is a complete liar, and lying about the Houla massacre is just one more lie among thousands.

Not only is Assad a liar, all his supporters are liars too. To give one example, Russia has said a number of times it doesn't support Assad. Well why then does it continue to send weapons to Assad? These weapons shipments allow Assad to continue the massacres, surely even the Russians know that?

Eggy Baby!

Not only is Assad a liar, all his supporters are liars too. To give one example, Russia has said a number of times it doesn't support Assad. Well why then does it continue to send weapons to Assad? These weapons shipments allow Assad to continue the massacres, surely even the Russians know that?

Something like 10% of arms exports in Russia goes to Syria. Its unlikely they'd just stop. Plus they've been trading arms for the last 40 years. It's just business.

Jesus, what a begrudging and deluded tirade. Its called an education, whoever you are.

Spare me the 'just good friends' bilge about Russia's tinkering with the region. It just belies any credibility and your apologetics just won't wash.

Sorry that Wikipedia is too plebeian for you.

So Assad gave a speech on June 3 and blamed foreign powers for creating divisions.

"Today, a year-and-a-half on, everything is clear and masks have fallen down. The international role in this crisis is now very clear."

He said Syria is facing a "plan of destruction" and a "war conducted from abroad."

Unfortunately Assad isn't the most reliable of sources to quote on the matter!

AlekSmart

It's so very easy to be 100% certain of things at this remove I suppose....

Plasmaguy: He is 100% to blame for everything, there is no getting away from that. He was given a chance under the Annan deal to order his tanks back to barracks, and he refused to issue such an order. No-one else in Syria has the power to issue such an order than Assad.

Let's put the blame where the blame lies, ie Assad.

And I really wish you'd stop saying "funnily enough". There's nothing at all funny about this situation.

You also lose credibility when you accuse people of being pro west. What is happening in Syria has nothing to do with being pro or anti west. Its a mass murdering thug murdering his people.

However I tend to have some regard for what a native Syrian thinks,and in this respect I'm accepting Suff's credentials at face value.

Suff wrote: »

Again, this is not a matter of black or white.

I am Syrian, and I do support a regime change in Syria, it is long over due but it has to be done correctly and not by armed interventions. You cannot clean blood with blood.

There are different groups running havoc in Syria, committing all sorts of atrocities in order to flare up the already blazed emotions of Syrians. Yes, we have issues with the Ba'ath regime and have suffered 40 years of it. But we don't want to see the country fall into a state of civil war due to schemes plotted by foreign players, which are using this notion to achieve their goals in the region.

Remember back in 2006, when the world watched Israel destroy Gaza and southern Lebanon, did we see Israeli officials and diplomats being given 72 hours to exit Western countries?? ...we know why, but when it comes to Syria, it is a different subject apparently.

As for what happened in Houla; we may never know the truth.

100% ism really does'nt serve to help issues such as we see in Syria....?

plasmaguy

AlekSmart wrote: »

It's so very easy to be 100% certain of things at this remove I suppose....




However I tend to have some regard for what a native Syrian thinks,and in this respect I'm accepting Suff's credentials at face value.



100% ism really does'nt serve to help issues such as we see in Syria....?

So you think Assad will step down through "negotiation" without any protests and so on? Frankly this viewpoint is utterly ludicrous.

Assad took over power from his father. He had two presidential elections since. There was only one candidate in each, Assad. He recently held a referendum which was supposed to change things and impose term limits. If Assad stood in the new presidential elections, he would be forced under the new constitution to leave power in 2028. That was his so-called reform, that was what he offered opponents if they stopped fighting, to step down in 2028.

Aside from that it wasn't the opposition who started the violence. So let's get that straight. Innocent protesters took to the street just like across the Arab world and Assad sent in the militia and snipers to slaughter innocent unarmed civilians. It was 6 months into this slaughter that the FSA was formed to defend civilians.

Using the Syrian, Russian or Chinese government as a source for anything is frankly pathetic. You cannot take one word they say at face value, so please don't. That's not directed at you in particular by the way, it's a general point. Assad and his allies have lied every day for the last year and they are accomplished liars. The best thing to do is believe the opposite of what they say.

It's also ludicrous to blame the FSA for anything. Without the FSA thousands more would be killed. At least the FSA forced Assad to sign up to the Annan plan although even that didn't work.

plasmaguy

Min wrote: »

How do we know Assad is responsible for Houla?

This is possibly another WMD type story, unknown facts reported as truth.

The western report where they blame the government, you don't see the western media reporting on the rebels who are able to kill as well as anyone, thanks to the weapons supplied by other nations to make sure Syria is a bloodbath.

Countries like Saudi Arabia support a war within the borders of Syria, they do this by sending in weapons and suicide bombers, but that is ok by the western media, better to have terrorism and suicide bombers in Syria than to have those Saudi suicide bombers that we had on 9/11.

Would you consider someone like Marie Colvin or that Irish photojournalist a propagandist for the West? I wouldn't.

They weren't allowed in, they had to sneak in. When the Syrians found out where they were, they shelled the building, killing Colvin, all because she was merely reporting the plight of ordinary civilians in Homs.

Hundreds of citizen journalists in Syria have also been detained, and some have met a worse fate.

You also have a very poor grasp of the actual situation in Syria, Assad was killing people for 6 months with impunity before the FSA stepped in. The only people the FSA kill is regime soldiers and thugs who are killing innocent civilians.

JustinDee

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

Sorry that Wikipedia is too plebeian for you

Any old duffer can edit a wiki. Hardly concrete evidence for anything. May as well quote this forum.
Good for discographies or spoilers, I suppose.

gurramok

AlekSmart wrote: »

Interesting stuff sure enough.....is our man Sudds still hovering around Bilderberg these days ?

Somewhat incredible to see this gent agreeing with Mr Al-Assad.......

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0605/un-observer-says-foreign-actors-at-work-in-syria.html

He didn't agree to that on the massacre, nice jumping to conclusions. He agreed that a 3rd force is at work(homegrown suicide bombers from Iraq) attacking the security forces, different thing altogether.

AlekSmart wrote: »

However I tend to have some regard for what a native Syrian thinks,and in this respect I'm accepting Suff's credentials at face value.

That's one persons views(assuming he is really Syrian). Perhaps we can ask a person from Homs to contribute?

plasmaguy

Eye-witness account about Houla.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jun/02/massacre-children-syrian-officer

And before anyone starts, the Guardian is noted for its left-wing and liberal ideology, and cannot be accused of being a pro western propagandist.

The witness in the article says Assad started shelling Houla a couple of days after the massacre to try to destroy the evidence.

Very few people on the ground in Syria (as opposed to those force-fed SANA lies every day) doubt it was pro Assad militia who carried this out.

Eggy Baby!

That's one persons views(assuming he is really Syrian). Perhaps we can ask a person from Homs to contribute?

As a source, hes still a million times more reliable than even a thousand armchair journalist opinions..


EDIT: I read this earlier; http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/05/us-syria-crisis-russia-assad-idUSBRE8540YK20120605

Russia is prepared to see Syrian President Bashar al-Assad leave power as part of a political settlement following 15 months of bloodshed, but is not in talks with other nations on the fate of the Syrian leader, a senior Russian diplomat said on Tuesday.

Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov also said a Yemen-style power transition was unlikely to work in Syria because many of Assad's foes are unwilling to negotiate with the government, Russian news agency Itar-Tass reported.

Looks like Russia is kicking butt as usual.

Eggy Baby!

And tbh these pages and pages of arguing are meaningless because tricky D and Suff hit the nail on the head in the first page.

plasmaguy

I don't think they are pointless.

1. Russia has played both sides from the start. It tells the West what it wants to hear. It tells Assad what he wants to hear. It tells the west it is getting tough on Assad, telling him to pull back his tanks, stop shooting people, asking him to step down. It tells Assad on the otherhand there is another shipment of arms on the way, hold out for a while longer, we'll veto any criticism, etc. Do I think Assad will still be in power in a month? Yes? In 3 months? probably. In 6 months, yes provided the FSA haven't overthrown him. Do I think he is likely to go as part of a Russian lead peace initiative, small chance. Assad stepping down is one thing, but most of the army has blood on its hands and probably wont allow Assad step down.

2. We may never know the truth about Houla but then again why doesn't Assad invite in an international team to properly investigate and/or the ICC? The Houla massacre is almost beside the point now (although most people in the region in Syria know who did it). Assad has murdered over 10,000 people, no-one even people on here can seriously doubt that, as it has been well documented and even the UN accepts this figure.

Its long passed time Assad was removed from power before he kills thousands more people.

AlekSmart

gurramok wrote: »

He didn't agree to that on the massacre, nice jumping to conclusions. He agreed that a 3rd force is at work(homegrown suicide bombers from Iraq) attacking the security forces, different thing altogether.

That's one persons views(assuming he is really Syrian). Perhaps we can ask a person from Homs to contribute?

I'm still reading the Officers carefully chosen words and still not managing the 100% so readily achieved by some....

Foreign interests fuelling Syria conflict - UN observer head

Head of the UN Observer Mission in Syria Major General Robert Mood has said he believes foreign interests are fuelling the conflict in Syria by providing money and weapons.

However, he would not say whether Western countries were involved.

Maj Gen Mood said: ''We are pretty sure, through our dialogues, that there are supplies of both money and weapons and also presence of other parties on [the] ground.''

''They have not come from the villages in Syria. We believe we have seen parties from outside Syria contribute to the spiral of violence in a very non-constructive way.''

It's worth noting that Maj Gen Mood made no reference to Iraqi suicide bombers, or a "3rd Force" as in a single entity,but rather to "Other Parties" as well as,importantly, money and weapons.

The Maj General did not offer an opinion on the presence or otherwise of "Western Countries" in this scenario,but that would be unsurprising in itself.

I suppose it would have been somewhat easier and more welcome,given his access to on-the-ground sitreps,had Maj Gen Mood managed to apportion 100% of the blame onto Al Assad,but he did,nt.

As for the nationality of Suff,it's not really an issue as I've already stated that I'm taking that posters statements at face value.

plasmaguy

gurramok wrote: »

He didn't agree to that on the massacre, nice jumping to conclusions. He agreed that a 3rd force is at work(homegrown suicide bombers from Iraq) attacking the security forces, different thing altogether.



That's one persons views(assuming he is really Syrian). Perhaps we can ask a person from Homs to contribute?

Agreed.

Something everyone can agree on is there was shelling of Houla a short time before the massacre and only the Syrian Army have that capability.

Does it make sense for someone to argue there was a couple hundred FSA waiting around for the shelling to stop so they could then go in, in cars, motorbikes and so on, to kill the people of Houla.

Also, how could the FSA be sure that shelling would not start again once they were in there?

It simply stretches credibility for anyone to suggest this was anything other than Assad allied militia.

They have been committing these massacres on a smaller scale all over Syria the last year, and invariably they always go in soon after shelling has stopped. And they have killed women, children and familes before in daily massacres. It's just this time they went over the top and its then the international community wakes up, as well as the pro Assad/anti western brigade.

The Master of Disaster

I've been surprised at just how much the Western media have bought into simplistic notion of Assad bad, rebels good. Assad isn't really in control of the Ba'ath Party the way he's portrayed by the press. While I still think if he had a conscious he'd either resign or renounce the violence it would merely be a symbolic step, albeit a powerful one. He came to power because he was his father's son. The people really pulling the strings as far as the regime's concerned are his father's old friends and advisers still knocking about Damascus.

Even then it's hard to tell what's really going on. There's a serious lack of any real intelligence and the fact that nobody can definitively state who carried out the Houla massacre is evidence of that. It could well have been the Shabiha but if so were they acting on orders from the regime or on their own accord? Was it the Syrian army itself? Surely they can't have been that stupid or brazen with the world watching? Was it a rival family or ethnic group settling a score? A terrorist group or foreign players trying to further a sectarian divided? The amount of questions marks I've just used is not indicative of a clear conception of what's happening.

What we do know is that the regime is using force to some extent by virtue of the fact that only the army has heavy artillery to shell areas. We also know that the opposition is highly fractured. The Syrian National Council is at odds with the National Coordination Committee and both of them seem to be at odds with the Free Syrian Army, itself less a coordinated army than a bunch of loosely connected, autonomous armed groups. Throw into the mix any number of people or groups with their own agendas or scores to settle and the scene becomes just too chaotic to decipher.

cyberhog wrote: »

A former MI6 officer believes the methods used in the slaughter in Houla implicate "Al-Qaeda like groups"

This wouldn't surprise me. Al Qaeda were very slow to get involved, or show any influence, in the Arab Spring and they've been looking to make up for it. The unrest in Syria has gone on long enough that they've had enough time to implant and direct fighters. The chaos resulting from the regime's clashes with the opposition has probably given them enough cover to move in and operate unnoticed. I'm not saying that AQ are definitely involved, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were there.

gurramok

AlekSmart wrote: »

I'm still reading the Officers carefully chosen words and still not managing the 100% so readily achieved by some....

It's worth noting that Maj Gen Mood made no reference to Iraqi suicide bombers, or a "3rd Force" as in a single entity,but rather to "Other Parties" as well as,importantly, money and weapons.

The Maj General did not offer an opinion on the presence or otherwise of "Western Countries" in this scenario,but that would be unsurprising in itself.

And what has that got to do with Houla?! He did not mention Houla or any specific massacre.

AlekSmart wrote: »

I suppose it would have been somewhat easier and more welcome,given his access to on-the-ground sitreps,had Maj Gen Mood managed to apportion 100% of the blame onto Al Assad,but he did,nt.

They're still investigating.

Suff

gurramok wrote: »

That's one persons views(assuming he is really Syrian). Perhaps we can ask a person from Homs to contribute?

If you have read my post you'd know that I haven't stated or declared myself as a spokesman for all Syrians. I have lived the events since they've started in Damascus, and my post is my opinion. There are enough people trying to shut us (Syrians) up without you joining them.

As for my Syrian authenticity; would a photocopy of my passport and a 900 years' old family tree do for a proof?

Edit:*
Everyone seems to be concentrating on the Houla massacre, its not the first nor it'll be the last. Some seem to indicate that Assad had ordered it.

Let's ask the following questions:

1- What would the regime possibly achieve from such a massacre?
2- Were Assad directly in contact with the troops? did he give the order to murder these children?
3- Who would benefit from this massacre?
4- What can we do about it?

Here are my 'personal' views on the above:

1- IMO; nothing! what it did is add oil to the fire (Syrian proverb) and as a result, it initiated the civil strike in Damascus and Aleppo, and a massive international condemnation which ended up with recalling of diplomats and ambassadors on both sides.
2- It may have been the work of the Shabeha (Assad loyalists), they are after all an armed sectarian militia, it could have been done in a desperate attempt to frighten the Syrian public. For me, to state Assad's direct involvement is completely silly, micromanagement at it worst. But, he's the authority figure at the moment therefore he is held responsible.
3- The beneficiaries are by the bucket load. It could be that the massacre was conducted by another side, as it could be easily blamed on the regime.
4- Adding more sanctions won't help, these effect Syrians and not the government. There are no flights to Damascus from the EU, now many Syrians are forced to travel to Beirut, then make their own way home by the dangerous roads (on a personal note: I have no idea how I could get home to Damascus). Military intervention is out of the question. This would result in a third world war; hence, no one is seriously considering it as a solution, and might be the reason why Russia and China are against it.
Syrians are still going out on protests and getting killed, shot and kidnapped, will this change? Yes, I believe it will and it'll be done by the Syrians themselves. The end is near for regime, its a matter of time, and this is something the regime doesn't have.


Houla is not the issue here, nor is Assad, he'll bugger of to Russia sooner or later leaving us to deal with the chaos.

The main issue is how to avoid civil war.

sweeney1971

I have lived over in the Middle East. What is going on in Syria at the moment is being conducted by different factions. Let's say the Government in Ireland collapsed, the Gard lost control and those neighbours who have given you hell over the years are now open season, would you not want payback with no recall from the Authorities?
That is what is happening and its all being blamed on the Government. I am not doubting the Government will have some involvement along the way, but look what happened to Iraq when Saddam lost power, look at Lybia. At the end of the day it is better the Devil you know. It has nothing to do with the West but the West is always dabbling in other Countries problems. They will not thank the west for help and once in power they will turn on the West.

JustinDee

sweeney1971 wrote: »

I have lived over in the Middle East

Thats not much of a qualification though, to be fair. Its like saying you've lived in Europe and this is how you know the ins and outs of what is going on in the Norwegian Stortinget right now. I've lived in the Middle East but I've never lived in Syria (have been to Damascus just once) and what I get to read on the country is the same as everyone else who has never lived there.

Eggy Baby!

Here's an article about how the BBC passed off a disturbing photo from Iraq as one taken in Houla- http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2012/05/29/the-bbcs-photo-fib-of-a-syrian-massacre/

And: http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2012/06/03/the-houla-hoaxsters/

It is claimed the Syrian army bombarded Houla, and yet the photos shows people with their throats cut, and shot in the head at very close range: this seeming contradiction required a revision of the “activist”-supplied narrative, which was duly changed to depict government-controlled “militias” coming into the village after the bombardment. Yet even this hasty revisionist version didn’t cover all the bases: for example, one of the victims was a candidate in Syria’s recent elections who had refused to stand down at the demand of opposition “activists.” He, too, was brutally murdered, and the question is – by whom?

(Note that there were links in the passage. I had to cut them out because some led to nasty images/videos)

plasmaguy

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

Here's an article about how the BBC passed off a disturbing photo from Iraq as one taken in Houla- http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2012/05/29/the-bbcs-photo-fib-of-a-syrian-massacre/

And: http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2012/06/03/the-houla-hoaxsters/



(Note that there were links in the passage. I had to cut them out because some led to nasty images/videos)

Given that there are many eye witness accounts including those directly affected by the massacre who narrowly escaped, who actually saw the people who carried it out, can you find us one eye witness account (not from Troll stations like RT and SANA) who accusses the FSA of doing it?

As has been said I think i will trust the word of someone actually living in Syria and living in the town where it happened instead of some armchair commentators.

plasmaguy

sweeney1971 wrote: »

I have lived over in the Middle East. What is going on in Syria at the moment is being conducted by different factions. Let's say the Government in Ireland collapsed, the Gard lost control and those neighbours who have given you hell over the years are now open season, would you not want payback with no recall from the Authorities?
That is what is happening and its all being blamed on the Government. I am not doubting the Government will have some involvement along the way, but look what happened to Iraq when Saddam lost power, look at Lybia. At the end of the day it is better the Devil you know. It has nothing to do with the West but the West is always dabbling in other Countries problems. They will not thank the west for help and once in power they will turn on the West.

This version of events is so totally removed from the reality of what is happening in Syria today its frankly surreal.

To be honest, I am getting tired of the 'Assad only defending the country, FSA rebels murdering everyone' line being peddled on here and elsewhere. It was the same with Gadaffi and Libya, similar people saying Gadaffi was a good guy, the NTC were murdering thugs, etc.

1. Assad has zero legitimacy. People demanded democracy and he bombed them with tanks and shells.

2. The FSA was not formed until 6 months after Assad started mass murdering his people, and by which stage already 5000 had been murdered by Assad.

3. There are hundreds of thousands of Syrians being held in government prisons in Syria without trial all for peacefully protesting.

4. The FSA have destroyed hundreds of Assad tanks, tanks that were being used to soften up towns before the Shabita went in to finish off the locals. It is without question the FSA have saved countless lives.

5. The Houla massacre is one among hundreds committed by Assad thugs. There was two massacres of factory workers in the week since Houla that have gone almost unreported in Western media.

6. There is no massacre on record which the FSA commited against familes or innocent civilians (other than those massacres that the Troll media outlets RT and SANA tried to pin on them which were carried out by Assad forces). The only people the FSA have murdered were shabita thugs and army thugs who were threathening civilians.

7. For the most part the FSA is so fractured, disorganised, lacking in communications equipment and leadership on the ground, that it wouldn't be even able to organise such an operation involving hundreds of men to attack these civilians, and the FSA would certainly not be stupid enough to enter a town that was in the sights of heavy armour and was shelled up to an hour or two before.

Let's get back to some reality about Syria, and can people stop parrotting the SANA and RT troll media line, although I have a feeling that won't stop some posters continuing to do so.

Jaafa

1. Assad has zero legitimacy. People demanded democracy and he bombed them with tanks and shells.

Then why has the army not seen any mass defections and the population still come out in mass rallies in his support?

2. The FSA was not formed until 6 months after Assad started mass murdering his people, and by which stage already 5000 had been murdered by Assad.

Soldiers were being killed as early as April 10, 2011. Weapons were flooding in from Lebanon from the very start, I spoke about this back then and still stand by that claim.

3. There are hundreds of thousands of Syrians being held in government prisons in Syria without trial all for peacefully protesting

Hundreds of thousands? Any sources please?

4. The FSA have destroyed hundreds of Assad tanks, tanks that were being used to soften up towns before the Shabita went in to finish off the locals. It is without question the FSA have saved countless lives.

Sources?

5. The Houla massacre is one among hundreds committed by Assad thugs. There was two massacres of factory workers in the week since Houla that have gone almost unreported in Western media.

The killers have as of yet not been identified. As sure as you are it was pro Assad militias (and it may well be that) I'd rather wait to make that call. As for the supposed massacres of factory workers I can assure you that if there were even some tiny evidence for it, western media would have been all over it.

6. There is no massacre on record which the FSA commited against familes or innocent civilians (other than those massacres that the Troll media outlets RT and SANA tried to pin on them which were carried out by Assad forces). The only people the FSA have murdered were shabita thugs and army thugs who were threathening civilians.

Human rights watch would disagree with you. 'Human Rights Watch has also received reports of executions by armed opposition groups of security force members and civilians.'

7. For the most part the FSA is so fractured, disorganised, lacking in communications equipment and leadership on the ground, that it wouldn't be even able to organise such an operation involving hundreds of men to attack these civilians, and the FSA would certainly not be stupid enough to enter a town that was in the sights of heavy armour and was shelled up to an hour or two before.

So they can destroy hundreds of army tanks, kill thousands of army soldiers but are too disorganized to kill a hundred civilians?

I think you are the one living in a separate reality here.

Oh and before anyone starts with the usual baseless attacks, no I don't support Assad staying in power, yes I do think the army kills civilians, yes I do think RT SANA etc are mainly propaganda. The difference between me and you is however is that I haven't chosen sides and am willing to accept the opposition are just as bad. I'm merely try find the the reality of the situation in Syria.

plasmaguy

Jaafa wrote: »

Then why has the army not seen any mass defections and the population still come out in mass rallies in his support?



Soldiers were being killed as early as April 10, 2011. Weapons were flooding in from Lebanon from the very start, I spoke about this back then and still stand by that claim.



Hundreds of thousands? Any sources please?



Sources?



The killers have as of yet not been identified. As sure as you are it was pro Assad militias (and it may well be that) I'd rather wait to make that call. As for the supposed massacres of factory workers I can assure you that if there were even some tiny evidence for it, western media would have been all over it.



Human rights watch would disagree with you. 'Human Rights Watch has also received reports of executions by armed opposition groups of security force members and civilians.'



So they can destroy hundreds of army tanks, kill thousands of army soldiers but are too disorganized to kill a hundred civilians?

I think you are the one living in a separate reality here.

Oh and before anyone starts with the usual baseless attacks, no I don't support Assad staying in power, yes I do think the army kills civilians, yes I do think RT SANA etc are mainly propaganda. The difference between me and you is however is that I haven't chosen sides and am willing to accept the opposition are just as bad. I'm merely try find the the reality of the situation in Syria.

When you say the opposition are just as bad as Assad, you lose credibility very very quickly and after that point its pointless replying to you. But I will give one example...Assad flattened Homs, killing 700 civilians indiscriminately, without bothering to check first which side they were on. There are many sources to back this up, go look for them yourself.

Jaafa

plasmaguy wrote: »

When you say the opposition are just as bad as Assad, you lose credibility very very quickly and after that point its pointless replying to you. But I will give one example...Assad flattened Homs, killing 700 civilians indiscriminately, without bothering to check first which side they were on. There are many sources to back this up, go look for them yourself.

When you can't back up your own statements or refute any of mine you lose credibility very very quickly.

plasmaguy

Jaafa wrote: »

When you can't back up your own statements or refute any of mine you lose credibility very very quickly.

Which statements are you referring to?

700 civilians killed in Homs for example?

Are you prepared to accept human rights watch as a source? a yes or no answer will do.

After that maybe you can provide some credible sources (not RT or SANA) for your claims that the FSA are massacring civilians in Syria since you are so big into sources.

Jaafa

Which statements are you referring to?

How you start with the above ones where I explicitly asked you for sources. Or did you even read my post?

Are you prepared to accept human rights watch as a source? a yes or no answer will do.

I won't be held to a yes or no answer. I will of course take a HRW report for what it is, a report from a reputable source, but I will point out any flaws in the source if I see them. As you are more than welcome to do with the report I posted from HRW.

After that maybe you can provide some credible sources (not RT or SANA) for your claims that the FSA are massacring civilians in Syria since you are so big into sources.

I already did, again did you not read my post?

plasmaguy

Another massacre in Syria

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0606/100-killed-in-new-syria-massacre-reports.html

Same format as in Houla, shelling by regular army followed by militia with guns and knives massacring civilians.

Wow, the regular army and FSA/third party really are good at co-ordinating the shelling and then the massacring. :rolleyes:

plasmaguy

Jaafa wrote: »

How you start with the above ones where I explicitly asked you for sources. Or did you even read my post?



I won't be held to a yes or no answer. I will of course take a HRW report for what it is, a report from a reputable source, but I will point out any flaws in the source if I see them. As you are more than welcome to do with the report I posted from HRW.



I already did, again did you not read my post?

Here's one source among thousands about this conflict.

http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/03/02/syria-new-satellite-images-show-homs-shelling

I hope you do accept that Homs was flattened by the Syrian Regular Army and many innocent civilians lost their lives.

There are hundreds more similar verifiable episodes about regime snipers, tanks, shelling, helicoptor attacks and so on. You know as well as me there are plenty of sources out there for everyone to find and I am not going to play games over sources, this is too serious a matter, I think you will agree, to be playing games on forums like this.

Eggy Baby!

Let's get back to some reality about Syria, and can people stop parrotting the SANA and RT troll media line, although I have a feeling that won't stop some posters continuing to do so.

Woah sorry man but that just crosses the line. You are essentially calling us trolls for having opinions different from your own. You accuse us of following "SANA and RT" like we are some sort of puppets of them. Stop acting so self-righteous and begin to accept that other people may or may not have the same opinion as you, as opposed to simply asking us to change our opinions. If you want a thread where your "irrefutable" view is the only one which is pioneered, then by all means make a "Syrian Uprising according to plasmaguy" thread.

I honestly don't need people telling me what opinion to have or what not to have. "Let's get back to some reality about Syria" that's basically you saying "Follow my point of view as it's the only one that is right even though I have presented A: no sources, B: speak in weasel word-rhetoric about Assad (i.e 'everybody believes he is to blame') and C: haven't actually been present at the massacres in question yet seemingly have inside knowledge of them. I think maybe a half dozen people have presented their opinions in an organised, coherent and logical way, and yet you refuse to even acknowledge this and continue to try and shoehorn your own opinions onto others. ("YOU LOSE CREDIBILITY FOR SAYING ASSAD IS NOT 100% TO BLAME I AM RIGHT I AM RIGHT IF YOU DON'T AGREE YOU WATCH RT AND SANA") You seem to be anti-Assad to the point of zealotry, to the point of ignoring the evidence.

To be honest, I am getting tired of the 'Assad only defending the country, FSA rebels murdering everyone' line being peddled on here and elsewhere. It was the same with Gadaffi and Libya, similar people saying Gadaffi was a good guy, the NTC were murdering thugs, etc.

There you go again- strawmanning to the max. Nobody is saying that. We are saying that Assad is not devoid of blame, but that the blame cannot be placed entirely on him. But of course- I am an Assad apologist apparently, because Assad apologists can usually admit that the man is a psycho dictator.

http://www.voltairenet.org/Lies-and-truths-about-Syria

Interesting link.

Jonny7

Jaafa wrote: »

Then why has the army not seen any mass defections and the population still come out in mass rallies in his support?

Ah, very familiar, in fact identical to claims about Libya (which turned out to be either weak or false in hindsight)

There were mass defections, there were also mass reprisals against troops. Up to 120 were killed in one incident (which were blamed on rebels) early on in the conflict. Defectors up to officer rank and above have been going in all directions, there are dozens of interviews online with them, many joining different factions, generally giving the same account within the Syrian armed forces.

Mass rallies are virtually irrelevant in any strong-armed government or dictatorship, North Korea for example.

Soldiers were being killed as early as April 10, 2011. Weapons were flooding in from Lebanon from the very start, I spoke about this back then and still stand by that claim.

It was a long time before the oppositions organised itself into a fighting force such as the rebels we see today. It was mainly just protesters being shot by security forces. This is reflected in the threads at the time.

The killers have as of yet not been identified. As sure as you are it was pro Assad militias (and it may well be that) I'd rather wait to make that call. As for the supposed massacres of factory workers I can assure you that if there were even some tiny evidence for it, western media would have been all over it.

It has been reported by the "Western media".

Jonny7

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

.

http://www.voltairenet.org/Lies-and-truths-about-Syria

Interesting link.

Eggy, that is Voltairenet, they are mainly made up of activist "reporters" (in heavy inverted comma's) many of whom weathered the assault on Tripoli in the Rixos hotel keenly reporting fictional CIA plots to kill them and other such theories to Russian and Iranian state TV.

Jaafa

Ah, very familiar, in fact identical to claims about Libya (which turned out to be either weak or false in hindsight)

There were mass defections, there were also mass reprisals against troops. Up to 120 were killed in one incident (which were blamed on rebels) early on in the conflict. Defectors up to officer rank and above have been going in all directions, there are dozens of interviews online with them, many joining different factions, generally giving the same account within the Syrian armed forces.

The oppositions claims of defections are highly exaggerated, all in all, its likely only about 10000 defections occurred, some of them yes high ranking officers. But from an active force of around 300,000 that is a very small figure.

Mass rallies are virtually irrelevant in any strong-armed government or dictatorship, North Korea for example.

I'm sorry but a comparison to north korea is not possible. North Korea is by far a special case, no other country in the world comes even close to the level of blatant indoctrination and iron fisted rule there.

It was a long time before the oppositions organised itself into a fighting force such as the rebels we see today. It was mainly just protesters being shot by security forces. This is reflected in the threads at the time.

Regardless of how long it took the rebels to become organised and good at killing soldiers the point is they were doing it almost from the start. This in direct contrast to the usual narrative that it was august before any sort of insurgency occurred against the army, army deaths were never reported up until then, and if they were it was always to say they were soldiers killed for defecting. It is naive to think all these weapons were flooding into the country and not being used till much much later. An armed response by the regime was to be expected, especially if these early rebels were bringing arms to protests with the aim of 'protecting civilians'.

It has been reported by the "Western media"

Which is in contradiction to what plasmaguy was saying.

JustinDee

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

http://www.voltairenet.org/Lies-and-truths-about-Syria

Interesting link.

'Interesting' in a curious as to why the likes of Thierry Meyssan are as they are, kind of way.

Seriously . . .

The Master of Disaster

I think this thread is being deliberately polarised by some people into two extremely simplistic views:

1. Assad is the bad guy who assumes complete responsibility.
2. Assad has no responsibility whatsoever for the violence.

I think most of us realise that the reality is a quagmire that lies somewhere in between but it's very hard for us, living in Ireland and most without any direct knowledge of Syria, to make definitive judgements based on what we know now. Yes I believe Assad, if he has a conscience, should step down. It would be a hugely powerful symbol if the President who is perceived to be responsible for most of the killing and has the most power to stop it would renounce the violence on both sides. It may just be enough to rescue the situation. Then again the thread title is "What if Assad's telling the truth' and the truth, Assad's truth, is that he may genuinely believe that he's doing right by his people, that he is protecting them from a bloody sectarian civil war. Regardless of what we think that may well be his POV.

Nonetheless I think the longer this goes on the less direct control Assad can exercise and the more he becomes a symbol. The country is becoming so chaotic and fractured that individual army and militia commanders are taking their own initiative and acting without concise instructions from higher up, particularly in the case of the latter. Do you think the old heads of inner government want to relinquish power after decades? Do you think the army et al. want to come out on the losing side given what some of them have done, knowing that either the ICC or their own countrymen will be waiting to administer justice?

Suff

The Master of Disaster wrote: »

I think this thread is being deliberately polarised by some people into two extremely simplistic views:

1. Assad is the bad guy who assumes complete responsibility.
2. Assad has no responsibility whatsoever for the violence.

We have to weight both sides before we can make our mind. Look what happened in Iraq, back then everyone jump on the WMD wagon, now the country and UN credibility are both in ruins.

I think most of us realise that the reality is a quagmire that lies somewhere in between but it's very hard for us, living in Ireland and most without any direct knowledge of Syria, to make definitive judgements based on what we know now. Yes I believe Assad, if he has a conscience, should step down. It would be a hugely powerful symbol if the President who is perceived to be responsible for most of the killing and has the most power to stop it would renounce the violence on both sides. It may just be enough to rescue the situation. Then again the thread title is "What if Assad's telling the truth' and the truth, Assad's truth, is that he may genuinely believe that he's doing right by his people, that he is protecting them from a bloody sectarian civil war. Regardless of what we think that may well be his POV.

I am leaning more towards the idea that Assad has no power within the regime, this however doesn't mean he's not held responsible for the regime's actions. He's the president and he's responsible. - unless some evidence surface at some stage to proof otherwise.

Nonetheless I think the longer this goes on the less direct control Assad can exercise and the more he becomes a symbol. The country is becoming so chaotic and fractured that individual army and militia commanders are taking their own initiative and acting without concise instructions from higher up, particularly in the case of the latter. Do you think the old heads of inner government want to relinquish power after decades? Do you think the army et al. want to come out on the losing side given what some of them have done, knowing that either the ICC or their own countrymen will be waiting to administer justice?

I agree to a point. The Army is formed under an Ba'ath ideology, and have been for the past 40 years governed by it. It cannot see itself as anything else but a Ba'ath Army, the extremely low number of defectors is a clear confirmation of this. For the regime to fall, its not only a political matter but also military one. The Army needs to be reformed, this is an extremely sensitive issue giving Syria's current state of war with Israel. Any major disassembling/ reforming of the army could invite Israel to launch a strike at Syria to weaken its defences.
Therefore, the Army will remain intact. loyal and under the control of the regime. A military strike or a change of the political figure at the top (Assad) is not a simple matter.

Even if Assad is gone, the regime needs to be routed out of the country. This is MAJOR work. The Ba'ath regime has been in power for 40 years, its ideologies have penetrated every aspect of the political, industrial and social elements of the Syrian society. Our schools, colleges, labour unions, and local representatives all have been infected. I remember when to get accepted into a union, professional association or even a sports club you'd have to be a member of the Ba'ath party!! When joining elementary school in Damascus I was asked if I wanted to join the Ba'ath party, my decline forced my father to pull few strings to get me accepted into school - No he's not a member of the Ba'ath party, as my uncle was tortured by them when they came to power in the early 70's. My uncle passed away after 6 months. I can go on and on...

This is going to be a very long, long recovery for Syria.

Eggy Baby!

We have to weight both sides before we can make our mind. Look what happened in Iraq, back then everyone jump on the WMD wagon, now the country and UN credibility are both in ruins.

Everyone knows the UN is essentially a proxy for America. They used it in Korea to give legitimacy to their armed invasion and they emasculated it in the Congo (their influence spread there too despite Hammarskjold's good intentions). The real power in the world lies with the United States and their network of "socii et amicii". Everything in the world piques America's direct interest. The UN should really stop behaving as a plaything and acting as it should- representing world opinion and not the side of the USA.

Jonny7

Jaafa wrote: »

The oppositions claims of defections are highly exaggerated, all in all, its likely only about 10000 defections occurred, some of them yes high ranking officers. But from an active force of around 300,000 that is a very small figure

How much of that force is seeing action? what about the pro-government militias? how are defections any indication that the level of violence may not be what is being reporting considering similar events in history?

I'm sorry but a comparison to north korea is not possible. North Korea is by far a special case, no other country in the world comes even close to the level of blatant indoctrination and iron fisted rule there.

I can't think of a standing dictator who couldn't organise a mass rally.

Regardless of how long it took the rebels to become organised and good at killing soldiers the point is they were doing it almost from the start.

No, they weren't "doing it" from the start. There were isolated incidents, compared to a high amount of incidents of protests and funerals being shot at by armed and security forces.

This in direct contrast to the usual narrative that it was august before any sort of insurgency occurred against the army, army deaths were never reported up until then, and if they were it was always to say they were soldiers killed for defecting.

Not true, army deaths were reported, I can provide links for this.

I have no idea which outlets you are referring to? but all army deaths were certainly not reported as defection reprisals.

It is naive to think all these weapons were flooding into the country and not being used till much much later.

There seems to be a large gap in understanding here. If there are protests against the leadership of a country and that leadership starts to shoot, kill, mass arrest and torture the citizens then it is extremely naive to believe that people will not start shooting back, getting revenge, forming militias.

An armed response by the regime was to be expected, especially if these early rebels were bringing arms to protests with the aim of 'protecting civilians'.

To fight Assad? to kill security forces/soldiers who killed friends, relatives, family members in cold blood?

The Shiites rose up against Saddam, I really cannot for the life of me remember them being subtly blamed for the violence that followed (which happened on both sides incidentally)

Jonny7

Around 80 people killed in latest attack on a village

UN have difficulty visiting the village, being blocked and turned back by the military.

Of course, if this genuinely was a "terrorist attack" the regime would be tripping over itself to show the press and plaster images all over state TV.

plasmaguy

Also, the massacre was once more preceded by government shelling.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/06/201267144045962996.html

This isn't a case of a band of thugs operating independently of the government, it's clear the government is supporting the work of these thugs, by softening up towns before they go in. It's looking like a systematic campaign by the government to ethnically cleanse certain areas of the country, since it is always Sunni areas that are impacted by these massacres and the perpetrators usually come from nearby Alawite towns.

Whether Assad is "in full control of his army" or not is pretty irrelevant. He's the President and Commander in Chief and he bears primary responsibility. He has the power to issue orders, to attack or pull back, and so far the orders have only been to attack.

Assad knows well he can commit massacres like this, in fact there will be many more because Assad's rationale seems to be the more massacres like this, the more he is condemned by the west and the more he is condemned by the west the more Russia, China and the usual anti-western brigade including on forums like this jump to his defence.

Also the belief that the FSA are somehow to blame and if they laid down their weapons Assad would stop killing people is utterly naive. Assad only knows one policy, kill as many people as possible and be bears full responsibility when his soldiers shell towns, there is no escaping that responsibility even if his apologists on here try to portray him as a nice guy who is only a pawn of someone else.

Finally, these people murdered in this new massacre posed no threat to Assad, and it just goes to show the guy derives a sick, perverted and sadistic pleasure from killing innocent women and children.

Eggy Baby!

there is no escaping that responsibility even if his apologists on here try to portray him as a nice guy who is only a pawn of someone else.

and the usual anti-western brigade including on forums like this jump to his defence.

:rolleyes:

gurramok

UN monitors trying to reach the village were shot at.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18352281

Whats the next excuse from the Assad apologists? Aljazeera is a western backed mouthpiece??!

Biggest hint yet from the UN that it was govt backed militia's that are doing the massacres.

UN wrote:

In a speech to the UN General Assembly on Thursday, Annan confirmed that massacres of civilians have taken place in the towns of Houla and al-Qubayr. While not assigning blame for the mass killings, the former UN secretary general said that the government, not the armed opposition, had the "first responsibility" to halt violence.

"I must be frank and confirm that the [six-point peace] plan is not being implemented," he said.

He said that despite urging President Bashar al-Assad to "make a strategic decision to change his path," the government's shelling of cities had continued, and government-backed militias "seem to have free reign, with appalling consequences".

plasmaguy

I think the situation in Syria has now entered a dangerous new phase, something like happened in Rwanda when the Hutu's thought they would lose power and in desperation decided to kill as many Tutsis as possible in a last desperate attempt to cling to power.

And yes Assad is every bit as evil as that Hutu regime and well capable of killing a million people if he was left unopposed. This is what happens with dictators, other human beings become nothing to them, they are used to being treated like Gods and have such a lack of respect for their "subjects" that they don't care if they all died.

It looks like Syria is now entering a phase similar to Rwanda where a desperate government wants to kill as many people as possible in the hope of staying in power. There will be more massacres in the next few days. Assad seems to believe his time is nearly up.

I really think now is the time for the international community to arm the FSA and if nothing else they might be able to prevent massacres of civilians. I don't think NATO intervention will happen any time soon, but there has to be some way to stop these pro Assad militia from committing massacres at will. Like the Rwandan Genociaires, they seem to have the taste for blood now and once started, don't know how to stop.

Fratton Fred

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

Everyone knows the UN is essentially a proxy for America. They used it in Korea to give legitimacy to their armed invasion and they emasculated it in the Congo (their influence spread there too despite Hammarskjold's good intentions). The real power in the world lies with the United States and their network of "socii et amicii". Everything in the world piques America's direct interest. The UN should really stop behaving as a plaything and acting as it should- representing world opinion and not the side of the USA.

In this case, it seems the whole world with the exception of Russia and China, want something done.

Eggy Baby!

Fratton Fred wrote: »

In this case, it seems the whole world with the exception of Russia and China, want something done.

The question is, is it good for Syria or good for America- I mean the world?