i always commented on both. but please just show me where we see the syrian gov massacring his own people. besides the lunatic in london, there is very little to back this fallacy, assad has been fighting armed mercenaries and islamists from the start.
the mercenaries and islamists however, have been filmed, or even filmed themselves killing unarmed civilians, and they claimed responsibility for tens of terrorist bombings. yet you continue to think assad killed 40,000 people.
i'll take the liberty of quoting myself from my above comment:
eh eh. so if the total dead is 40,000 (according to rami abdulrahman in london, but yea wtv) and assad alone killed 40,000 people. it means the armed people in front, with their foreign sent weapons, their bombs blown up in civilian areas, their mass massacres, and their self-filmed throat slicing, killed an astonishing number of.... 0 people.
bravo peace, you're redefining the laws of maths with mohammad.
"mowaten i told you before.. sure there were some people who took advantage of the situation but the protests were generally peaceful..."
yes, not questioning that. many protesters were peaceful and had good intentions, but in the background the mercenaries and their truckloads of weapons were already active. shooting left and right to ignite tensions.
"again as i have asked MULTIPLE times before with no logical answer.. WHY didnt bashar have fair elections if he was so confident of his power base?? "
arzak please come on, you asked this below and i answered you. check the facts for the love of mental sanity!! bashar changed the constitution to allow opposition parties and candidates to run against him. the rebels brushed off that solution with not a single justification!
"at first the demos were not calling for bashar to be ousted but for a scrap of the emergency law and a democratization of the repressive system. "
yes, and when he scrapped the emergency law (within a few weeks of the start of protests) they said they werent interested anymore, and he freed political prisonners as they asked but then they said they dont care, and then they asked for open elections and he accepted but again, they didnt care anymore, and they asked for him to step down or else there would be no settlement. that's when he stopped giving in to their demands. how can one step down to armed mercenaries and self-proclaimed "people's representatives" who dont even want to run in elections?
"There are a magnitude of videos which show unarmed protesters being shot at or charged at by shabiha.. "
nope, sorry, many videos show people being shot at, indeed, but none show by whom they were shot. the protesters being shot was fueling the anger and protests, it was in no way bashar's interest to do that, especially when one knows he was playing the appeasement card by conceding to ALL revendications. why would he give in and make concessions, and then shoot people and make them mad? so that they take weapons and fight him? does that make sense? no, it's the foreign mercenaries who shot people, because their aim is not settlement, it's not democracy, it's destroying the regime AND/OR the country.
"i do not get my info from rami abdulrahan.. " where do you get them from if i may ask? 99% of the info in all the anti-bashar media front comes from him.
"houla masacre is still being debated" actually no it isnt. there was a huge international outcry when it happened (a few days before a security council meeting, what a coincidence), and syrian ambassadors were kicked out in the heat of the news, but as soon as elements came out indicating it was the rebels, there was a sudden blackout in medias, and anti-bashar diplomatic circles
"bashar.. and his daddy dearest have committed well known massacres which i have yet to hear you say anything against..."
first bashar is not hafez. yes they are father and sons and he inherited power from him, but they are very different, and one cannot be held responsible for crimes of the other. bashar as soon as he took power positioned himself as a reformer. there is actually nothing to blame him for in the pre-rebellion era, including in lebanon, where his only major action was to leave peacefully.
regarding the rebellion era, please refer to the above.
" at the end of the day it is bashar that gave extremists a rise"
no arzak, the muslim brotherhood and their saudi sponsors did. it is nothing new and started before bashar was even born. they have been pushing for a total domination of the area, using saudi oil money and extremist ideologies. and this applies to lebanon as well.
"Why would the people want bashar? for the employment he is providing them? for the high standard of living? for the excellent educational and health systems? for placing alawis in all high positions and sidelining the sunnis?? this is a true spring where the people revolted for social reasons prior to the revolution being hijacked for political ones."
sunnis are not sidelined in syria, look at the syrian government for instance, there are more sunnis then alawis. the aleppo bourgeoisie is mainly christian for instance. the claims that alawis sidelined the others is baseless.
as i said above, there were legitimate demands initially, and most were accepted by assad, but as you say, the movement was hijacked by anti-assad countries and organizations, which have nothing to do with people's claims.
"and about the flag.. whats the difference.. we have a faction in the country that already carries the syrian flag wherever they go.. why is it so upsetting now??"
who carries the syrian flag wherever they go? and how can you even begin to try to justify them placing their flag on our martyrs' statue on the occasion of an event which has nothing to do with syria?
they are all over our country, using it as a base for training and cross-border attacks, they are armed to the teeth and roamed around making checkpoints and shooting at lebanese. how can you be lebanese, and accept that? how can you not have learned from when the palestinians did the same?
peace when you'll know the meaning of honest you'll be able to ask that from me.
also in the mean time have a look at history and what happened in hama, because it only proves my point. the muslim brotherhood started the massacres and hafez had to react. he gave 3 days for the population to leave hama, and then cracked down on the fighters. various claims have overblown the number of dead (all without any proof) but none went as far as you peace (50,000? i bet you have your own personal study to back that number?)
Blasts Kill 54 near Syria Capital
28 November 2012, 19:25i always commented on both. but please just show me where we see the syrian gov massacring his own people. besides the lunatic in london, there is very little to back this fallacy, assad has been fighting armed mercenaries and islamists from the start.
the mercenaries and islamists however, have been filmed, or even filmed themselves killing unarmed civilians, and they claimed responsibility for tens of terrorist bombings. yet you continue to think assad killed 40,000 people.
i'll take the liberty of quoting myself from my above comment:
eh eh. so if the total dead is 40,000 (according to rami abdulrahman in london, but yea wtv) and assad alone killed 40,000 people. it means the armed people in front, with their foreign sent weapons, their bombs blown up in civilian areas, their mass massacres, and their self-filmed throat slicing, killed an astonishing number of.... 0 people.
bravo peace, you're redefining the laws of maths with mohammad.
87 Dead across Syria as Rebels Use New Arms to Down Chopper
28 November 2012, 19:28i'll answer on your level B..S...:
wwwwwooof! woof!
bigsami, did you configure a keyboard shortcut for "farsi motormouth" ?
Blasts Kill 54 near Syria Capital
28 November 2012, 19:31"mowaten i told you before.. sure there were some people who took advantage of the situation but the protests were generally peaceful..."
yes, not questioning that. many protesters were peaceful and had good intentions, but in the background the mercenaries and their truckloads of weapons were already active. shooting left and right to ignite tensions.
"again as i have asked MULTIPLE times before with no logical answer.. WHY didnt bashar have fair elections if he was so confident of his power base?? "
arzak please come on, you asked this below and i answered you. check the facts for the love of mental sanity!! bashar changed the constitution to allow opposition parties and candidates to run against him. the rebels brushed off that solution with not a single justification!
Blasts Kill 54 near Syria Capital
28 November 2012, 19:34"at first the demos were not calling for bashar to be ousted but for a scrap of the emergency law and a democratization of the repressive system. "
yes, and when he scrapped the emergency law (within a few weeks of the start of protests) they said they werent interested anymore, and he freed political prisonners as they asked but then they said they dont care, and then they asked for open elections and he accepted but again, they didnt care anymore, and they asked for him to step down or else there would be no settlement. that's when he stopped giving in to their demands. how can one step down to armed mercenaries and self-proclaimed "people's representatives" who dont even want to run in elections?
Blasts Kill 54 near Syria Capital
28 November 2012, 19:36"There are a magnitude of videos which show unarmed protesters being shot at or charged at by shabiha.. "
nope, sorry, many videos show people being shot at, indeed, but none show by whom they were shot. the protesters being shot was fueling the anger and protests, it was in no way bashar's interest to do that, especially when one knows he was playing the appeasement card by conceding to ALL revendications. why would he give in and make concessions, and then shoot people and make them mad? so that they take weapons and fight him? does that make sense? no, it's the foreign mercenaries who shot people, because their aim is not settlement, it's not democracy, it's destroying the regime AND/OR the country.
Blasts Kill 54 near Syria Capital
28 November 2012, 19:39"i do not get my info from rami abdulrahan.. " where do you get them from if i may ask? 99% of the info in all the anti-bashar media front comes from him.
"houla masacre is still being debated" actually no it isnt. there was a huge international outcry when it happened (a few days before a security council meeting, what a coincidence), and syrian ambassadors were kicked out in the heat of the news, but as soon as elements came out indicating it was the rebels, there was a sudden blackout in medias, and anti-bashar diplomatic circles
Blasts Kill 54 near Syria Capital
28 November 2012, 19:45"bashar.. and his daddy dearest have committed well known massacres which i have yet to hear you say anything against..."
first bashar is not hafez. yes they are father and sons and he inherited power from him, but they are very different, and one cannot be held responsible for crimes of the other. bashar as soon as he took power positioned himself as a reformer. there is actually nothing to blame him for in the pre-rebellion era, including in lebanon, where his only major action was to leave peacefully.
regarding the rebellion era, please refer to the above.
" at the end of the day it is bashar that gave extremists a rise"
no arzak, the muslim brotherhood and their saudi sponsors did. it is nothing new and started before bashar was even born. they have been pushing for a total domination of the area, using saudi oil money and extremist ideologies. and this applies to lebanon as well.
Blasts Kill 54 near Syria Capital
28 November 2012, 19:47"Why would the people want bashar? for the employment he is providing them? for the high standard of living? for the excellent educational and health systems? for placing alawis in all high positions and sidelining the sunnis?? this is a true spring where the people revolted for social reasons prior to the revolution being hijacked for political ones."
sunnis are not sidelined in syria, look at the syrian government for instance, there are more sunnis then alawis. the aleppo bourgeoisie is mainly christian for instance. the claims that alawis sidelined the others is baseless.
as i said above, there were legitimate demands initially, and most were accepted by assad, but as you say, the movement was hijacked by anti-assad countries and organizations, which have nothing to do with people's claims.
Blasts Kill 54 near Syria Capital
28 November 2012, 19:50"and about the flag.. whats the difference.. we have a faction in the country that already carries the syrian flag wherever they go.. why is it so upsetting now??"
who carries the syrian flag wherever they go? and how can you even begin to try to justify them placing their flag on our martyrs' statue on the occasion of an event which has nothing to do with syria?
they are all over our country, using it as a base for training and cross-border attacks, they are armed to the teeth and roamed around making checkpoints and shooting at lebanese. how can you be lebanese, and accept that? how can you not have learned from when the palestinians did the same?
Blasts Kill 54 near Syria Capital
28 November 2012, 19:56peace when you'll know the meaning of honest you'll be able to ask that from me.
also in the mean time have a look at history and what happened in hama, because it only proves my point. the muslim brotherhood started the massacres and hafez had to react. he gave 3 days for the population to leave hama, and then cracked down on the fighters. various claims have overblown the number of dead (all without any proof) but none went as far as you peace (50,000? i bet you have your own personal study to back that number?)