how can assad surive

[Blanquist]

america has said he must go. he can never reestablish relations with his neighbors. saudi arabia, turkey, etc, are all plotting and supporting his overthrow

can anyone see a scenario where he can survive?

[Althusser]

Do you support him?

[Blanquist]

Do you support him?

i admit i have not followed this story very closely. but as a trotskyist i support all regimes against imperialism.

as trotsky said he supported the Ethiopia emperor against italy, would support 'facist' brazil against britian, and would support a barbaric monarchy against a 'civilized' imperialist power.

i play it by the book, and dont pretend to be above trotsky and his analysis.

[Krano]

i admit i have not followed this story very closely. but as a trotskyist i support all regimes against imperialism.

as trotsky said he supported the Ethiopia emperor against italy, would support 'facist' brazil against britian, and would support a barbaric monarchy against a 'civilized' imperialist power.

i play it by the book, and dont pretend to be above trotsky and his analysis.
You sir need to be restricted.

jffUNQw8Fl8

[Blanquist]

You sir need to be restricted.



for being a trotskyist and not supporting imperialism?, and im not gonna watch your gore videos

[Os Cangaceiros]

i admit i have not followed this story very closely. but as a trotskyist i support all regimes against imperialism.

as trotsky said he supported the Ethiopia emperor against italy, would support 'facist' brazil against britian, and would support a barbaric monarchy against a 'civilized' imperialist power.

i play it by the book, and dont pretend to be above trotsky and his analysis.

The correct position for a communist is not to take sides in inter-capital disputes.

[Mettalian]

Why does not supporting imperialism mean having to support Assad, though? It seems like a false dilemma. Neither side is correct in this, and the only people I think we should be supporting are the working people who've been dragged into this mess, and others like it internationally.

[Krano]

for being a trotskyist and not supporting imperialism?, and im not gonna watch your gore videos
You might as well be a Stalinist while you're at it, you know the people who support the North Korean feudal dynasty because of anti-imperialism.

[Blanquist]

The correct position for a communist is not to take sides in inter-capital disputes.

neutrality, as trotsky said, is tantamount to support for imperialism

[Os Cangaceiros]

To answer the question posed in the OP, though, I don't think there's much chance for Assad at this point. Turkey is hosting an armed movement on the border, there have been recent large demonstrations in even formerly stalwart regime strongholds like Aleppo, and there is signs that Russia may be ready to jump ship if a better alternative to Assad comes along. Iran will jump ship as well if it becomes clear that Assad's goose is cooked.


neutrality, as trotsky said, is tantamount to support for imperialism

Trotsky was wrong.

[Blanquist]

Why does not supporting imperialism mean having to support Assad, though? It seems like a false dilemma. Neither side is correct in this, and the only people I think we should be supporting are the working people who've been dragged into this mess, and others like it internationally.

you can read some trotsky, agree with it or not is your choice.

[L.A.P.]

and there is signs that Russia may be ready to jump ship if a better alternative to Assad comes along.

This seems apparent as Russia is establishing relations with the Syrian opposition. And if so, Syria will be fucked as they'll lose their biggest ally and no one will stop the Security Council from intervening. U.S. troops already training in Jordan to get ready for another invasion.

[Igor]

neutrality, as trotsky said, is tantamount to support for imperialism

Well fuck Trotsky then. If I have to pick between supporting a capitalist regime murdering its citizens and a capitalist regime supporting other countries' citizens I might as well support imperialism.

[Imposter Marxist]

Holy shit, I have to break character and just say:

Some of you people are the most chauvanist pro-imperialist "leftists" i've ever seen.

[Art Vandelay]

Holy shit, I have to break character and just say:

Some of you people are the most chauvanist pro-imperialist "leftists" i've ever seen.

Expand, perhaps?

[Igor]

Holy shit, I have to break character and just say:

Some of you people are the most chauvanist pro-imperialist "leftists" i've ever seen.

Because true leftists take sides in capitalist conflicts and give their support to capitalist regimes. :rolleyes:

[Imposter Marxist]

capitalist conflicts! NO! STATE CAPITALIST CONFLICTS!

the dear leader Tony Cliff once wrote about this, you should educate yourself.

[Art Vandelay]

capitalist conflicts! NO! STATE CAPITALIST CONFLICTS!

the dear leader Tony Cliff once wrote about this, you should educate yourself.

Ranting about a forgotten and frankly minor 20th century socialist thinker and yelling at others to educate themselves is not an analysis or a good way of helping your convictions gain traction in the minds of others.

[Imposter Marxist]

How dare you call Cliff forgotten and minor! He is the only leftist that can lead us away from totalitarianism and state capitalism.

[seventeethdecember2016]

Assad is worthless, but I look at the people of Syria as worthy. This civil war is going to achieve absolutely nothing unless a leftist group seizes power, however the revolt seems more on the basis of Sectarianism rather than Tyranny. Syria was actually a peaceful place, with relative freedom, prior to this insurgency, so claims of Tyranny is just complete rhetoric. I frankly don't give a care if a Sharia or Bourgeois state replaces Assad, but I will not stand for a Civil War. Especially not in a country with the density of Syria.

I feel bad for those who are being massacred, of course, but there is a point that Syria is in the middle of many upheavals, and often mistakes are committed by self-righteous soldiers. I read a report that the recent massacre was due to the religion of those who were killed, and it was run by soldiers who were fervent Alawites and wasn't sponsored by the government.

Also, if Syria goes down, you can watch standard of living to plummet for the next decade, as is a trait of such geopolitical mayhem.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

i admit i have not followed this story very closely. but as a trotskyist i support all regimes against imperialism.


There are no regimes in the world today which are "against Imperialism". Or at least if there are, Syria is not one of them. It is opposed to particular empires around the world like the US, but that doesn't make their regime "against Imperialism". That seems to be an oversimplistic division of the world, as if other nations around the world like Russia and China don't have Imperialistic interests. More importantly the Syrian regime is collapsing because its refusal to respond properly to the current social and political crisis. This is because it represents Capitalist interests, and is willing to use violence to preserve those interests. That the Muslim Brotherhood or whatever other faction has started an insurrection doesn't change the causal relationship.



as trotsky said he supported the Ethiopia emperor against italy, would support 'facist' brazil against britian, and would support a barbaric monarchy against a 'civilized' imperialist power.
Ethiopia & Brazil in the 1930s =/= Syria in the 2010s. For one thing, Syria is suffering from its own internal contradictions. Insofar as Imperialists are involved, it is only because they are exploiting the unrest. They did not create this unrest out of thin air however, but it was created because of the crisis of capitalism as well as the crisis of state legitimacy we have seen in the Arab world over the past year and a half. Those conditions won't go away if Assad wins ... in fact the suffering of the people will only expand. State Capitalist dictatorships like Assad's don't have the tools to overcome these kinds of crises without raining down terror on their population. People act like somehow capitalist crises don't affect "anti-Imperialist" regimes too.


i play it by the book, and dont pretend to be above trotsky and his analysis.Trotsky's views evolved over his life; he obviously didn't take his own word as gospel, so why should his "followers"?


neutrality, as trotsky said, is tantamount to support for imperialism

This might well be the case, but the only options are not limited to "neutrality, pro-assad, pro-imperialist".

[jookyle]

Supporting a people overthrowing a murderous bastard isn't the same as supporting imperialism.

[Prometeo liberado]

I cant believe I'm going to say this but the OP makes a good argument. All Dictators have a shelf life, some longer than others. Like bananas they show soft spots and age marks just before they are scheduled to depart. Assad, my friends is ripe fruit and it's only getting hotter. T. Cliff can say and write whatever dribble comes out of that insignificant little vapid head of his but we are internationalist and in being that we support only the working class. No "what ifs" or whatever other compromises you need to make your trot cosmology fit, just a simple "I stand in unity with the international working class against oppression homegrown or foreign".

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

neutrality, as trotsky said, is tantamount to support for imperialism

But loads of us think Trotsky was a raging shithead, so we don't really accept that. It's not analysis to say 'you're wrong because Trotsky said so'. Put him off of his pedastool and engage your own brain, dude.

People are getting killed willy nilly in Syria. Real people, real families, real workers. To sit back in the safety of your own middle-class home behind your computer and overlook all of this, in the name of anti-imperialism is pretty dreadful. To do so because another main who died decades ago said so, and not because of your own original thinking, is really just blind stupidity beyond belief.

[Devrim]

T. Cliff can say and write whatever dribble comes out of that insignificant little vapid head of his...

Cliff tends to write very little these days. I would put it down to his medical condition.

Devrim

[Imposter Marxist]

Tony Cliff, god rest his beautiful soul, is dead, my friends.

[ckaihatsu]

This part, by itself, is unnecessarily dismissive:





People are getting killed willy nilly in Syria. Real people, real families, real workers. To sit back in the safety of your own middle-class home behind your computer and overlook all of this, in the name of anti-imperialism is pretty dreadful.


It's practically counter-revolutionary, to play the 'armchair-activist' card -- instead we should be seeing this as an *increase* in class consciousness, self-motivated political participation, and a dynamism that simply hasn't been possible in the past.

If *more* people were on RevLeft and actively wrestling with revolutionary political issues it *would* have a tangible effect in the real world, have no doubt.

And, to the topic, what's been happening in Syria is not some wanton genocide -- it's a thuggish regime whose base of power is drying up like a puddle in the sun. But that *doesn't* mean that makes it okay for outsiders to play white-knight-on-a-horse and come rushing in with missiles and oil contracts. Whatever the people of Syria can do for themselves is to be encouraged the world over, and if they put out a leftist proletarian strategy for revolution there and throughout the Middle East then that would be our cue.

Unfortunately the situation is stagnating and the existing base of power is fragmenting, from what I can gather. It's too much pressure in one place, with no relief in sight.

[Bronco]

Syria was actually a peaceful place, with relative freedom, prior to this insurgency

No, it's a country that's been ruled by one family for more than 40 years, using the military and secret police to crush dissent and imposing numerous restrictions on its citizens. By no means could Syria under Assad ever have been considered a place of "freedom"

[Arlekino]

It looks different story.
http://news.yahoo.com/syria-anti-government-groups-committed-houla-massacre-161038724.html

[scarletghoul]

As a communist, I support the people fighting against the mercenaries of imperialist capital in the middle east. This should be obvious. (and if anyone disputes that the syrian opposition is imperialist-backed then youre just a fucking fool. our media and governments are both glorifying them, turkey is letting itself be used as a base, and the gulf states are openly paying their salaries. Wake up, for fuck sake.)

[scarletghoul]

youre also a moron if you took the bbc/reuters/whatever story about houla for granted and immediately went 'omg assads killing people' without questioning a thing. at least fucking investigate the other side in these things , my god,, did we have similar discussions on here about saddams wmd

[Rafiq]

You sir need to be restricted.

jffUNQw8Fl8

You don't need to resort to emotional rhetoric to debate someone whose pro assad. The UN confirmed, I believe, Syrian military wasn't responsable for that.

As if Assad's regime is to be supported if no "massacres" occured. Either way, he's to be opposed.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

[Brosa Luxemburg]

i admit i have not followed this story very closely. but as a trotskyist i support all regimes against imperialism.

as trotsky said he supported the Ethiopia emperor against italy, would support 'facist' brazil against britian, and would support a barbaric monarchy against a 'civilized' imperialist power.

i play it by the book, and dont pretend to be above trotsky and his analysis.


neutrality, as trotsky said, is tantamount to support for imperialism


you can read some trotsky, agree with it or not is your choice.


So basically your entire defense of what you have said has been "Trotsky said it, so it must be true!"

Marxism is not a religion. We do not have gods for which we must live our lives for and respect every word they say. You, it would seem, would disagree.

[blake 3:17]

The question for those of us in the imperialist countries is whether or not we support imperialist intervention under a humanitarian guise. Many on the liberal/social democratic left are demanding imperialist intervention. Do we support that?

[Krano]

So basically your entire defense of what you have said has been "Trotsky said it, so it must be true!"

Marxism is not a religion. We do not have gods for which we must live our lives for and respect every word they say. You, it would seem, would disagree.
Thats what (Enter Name) isms are all about.

[Comrade Samuel]

You might as well be a Stalinist while you're at it, you know the people who support the North Korean feudal dynasty because of anti-imperialism.

For the record comrade we filthy godless "Stalinists" despise the governments of both Syria and North Korea, your far better off being a one-person tendency stumbling all over yourself with your self-contradiction and batshit crazy opinion on the matter.

No "stand against imperialism" is worth the deaths of hundreds of workers, I ask you OP to find me one other person here who disagrees

[Krano]

For the record comrade we filthy godless "Stalinists" despise the governments of both Syria and North Korea, your far better off being a one-person tendency stumbling all over yourself with your self-contradiction and batshit crazy opinion on the matter.
I don't see whats contradictory about being opposed to both imperialism and dictatorships, i know you fine folk sure like to take sides with any dictator that call themselfs even remotely socialist or anti-imperialist.

[Comrade Samuel]

I don't see whats contradictory about being opposed to both imperialism and dictatorships, i know you fine folk sure like to take sides with any dictator that call themselfs even remotely socialist or anti-imperialist.

(please refer to the edit, sorry for not being clear who the second part of the rant was directed toward)

Also who are these "dictators" we supposedly support for calling themselves socialist/anti- imperialist?

[Krano]

(please refer to the edit, sorry for not being clear who the second part of the rant was directed toward)

Also who are these "dictators" we supposedly support for calling themselves socialist/anti- imperialist?
Well the few that supported North Korea seem to be banned now anyway, of course i don't mean all of you, but some of you do seem to have a bad habit of choosing between lesser evils which is something leftists shouldnt do to begin with.

[Comrade Samuel]

Well the few that supported North Korea seem to be banned now anyway, of course i don't mean all of you, but some of you do seem to have a bad habit of choosing between lesser evils which is something leftists shouldnt do to begin with.

I would hardly go as far to say supporters of North Korea are looked upon very kindly by the majority of Marxist-Leninists to begin with, I'd say just about all of us see juche as revisionist and an insult to real marxism.

I don't really understand what you mean by "haveing a bad habit of choosing the lesser of two evils". That could mean choosing a reformist party over the the republicans which again I doubt anybody from any tendency could care less about either way.

Regardless we should stop derailing this thread with our petty little tendency disagreement, there's 100's of other places for that.

[Agathor]

I don't buy the cop-out that since both the FSA and Assad would run capitalist regimes it is uncommunist for us to consider whether one might be better than the other (Would anyone apply that standard to Germany in 1933, or Chile in 1972?). I also don't buy the assumption, dusted off from its use in the Libyan Civil War, that the Syrian 'working class' are just collateral damage in the fight between the American and Syrian bourgeoisie. For as usual the position of the working class in the mind of Marxists is no more than their idea of where the working class ought to be standing.

However, it's obvious to me that the difference between the FSA and Assad isn't worth a pint of blood. And a civil war in Syria would probably be unnaturally bloody, likely spilling over into Iraqi style sectarian massacres.

[Os Cangaceiros]

You don't need to resort to emotional rhetoric to debate someone whose pro assad. The UN confirmed, I believe, Syrian military wasn't responsable for that.

When did that happen? :confused:

[seventeethdecember2016]

No, it's a country that's been ruled by one family for more than 40 years, using the military and secret police to crush dissent and imposing numerous restrictions on its citizens. By no means could Syria under Assad ever have been considered a place of "freedom"
Ease off the Idealism will you? Now you know very well what I mean by 'relative freedom'. Sure Syria isn't a Liberal Democracy, but the distribution of power in a state doesn't usually affect common citizens. It was just business as usual for the past 40 years, which equates to relative freedom.

I'm all for ousting Assad, but what do the people of Syria have to look forward to in a country with constant secular agitation? There are also many Assyrian and Chaldean Christians who went to Syria as refugees during the Iraqi insurgency. Are these people to relive the same horrors twice?
Also, do you really think a civil war is the best option for Syria? Especially when Assad has a majority of support amongst the populous? Thanks to all the sanctions, there is also a shortage of cooking oil and other essentials, so Western countries are further touting themselves for plunging Syria into possibly mass starvation, which they'll conveniently blame Assad for.

None of these are beneficial for Syria, and a Liberal or Islamist government is not worth causing years of unrest.

In my country, they've just been busy humanizing these insurgent scum by showing makeshift hospitals with rebels spewing pseudo-revolutionary rhetoric. It really warms your heart.
You know, Syria's military has prepared itself, over the years, for war with Israel. If NATO intervenes, I hope they get the full taste of the Syrian defenses.


You don't need to resort to emotional rhetoric to debate someone whose pro assad. The UN confirmed, I believe, Syrian military wasn't responsable for that.

The UN now recognizes that the perpetrators were from an Alawite community which, apparently, had affiliations with the pro-Assad movement(of course this is just exposing its bias). At least that's what I heard from the BBC(bad source) last night.

[X5N]

As I said in the other thread, opposing imperialism is one thing, but supporting a brutal dictator is another thing entirely. And it's completely repugnant, that people who claim to stand for the people would support any oppressor of the people.

[X5N]

consider that many syrians ,the majority are against the 'rebels'

1) Doesn't mean he isn't a brutal dictator who needs to go die in a fire.

2) How the hell do you know? Polling can't exactly be accurate in an authoritarian regime.

3) Most workers support capitalism. Doesn't mean they haven't been brainwashed.

Also, I love how you put 'rebels' in little quotes. Like you really believe the state television of a brutal authoritarian regime, as well as bullshit news sources like RT.

[seventeethdecember2016]

2) How the hell do you know? Polling can't exactly be accurate in an authoritarian regime.
I personally got that information from the PBS program Frontline.



Also, I love how you put 'rebels' in little quotes. Like you really believe the state television of a brutal authoritarian regime, as well as bullshit news sources like RT.
It doesn't take a political scientist to realize there is an insurgency in Syria. Those who deny that, or sugarcoat it by calling them 'freedom fighters', are simply naive.

I also don't know any other sources which takes such an intimate view of Syria as Syrian based sources. Western Sources do a good job, or rather bad job considering how you may look at it, at illustrating wrongs done in Syria, but they aren't interested in talking about local issues like Syrian source have been doing for decades. Of course Syrian sources will shy away from taking criticisms. The BBC, which is pretty Liberal, portrayed the August protests, in England, in a negative way. Yet the BBC is still hailed as a reasonable source by many people(Alexa says they're the 50th most popular website).

Don't be fooled by psychological warfare and political opportunism. And what I mean by that is that you shouldn't take sides.

[Lenina Rosenweg]

i admit i have not followed this story very closely. but as a trotskyist i support all regimes against imperialism.

as trotsky said he supported the Ethiopia emperor against italy, would support 'facist' brazil against britian, and would support a barbaric monarchy against a 'civilized' imperialist power.

i play it by the book, and dont pretend to be above trotsky and his analysis.

Trotsky would not have supported Assad.This is a different historical context.

[Os Cangaceiros]

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2215224&postcount=11

[Os Cangaceiros]

The label "rebels" says nothing about whether the aforementioned rebels are good or bad, though.

[workerist]

i think people who support the murderous regime in Syria out of "anti-imperialism" are still living in some Cold War timewarp or something. I personally could care less if assad is toppled by his own people. that doesn't mean I support NATO though. One does not have to choose one or the other, both are terrible options for the syrian people (imperialism and the alawite thugs who control syria)

[ckaihatsu]

... thats an understatement, when 'they've' overthrown the state,then be sure there'll be large scale massacres,with their goal of bringing about some prehistoric caliphate.
the media and govts ,gulf and saudi especially have helped with sectarian propaganda,it already appears that a civil war in lebanon and iraq is more than likely.





i think people who support the murderous regime in Syria out of "anti-imperialism" are still living in some Cold War timewarp or something. I personally could care less if assad is toppled by his own people. that doesn't mean I support NATO though. One does not have to choose one or the other, both are terrible options for the syrian people (imperialism and the alawite thugs who control syria)


People's localist bias is showing through here -- many probably subscribe to a let's-just-ignore-international-dynamics mindset, but how *realistic* *is* it, really -- ??

It would be "nice" if we could chalk this up to a mere neighbors' spat, one that would spread no further than a "civil war" within the region, or an in-house matter of "deposing the dictator" for Syria.

It's more accurate to describe this as an *international* civil war, or a "soft world war", because anytime Syria is mentioned so is NATO, Russia, and China.

We have to be careful in how we approach the topic of Syria because a fine political surgery isn't possible here -- we can't just scalpel-out Assad and pretend that there wouldn't be international consequences to it, namely destabilizing Syria and making it ripe for NATO invasion.

[ckaihatsu]

Let me put this another way, too -- imperialism (power) despises autonomy, and certain countries like China, Russia, and Iraq, Libya, Syria, Iran, and others have had the internal resources to be relatively self-sufficient and autarkic.

Now, in a period of capitalist economic crisis, imperialism will be looking even *more* to valuations based on raw resources, since robust *high-level* economic production is weakening. Western civilization has been shifting its emphasis to militarism over industrial production over the past few decades and reverting to a strategy of neo-colonialism, to maintain its hegemony.

It's only predictable that NATO's aggression would only *expand* and look for a Cold-War-like dominance over nations that are "holding out" by remaining relatively autonomous and autarkic.


Political Spectrum, Simplified

http://postimage.org/image/35tmoycro/

[Tim Cornelis]

You don't need to resort to emotional rhetoric to debate someone whose pro assad. The UN confirmed, I believe, Syrian military wasn't responsable for that.

No, it were the pro-Assad Shabiha.


Witnesses and survivors have told U.N. investigators that most victims died in two bouts of summary executions carried out by "shabbiha" militiamen loyal to President Bashar al-Assad in the nearby village of Taldaou last Friday, U.N. rights spokesman Rupert Colville said.

Reuters.

[Tim Cornelis]

As a communist, I support the people fighting against the mercenaries of imperialist capital in the middle east. This should be obvious. (and if anyone disputes that the syrian opposition is imperialist-backed then youre just a fucking fool. our media and governments are both glorifying them, turkey is letting itself be used as a base, and the gulf states are openly paying their salaries. Wake up, for fuck sake.)

As a communist, I support the people fighting against the mercenaries of imperialist capital in the Middle East. This should be obvious. (And if anyone disputes that the Syrian regime is imperialist-backed then you're just a fool. Russian media and government are both glorifying it, supplying them. Wake up)

Your position is quite problematic when both sides are supported by an imperialist power.

Incidentally, you support the Shabiha, as you say "I support the people fighting against the mercenaries of imperialist capital [Shabiba, Syrian regime] in the Middle East". That is to say, you support child murderers, murderers of unarmed men and women. For this alone you should be banned.

It is quite ironic, and unfortunate, and all too common, that those who most vocally present themselves as "anti-imperialist" support imperialism themselves.

Here is the murderers you support:

Q7tFn0nvF2M

[freepalestine]

Fire in Syria (I): Preparations on the Turkish and Lebanese Borders


Members of the Free Syrian Army walk as they carry rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs) at Bab Al Hawa in outskirts of Idlib, near the Syrian-Turkey border 21 May 2012. (Photo: Reuters - Stringer)
By: Ibrahim al-Amin
Published Monday, June 11, 2012
Syria and the wider region are witnessing preparations for a phase that can be described as critical. The international and regional contexts reveal the severity of the upcoming battle, not just in Syria but in all the countries of Bilad al-Sham (the Levant), spreading to the remaining Arab countries and the whole region.

Gulf countries are in a state of high alert based on information regarding possible violent attacks in the context of the Syrian crisis. They are alert because the rulers of these countries know what they are doing, especially after proclaiming that they are in an existential struggle.

Reports from the field and in the media indicate a discernible increase in the number of Arab fighters from Gulf countries joining the battle against the Syrian government and on its soil.

Some regime opponents speak about Turkish officers training Syrian fighters on advanced anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons. Turkey is left on its own to answer the strategic question: Shall we get involved in the bloody game engulfing Syria and are we ready to pay the costs?
While all sides find it difficult to contemplate any type of political solution, they are all quick to reveal thorough practical arrangements for a new round of violence to change the situation on the ground. Each hopes to tip the balance of power in its favor to use in negotiations that are expected to follow at a later time.

Kofi Annan’s mission is over, mainly because there is no consensus to support it. On the contrary, the mission was an opportunity for adversaries of the Syrian regime, whether the opposition or foreign powers, to catch their breath after the latest wave of diplomatic efforts and confrontations on the ground that tipped the balance in the regime’s direction.

Syria’s opponents made an effort to unite the opposition. It turned out to be difficult for many reasons. So they began working on making the opposition work in a common direction. Foreign powers such as Turkey, Gulf states, Europe, the United States, and even Israel would take charge of practical matters.

Failing to attract diplomatic and military groups loyal to the regime to the other side, they decided to expel all Syrian diplomats. They also carried out calculated security-military attacks on a number of officers in the Syrian army to give them a taste of the dangers involved in remaining loyal to the regime.

This was in conjunction with a concentrated campaign to spread rumors, aiming, as usual, to create an atmosphere of doubt and mistrust. They then decided to forbid the regime from replying, even through the media, through attempting to ban satellite transmission of Syrian channels and preparing to disrupt their signals even inside Syria.

On the level of security, work is speedily underway to create the support zones needed by the armed Syrian groups. In the last several weeks, the Turkish border has effectively become a military training ground for Syrian fighters.

Some regime opponents speak about Turkish officers training Syrian fighters on advanced anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons. They are also undertaking logistical tasks to coordinate the work of armed groups and train them on modern communications techniques.

In the meantime, some Gulf countries increased their financial support to an unprecedented level. They are financing the purchase of various weapons, providing salaries for the enlisting of more fighters, recruiting young Syrians in Turkey, Iraq, and Lebanon, in addition to the continuation of the open media campaign against the regime until further notice.

In Lebanon, efforts to provide the necessary political and popular support for the Syrian opposition are now at the stage of practical preparations. Several steps were taken in that direction by the Saudis through Salafi groups and Future Movement supporters, some of whom are employed in the civil and military departments of the Lebanese state. They implemented a part of the plan to control large areas in the North.

One could say now that the Saudis succeeded in having a veto, through its partisans, on any political, security, or other action in the northern Lebanese region. Practically, this veto meant restricting the movement of the Lebanese army, obstructing its intelligence work, warning its leaders that monitoring the opponents of Syria could be considered an aggressive act.

In Lebanon, efforts to provide the necessary political and popular support for the Syrian opposition are now at the stage of practical preparations. This meant extending the distribution of Lebanese and Syrian armed groups in the city of Tripoli and a substantial section of Akkar. They also created a hostile sectarian situation to increase tensions in the street. This is done by targeting Alawis in such areas, even if this meant a wide and open war.
In North Bekaa, on-the-ground preparations continue, with sympathetic groups transporting arms to the mountains of Ersal that have become open bases for Syrian fighters and their Lebanese supporters, under political and even security cover.

The clearest indicator was in the statements of Ersal’s head of municipality, Ali Hujairi, who called on the people of his town to arm themselves and confront the state security forces.

Records of investigations with those detained for transporting and smuggling weapons and explosives in the area have shown that there is an advanced plan underway. Confiscated materials reveal a plot that could destroy whole villages or city neighborhoods.

In the meantime, armed Syrian groups are active along a line connecting the surrounding areas of Damascus and Homs to Lebanon’s eastern borders. They are clashing with people in those regions using the pretext that Hezbollah is deployed in the area to support the regular Syrian army.

It should be noted that areas under Hezbollah’s influence did not hinder the transportation of injured Syrian opposition members through these border points to hospitals in the North.

There is also an increased level of sectarian incitement in a strip of villages along the Syrian border, whose populations are a mix of sects.

It seems there is a zero hour planned by those who control these groups. On the other side, the regime is prepared to face the inevitable...So what is going to happen?

Ibrahim al-Amin is editor-in-chief of Al-Akhbar.

This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.
http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/fire-syria-i-preparations-turkish-and-lebanese-borders















Fire in Syria (II): The Regime’s Response


Syrians listen to the televised speech of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad at a store in Damascus on 3 June 2012. (Photo: AFP - Louai Beshara)
By: Ibrahim al-Amin
Published Tuesday, June 12, 2012
The disarray amongst the Syrian opposition is all-pervading. The factions are at political loggerheads, trading charges of treason and incompetence. Their preoccupation with meaningless media appearances persists, amid reports of embezzlement of “the revolution’s funds.” The foreign capitals and supposed “think-tanks” that have been striving to unify the Syrian opposition meanwhile voice growing exasperation at the elusiveness of their task.

The political and media leaders who speak in the name of the opposition continue to bank on, and work towards, foreign intervention to resolve the situation decisively.

That leaves the opposition inside Syria on its own, though it too is divided. Some want a showdown come what may, as the regime cannot be changed peacefully. Others – not a majority – argue that it would be possible to arrive at an interim accommodating solution, in order to prevent Syria in its entirety from being engulfed in blood and fire.

It is impossible to create a framework within which all armed groups would defer to the political authority of a single leadership – especially with the entry onto the scene of extremist groups.The disarray is not confined to politics. It applies to the armed opposition factions as much as the political groupings. A significant proportion of the opposition inside Syria rejects militarization, though it decided some time ago not to condemn those who resort to taking up arms. Now these figures and groups complain that it is impossible to create a framework within which all armed groups would defer to the political authority of a single leadership – especially with the entry onto the scene of extremist groups, bringing with them a plethora of bloody experiences from Afghanistan and Pakistan, or North Africa and Iraq.
Once collectively known as the “Arab Afghans,” these groups are now referred to as the “Arab fighters” in Syria. They function in accordance with their own hierarchical structure. They copy the modus operandi which was devised by the leadership of al-Qaeda, and then became public property available to anyone who wants it. This is based on providing men who want to sacrifice themselves for goals which they believe to be pleasing to the Almighty, while supplying them with their needs by various means that are readily available the world over, especially in our region.

The actions of these groups, and the sectarian massacres they have committed in several parts of Syria, have dismayed a large section of the opposition: those who have “gone back home,” or lost confidence in the direction taken by what began as a genuine struggle to improve the political, economic, human and social condition of the country.

The opposition routinely blames all acts of violence on the regime. The regime and its agencies are not innocent. Its security forces and army commit crimes in the course of their suppression of its civilian or paramilitary opponents. Yet things have reached the point of prompting some opposition supporters to want a restoration of stability. That does not mean accepting restoration of the status quo ante. It means no longer allowing a justified popular uprising to be used to subject Syria to a process of wholesale destruction – one which also benefits powerful hardliners in the security and military elites.

As the Assad regime’s Syrian, Arab and Western enemies prepare to usher in a new stage in the bloody confrontation, the Syrian authorities have been mulling over their own plans for a comprehensive military showdown. The aim this time will not just be to prevent the creation of armed opposition concentrations or enclaves, but to “destroy all armed groups, irrespective of their nature or identity.”

The Syrian authorities have been mulling over their own plans for a comprehensive military showdown. This is the prevalent notion in Syrian military and security circles, according to sources in contact with them. “The rationale and motivation for launching wholesale cleansing operations are increasing by the day,” they say. “To repeat with the UN observers the free-for-all that came with the Arab observers, would only open the door to further deterioration and bloodshed.”
As seen from Damascus, the difference now is that “a hardline majority of the armed groups have come to be led by non-Syrians, and the foreign intelligence agencies that work with them act as though they’re willing to destroy everything in Syria – not just targeting the army and security forces, but all public civilian facilities on the pretext that they belong to the regime, and at the same time ratcheting up sectarian tensions through roving acts of criminality.”

Sources familiar with Damascus’ thinking do not deny the involvement of pro-regime loyalists in sectarian crimes. But they believe that it is intent on “achieving blows of the kind that would change the look of the entire scene, military, political, and popular.”

It would appear that the current focus of security activity is around Damascus, where a sweeping operation has been ordered aimed at curtailing rebel activity in the capital’s hinterland, all the way to the Lebanese border. This in turn reflects a top-level decision to take all necessary action, over an indeterminate period, to eliminate any “threat from the West.”

Informed sources explain that what is being considered is “extensive and very harsh operations in the area of the Lebanese borders, against all sites used by the oppositionists, even if that means directing strikes at forces operating directly on the border, possibly including Lebanese groups that support them. ” The message is that so long as the Lebanese are incapable of preventing parts of their country from becoming havens for armed rebels, the Syrian authorities will act to neutralize those areas.

So long as the Lebanese are incapable of preventing parts of their country from becoming havens for armed rebels, the Syrian authorities will act to neutralize those areas.In addition to pursuing the goal of clearing Homs and its hinterland of armed opposition enclaves and cells, action is being taken against concentrations of opposition fighters elsewhere, especially bases and training sites near the Turkish, Iraqi and Jordanian borders. The Syrian army appears to have embarked on a campaign described as “extremely harsh.” aimed at “exterminating entire groups” of rebels.
The Syrian leadership has been coordinating closely with the Russian leadership on such matters. According to informed sources, Moscow may even have intervened to block the execution of some military orders after they were issued. But this was in the context of its efforts to strengthen its diplomatic hand. Russia is not expected to stand in the way of the Syrian authorities as they embark on actions that could be of different order to what we have seen so far.

Ibrahim al-Amin is editor-in-chief of Al-Akhbar.

This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.
http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/fire-syria-ii-regime%E2%80%99s-response








Syrian Crisis: Three’s a Crowd
By: Amal Saad-Ghorayeb
Published Tuesday, June 12, 2012
http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/syrian-crisis-three%E2%80%99s-crowd



http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/syria-alternatives-i-man-cannot-live-guns-alone

http://english.al-akhbar.com/blogs/sandbox/going-rogue-americas-unconventional-warfare-mideast


http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/israel-admits-hezbollah-can-hit-tel-aviv
http://www.thenational.ae/news/world/middle-east/israel-warns-on-syrias-chemical-weapons
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=494776

[X5N]

I think I'm leaning towards being neutral. But still of the opinion that support of Assad (or anyone who murders people) is fucking repugnant.

[Os Cangaceiros]

I'm sorry, but that's an unacceptable position to hold. Syria is under attack from imperialism, you must throw your meaningless rhetorical support behind one group of murderous thugs or the other!

[Raskolnikov]

Syria is under attack from imperialism, you must throw your meaningless rhetorical support behind one group of murderous thugs or the other!

Or it becomes (as they say) political necessity. At this point - we know the Syrian Proletariat will be likely worse off under a puppet of US's Imperialism than Syria's regime. It obviously does not mean the Proletariat is not oppressed under Assad's regime - except there is a different degree of oppression when compared to under the boot of an Empire, it's puppets and possibly more so if said puppets are really good friends with Al-Qaeda.



I mean the whole center of Revolutionary Struggle at this point is breaking Imperialism's hold upon the Third World and the oppressed nationalities within the First World - and allowing this to produce Revolutionary Struggle in order to overcome their own contradictions and their own capitalist states.

As we can see from Libya - the situation of Gaddafi's Libya vs the NTC's Libya is much to be seen. Under the NTC we see a very genocidal (or racist against Black Libyans to an extreme - take your pick of terms) state which incorporates many means that were given to them via NATO.

However - did going against NATO mean we were fully 100% for Gaddafi and say he had no mistakes or problems what so ever? No. We were simply against NATO intervention, and against the NATO-supported NTC.

It works more so as building an anti-Imperialist front, and connecting with the masses.

So, the question of 'Supporting Assad' is like 'Supporting Gaddafi'. Your choice. However the main thing of unity would be - Against a NATO intervention in Syria that will obviously destroy it and make it just as bad as Libya.

[Comrade B]

Assad isn't fighting imperialists right now, he is fighting revolutionaries. Trotsky supported those who we would ordinarily oppose over imperialism, this is against his own people.

[Comrade B]

being supported by Russian imperialists makes you no less imperialist-supported than a US imperialist supported regime

[hashem]

as a trotskyist i support all regimes against imperialism.

you are not supporting anyone against imperialism. you are supporting one faction of imperialism system against another one.

[Martin Blank]

neutrality, as trotsky said, is tantamount to support for imperialism

Neutrality is not what's being argued here. Rather, what is being argued is whether it is necessary to support the Assad regime in addition to opposing U.S./UN imperialist intervention. I am for the defeat of American imperialism, and will continue to organize my brothers and sisters to fight against capitalist war through the use of class-struggle means (strikes, "hot cargoing", occupations, protests, etc.).

I am for the defeat of American imperialism, whether or not that means the Assad regime is victorious on the battlefield. As other comrades have said on here, I see no need to try to figure out who is the "lesser evil".

The defeat of both capitalist regimes through proletarian revolution and the establishment of workers' republics is what I advocate, not the propping up of this or that capitalist regime.

[ckaihatsu]

http://wsws.org/articles/2012/jun2012/pers-j14.shtml


Imperialism and the Houla massacre


14 June 2012

Investigations of the May 25 massacre in Houla, Syria have shattered the lies Washington and its allies are using to justify their escalating military intervention in Syria.

Responsibility for the deaths of 108 people massacred in Houla lies not with the Syrian army, but with the Syrian “rebel” forces the US is arming against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, according to the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, a leading German daily. The newspaper reported that the Syrian guerilla groups functioned as Sunni sectarian death squads, wiping out much of Houla’s Shiite Muslim minority. Its sources were not drawn from the Assad regime, but from the Syrian opposition itself, as well as from French religious groups in Syria.

The implications of this revelation go far beyond the atrocity in Houla. They undermine the rotten foundations of the US-led campaign for war with Syria. The media uncritically reports opposition accounts of the killings and Western denunciations of Assad to cynically present arms support for the opposition—or, possibly, a US invasion of Syria—as acts of conscience to halt a humanitarian disaster.

Media outlets carrying such reports are acting as nothing more than propaganda agencies for US intervention. The US and its allies aim to intimidate Russia and China into abandoning their opposition to US-led intervention, then oust Assad and replace him with a pro-US proxy regime.

[...]

[Raskolnikov]

Assad isn't fighting imperialists right now, he is fighting revolutionaries.

These same 'Revolutionaries' whom more or less caused the Houla massacre?

(National Review has the evidence..)

Or the same 'revolutionaries' whom are recruiting child soldiers? (Reuters has an article yet I'm not allowed to post links yet...bah!)


You are supporting one faction of imperialism system against another one.

Sorry, it'd be one Capitalist system (who in this case has come into opposition to much larger Capitalistic forces) against an Imperialistic One.

Imperialism is the final-stage of Capitalism, a capitalism which basically creates 'superprofits' and no longer applies with the regular rules concerning how a capitalist can gain these profits.

Syria, is not an Imperialist power. Capitalist - certainly. Seemingly nationalist-bourgeois.


being supported by Russian imperialists makes you no less imperialist-supported than a US imperialist supported regime

In this case - the Russians do not have the full obedience or full control of the state of Syria. Syria is not Russia's puppet.

While Russia is in this for its own gains (as to oppose US Imperialism as a potential to set up its own) we do know that it has basically become a battlefield between US Imperialism and Syrian Self-Determination.

And as per the usual Capitalists will jump in to oppose each other. Russia will support Syria for its own designs - it just so happens that they're opposing US Imperialism and US aggression in the region.

Basically - going against US and NATO Intervention.

[marxleninstalinmao]

i admit i have not followed this story very closely. but as a trotskyist i support all regimes against imperialism.

as trotsky said he supported the Ethiopia emperor against italy, would support 'facist' brazil against britian, and would support a barbaric monarchy against a 'civilized' imperialist power.

i play it by the book, and dont pretend to be above trotsky and his analysis.
And Stalin supported the Emir of Afghanistan over British Imperialism. That attitude is not limited to your anti-capitalist, treacherous idol

[Sir Comradical]

You sir need to be restricted.

jffUNQw8Fl8

Carried out by FSA. Welcome to five months ago.

[LiberationTheologist]

Before anyone votes for or suggests war they should have a damn good reason for carrying it out. In the case of Syria I dont think the oppression and dictatorship was near the level of worthy of me going out in the streets and shooting the policeman and politicians, but that is my view from afar. This conflict is looking like a religous armed conflict stirred up from without and within. How easy is it to divide people on religion?

It never ceases to amaze me how governments and people outside of a war area can support shipping arms to other nations creating massive, massive slaughter, when they are not even aware of the actual conditions in that country. Of course what do they care, they don't live there. Who amongst us has any idea of the material and social conditions in Syria before this USA, Qatar, French, Turkey, Saudi Kingdom arms supplied war began? None of those prior listed governments has any right to create war in another nation. Why are war partisans not creating war in their own country? Hypocrites.

Shame, shame, shame on any government or person who supports war in another country but wont take up the same action in their own imperialist mass murdering, weapons shipping country.

[Let's Get Free]

Carried out by FSA. Welcome to five months ago.

Actually, according to actual witnesses, the perpetrators were the Shabihha, or the Assad's regime's paid mercenaries, the armed men in civilian clothing who assault protesters against the regime.

[LiberationTheologist]

Actually, according to actual witnesses, the perpetrators were the Shabihha, or the Assad's regime's paid mercenaries, the armed men in civilian clothing who assault protesters against the regime.

What was your news source for formulating that opinion? It is wrong. Propaganda is a serious thing but when you run into these situations you can truly start to question just how the media works. I want to suggest a news source to you it is much more honest; but not totally; than the other main stream corporate media. http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/


Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung: Syrian Rebels Committed Houla Massacre


The German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung has run two articles alleging that Syrian Sunni rebels committed the Houla massacre, reporting that the victims were largely from Alawi and Shia minorities in Houla. This is important because the Syrian government has been blamed for the massacre and the massacre has been invoked as a justification for foreign military intervention. Here are the articles:
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/neue-erkenntnisse-zu-getoeteten-von-hula-abermals-massaker-in-syrien-11776496.html
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/arabische-welt/syrien-eine-ausloeschung-11784434.html

And here are English translations from the articles:
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2012/06/prime-german-paper-syrian-rebels-committed-houla-massacre.html
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2012/06/new-faz-piece-on-houla-massacre-the-extermination.html

[ckaihatsu]

Who amongst us has any idea of the material and social conditions in Syria before this USA, Qatar, French, Turkey, Saudi Kingdom arms supplied war began? None of those prior listed governments has any right to create war in another nation. Why are war partisans not creating war in their own country? Hypocrites.

Shame, shame, shame on any government or person who supports war in another country but wont take up the same action in their own imperialist mass murdering, weapons shipping country.


This is profoundly correct, and is one of the best things I've ever seen on RevLeft -- the 'ludicrosity' of the war industry is at historical levels now, and may even be reflected in the mouthing of "secessionist" sentiment from a number of the states -- (meaning that the secessionist move would somehow implicitly be a veto of the unity of the Union on its imperialist foreign policy presence).

(There's a thread on this elsewhere here.)

[Avanti]

assad can not survive

assad has always been dead

since the day

he was selected as a chosen

and that's for all the well-known faces

what assad is

is but a shadow of interests we cannot see

which clash against one another

he was marked

the civilians

dying in the rubble

are not even the pawns

they are the dust of the chessboard

the rulers were bored

[Let's Get Free]

What was your news source for formulating that opinion? It is wrong.

This is from the actual witnesses, you know, the people who saw it first hand.

[GoddessCleoLover]

Seems like the kind of thing that Assad's goons would perpetrate.

[LiberationTheologist]

This is from the actual witnesses, you know, the people who saw it first hand.

That is not a total answer to my question but it does show your perception is based on weak sources, which was the lie in actuality. You may have swallowed the lie and not examined the reality that was exposed after the mass propaganda story took place. Let me ask you another question so I can judge whether or not I am dealing with someone who is seeking reality and the truth or just someone who wants to win an argument. Have you ever seen a large corporate media story before and realized later that what you were seeing was a purposefully crafted falsification of reality?

I have been fooled before and learned that I and no one else can take an event as portrayed by main stream media (capitalist main stream media I will add)as truth without doing investigation and checking other sources. Do you agree with the prior statement?

If you and others at some point took your news source as informative and did not keep tabs on the Houla massacre then you missed a good lesson on how media manipulation by the huge media propaganda machine works. I hope you re-examine this story because this is a very concrete real lesson in how false propaganda and the media works.

To be more blunt in this case you are simply eating up main stream media lies as they are fed to you. This is an example of the power of mass media to distort reality.

[GoddessCleoLover]

Haven't UN investigators determined that Assad's forces were in fact responsible for the Houla massacre?

[Os Cangaceiros]

Does it even matter who did it? Even if it were proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Assad's supporters carried out the massacre, even if Assad himself was caught on video strangling an infant in it's crib, the anti-imperialists here on revleft would just say, "oh, well, American supported FSA imperialist quislings carried out such and such massacre, American quislings in the Ivory Coast did this, imperialist goons in the Balkans did such-and-such massacre back in the 90's, etc."

It's so tiring and stupid. It's not like anyone on either side really cares about these slaughters anyway. A slaughter perpetrated by the "good guys" is just an unfortunate deviation, a statistic (if it can even be proven to have happened...who knows, perhaps it was a false flag, or a wholesale fabrication of the media!), while a slaughter perpetrated by the "bad guys" is living proof of the evil demonic intentions of Assad and the Syrian government, or the AmeriKKKan imperialists and their Islamic fundamentalist puppets.

It makes me want to puke.

[LiberationTheologist]

Does it even matter who did it? Even if it were proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Assad's supporters carried out the massacre, even if Assad himself was caught on video strangling an infant in it's crib, the anti-imperialists here on revleft would just say, "oh, well, American supported FSA imperialist quislings carried out such and such massacre, American quislings in the Ivory Coast did this, imperialist goons in the Balkans did such-and-such massacre back in the 90's, etc."
It's so tiring and stupid. It's not like anyone on either side really cares about these slaughters anyway. A slaughter perpetrated by the "good guys" is just an unfortunate deviation, a statistic (if it can even be proven to have happened...who knows, perhaps it was a false flag, or a wholesale fabrication of the media!), while a slaughter perpetrated by the "bad guys" is living proof of the evil demonic intentions of Assad and the Syrian government, or the AmeriKKKan imperialists and their Islamic fundamentalist puppets.

It makes me want to puke.

When attempting to ascertain the truth always verify your news sources and ask the other person were they are getting their information.

Your point about people with agendas is a very valid one. Please note I asked the other poster to name his sources of information and asked him questions to ascertain whether he is pushing and agenda or searching for the truth. He has provided nothing and may have an agenda that is based not on truth seeking but on other interests.

You are stating that pro - Assad people carried out the slaughter and that is false from what I have seen. What is your basis for your claim and your sources of information?

[Os Cangaceiros]

You are stating that pro - Assad people carried out the slaughter and that is false from what I have seen. What is your basis for your claim and your sources of information?

I'm actually not stating that. I don't think it particularly matters who committed that specific attack, as I stated in my post.

I don't know who did it, but why should I believe a link you posted, which in itself is based on anonymous sources in Syria? If I posted an article from CNN which stated that anonymous Sunni activist sources have claimed that Assad's troops are chopping up random civilians with machetes, would you believe it? Am I supposed to disregard everything from CNN and the BBC and Al Jazeera, yet believe everything from the Syrian state media and Press TV and RT?