Britain sending armoured vehicles to Syrian rebels

[Brutus]

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21684105

What do you think of the situation? Do you support the rebels?

[Lord Hargreaves]

I'm obviously sceptical of the UK government's intentions, as it seems likely such efforts are an attempt to co-opt the rebels as much as they are to help them. I would argue for a principled noninterventionism, even regarding sending such armoured vehicles.

But having said that, it is an extremely difficult situation, and if such policies led to the quick overthrow of Assad that clearly wouldn't be the worst thing in the world

[Kalinin's Facial Hair]

I sure do not support UK, Saudi Arabia and Israel backed 'rebels'. Though I'm not a Bashar supporter.

Know too little of the situation to support any side. I'll just side against foreign intervention.

[CommanderSasha]

To be honest, I don't trust the rebels or Assad. The rebels are apparently Islamists, which isn't great. But then Assad is a wanker of colossal proportions.

I think the Syrian people need a third option. Maybe Leftists over there should form their own faction?

[Brutus]

To be honest, I don't trust the rebels or Assad. The rebels are apparently Islamists, which isn't great. But then Assad is a wanker of colossal proportions.

I think the Syrian people need a third option. Maybe Leftists over there should form their own faction?

If only there were leftists! We've got to chose between an al-Qaeda-esque army or a dictator.

[Sir Comradical]

I support the Syrian Army! Fuck the rebels!

[Pleb]

I support the Syrian Army! Fuck the rebels!


2nd that

[ind_com]

Since the subjective conditions of a socialist revolution are missing, I want Assad to win this one. Fuck the terrorist lackeys of western imperialism.

[RadioRaheem84]

Did you guys ever stop to think that third options are just not there and cannot be pulled out of a hat in the middle of a civil war? I agree that both camps aren't ideal in the slightest but at least there is one that doesn't involve radical Islamists, rich businessmen connected to the west and imperial support. I think we spend too much time in theory and communist/socialist reading that we forget that there is no radical movement out there to out liking that is actually fighting back in these imperial onslaughts. If you take an non-interventionist position, then that is fine, but to not at least hope that Assad's forces can stop something much worse from happening to the people of Syria seems better. It's not ideal and it's not really supporting Assad to say that.

[Pleb]

Britain does not negotiate with terrorists, it arms them!

[Nakidana]

if such policies led to the quick overthrow of Assad that clearly wouldn't be the worst thing in the world

Saddam was overthrown very quickly, yet we all know what followed from that policy of intervention.

[RadioRaheem84]

But having said that, it is an extremely difficult situation, and if such policies led to the quick overthrow of Assad that clearly wouldn't be the worst thing in the world

Say what? Iraq and Libya are basket case nations. Just go down the line. Were there any nations that were better off after an intervention? Afghanistan was a war lord vipers den and then a theocratic regime until the Americans came in and returned it to the war lords. All because the Soviets and the Soviey backed regime wasn't ideal for many leftists to support?

[Let's Get Free]

To be honest, I don't trust the rebels or Assad. The rebels are apparently Islamists, which isn't great.

The rebels aren't Islamists, they're not even a majority. In fact, the Islamists make up the minority of the people fighting against the Assad regime. However, the Islamists are generally the most organized and best equipped, due to the funds the receive from the gulf states. The FSA are regularly under armed and strapped for cash.

[piet11111]

The UK wants to send APC's to them ?

Doesnt that say enough already ?

[RadioRaheem84]

That's how a lot of these revolts first start and then get hijacked by the most fundmentalist groups because a lot of them are ape shit crazy enough to be on the front lines and they receive funding by the Western backed bougie professional class. They get air support, political and financial backing and official recognition to gain more international support.

The radical Islamists are never in the majority but they're pushed to the forefront. But they are (along with imperialist ambitions to carve up Syria) ar worse threat than Assad.