So, should we then vote for the Labour Party in the next election? Because their policies, although horrendous, pale in comparison to what the coalition is doing right now.
How about that logic eh?
Results 41 to 60 of 109
fuck assad
fuck nato
fuck the un
fuck liberal internationalism
So, should we then vote for the Labour Party in the next election? Because their policies, although horrendous, pale in comparison to what the coalition is doing right now.
How about that logic eh?
The appropriate comparison would be not voting for the Republican Party.So, should we then vote for the Labour Party in the next election? Because their policies, although horrendous, pale in comparison to what the coalition is doing right now.
How about that logic eh?
There is very little one can add......perhaps the uniform changes but the crude propaganda does not(British WW1 Poster.)
^^^^^^^^^
Last edited by dodger; 30th March 2012 at 18:13. Reason: title
Night has one thousand eyes
Most.. what percentage is most? See this is the kind of comments that people make and just run with. I'm not saying that I don't agree. The FSA is a mix pot.
we need more revolutions and less "isms"
just because recently the US has used Islamist radicals to it's advantage in Libya and Syria and supports Saudi Arabia doesn't mean that the US desires Islamist radicals. thats ridiculous. Taliban, Al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas, Iran, Iraqi Islamist militias, are all obviously thorns in the US's side in the middle east.
They'd rather fight Islamists than communists in the middle east, for sure.
[FONT="Courier New"] “We stand for organized terror - this should be frankly admitted. Terror is an absolute necessity during times of revolution. Our aim is to fight against the enemies of the Revolution and of the new order of life. ”
― Felix Dzerzhinsky [/FONT]
لا شيء يمكن وقف محاكم التفتيش للثورة
Saying that the rebellion in Syria was not caused by the material conditions IN Syria and the management failures of their State and instead by hordes of mythical Saudi Arabian Salafists is naive and not based on any serious analysis of the material conditions. Yes, reactionary elements in Syria are probably better positioned than Leftist elements, buy WHY is that, and what possible role could the Syrian state have in creating or preserving that tradition? More importantly, how will any supposed Islamist government prevent the people from then coming and overthrowing THEM if that Islamist government fails to actually answer the material problems of the people?
The Muslim Brotherhood took over Egypt after the fall of Mubarak. Does that justify Mubarak's violence against the people? Should Leftists in Egypt weep and beg for Mubarak to return? Of course not, they try to make sure that the Muslim Brotherhood shares the same fate as Mubarak. The same goes for Syria.
You said they were FOREIGN Islamists. Are there Sunni radicals in the rebels? Probably, there were in Tunisia, Libya and Egypt, and Syria is obviously no different. Are there foreign fighters? There may well be in Syria too, al Qaeda already made a call to arms. But you are jumping to the conclusion that MOST are foreign Jihadi fanatics and not local Syrian fighters of various ideologies including Islamism, which is jumping to conclusions.
Just like in Egypt, Libya and Tunisia, the Islamists are playing a major role. And just like in Egypt, Libya and Tunisia, the presence of Islamists among the protesters and anti-government activists does not justify the government slaughtering innocent people or unarmed protesters, or committing any human rights abuses for that matter. Nor does it justify slandering ALL anti-government activists as Islamists and reactionaries. There's a good chance that whatever government would come out of a revolution in Syria, just like in Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Yemen, and in fact every other revolution in history, would be somewhat reactionary and would need to be toppled. That doesn't mean we should be an apologist for a dictatorial State which is no better.
Evidence? This is just a loopy conspiratorial rant.
That's what the Mubarak government said. It is skillful manipulation by the State. The Islamists are, in fact, doing precisely what the State wants them to do whenever they target Christians-the State has a material interest in heightening the tensions between the groups. Like in Egypt, the MB and Salafist fundamentalists are only powerful because they are the group which is best positioned against the State.Originally Posted by Borz
It should be noted too that Assad and the late Saddam come from the same Baathist ideology, and neither the Assad dynasty or the Iraqi Baathists seem to have any particular problem with killing their own people to hold on to power.
Last edited by Sinister Cultural Marxist; 30th March 2012 at 19:45.
Socialist Party of Outer Space
I don't see anything on either the "mainstream" press or the blog that you've been posting which prove that armed anti-regime forces in Syria are mostly foreign fighters. I've read a lot of bad things about armed anti-regime activists but not that they are predominantly foreign. What about the Syrian army defectors? They, presumably, are not foreign fighters.
The fact that they were enemies doesn't mean that they didn't have similar political ideologies and systems.
Last edited by Sinister Cultural Marxist; 30th March 2012 at 20:05.
uh huh.So, should we then vote for the Labour Party in the next election? Because their policies, although horrendous, pale in comparison to what the coalition is doing right now.
How about that logic eh?
isn't that the same logic you're using tho
that the imperialist folks getting involved are better than assad?
I'm on some sickle-hammer shit
Collective Bruce Banner shit
FKA: #FF0000, AKA Mistake Not My Current State Of Joshing Gentle Peevishness For The Awesome And Terrible Majesty Of The Towering Seas Of Ire That Are Themselves The Milquetoast Shallows Fringing My Vast Oceans Of Wrath
Yo regardless of how many foreign nationals are working with the rebels (the answer, if you're wondering, is a lot) there is still tons of weapons smuggling going on from outside forces to arm the rebels, the rebels who don't even make up a significant minority in the country.
Real talk this is more like a coup than it is a revolution and you have to a hole in your skull to not see that.
Then again you fucking idiots are the same ones who were riding NATO's dick when they went into Libya so haha hey
I'm on some sickle-hammer shit
Collective Bruce Banner shit
FKA: #FF0000, AKA Mistake Not My Current State Of Joshing Gentle Peevishness For The Awesome And Terrible Majesty Of The Towering Seas Of Ire That Are Themselves The Milquetoast Shallows Fringing My Vast Oceans Of Wrath
I don't think that's necessarily true. focuses on certain enemies are just tactical. the US chose to fight nazi germany instead of the soviet union when that was a more pressing matter.
Yeah it's unfortunate but true that the radical Islamists are pretty much the vanguard of "anti-imperialist resistance" in the middle east.
It would be great if we still lived in the 70's and there were relevant, more "palatable" groups for the left to support, like secular nationalists, but unfortunately that's not the case.
That's not to say that we should support radical Islamists, they suck. I just think that people really just want to wish for something that's not there, like they're hoping that some PFLP-type group will sprout up in a bunch of countries and start magically spouting the language of anti-imperialism. Unfortunately though Islam, as a politicized ideology, is what most people turn to as an opposition movement against whatever regime they live in. It creates a powerful unifying ideology which is incredibly important for any resistance movement.
"Win, lose or draw...long as you squabble and you get down, that's gangsta."
"Rebels have foreign support"=/="Rebels are mostly foreign fighters". Valter wasn't talking about foreign support of the rebels (of course Syria receives arms from Russian Imperialists), he was saying all of the rebels were foreign fighters. That's a very different claim. As I said in an earlier example, the fact that Iraqi insurgents included both foreign "Jihadists" (and foreign arms) did NOT mean that there were not substantial number of Iraqi insurgents and that the insurgents did not have some amount of local support. It also does not mean that the US government's actions did not lead to the support of the insurgent movement. Saying "All the rebels are foreign fighters" is a way of whitewashing the Syrian state and oversimplifying the situation, and is much different from saying "The rebels include foreign fighters and foreign arms".
This doesn't mean people should think the rebels are great or anything. People can disagree with US policy in Afghanistan and disagree with simplistic caricatures of the groups which America is fighting to support the war effort, but that doesn't mean they support the Taliban either.
I'm unclear as to why you're being a dick. What I would call the evens right now is a "civil war" and the Syrian regime is not innocent at all in the events unfolding.
Bullshit, I never said anything in support of NATO, what the fuck are you even talking about? This is just irrelevant trolling
Last edited by Sinister Cultural Marxist; 30th March 2012 at 21:37.
It's not so much a fear of killings as it is continued marginalization regardless of who is in power. Kurds haven't really been targeted in the same manner as some other communities due to their sheer size (largest minority and all) and lack of connection to the government (denial of citizenship until then for some only strengthens that). Some have been active in demonstrations here and there, with even the Kurdish tricolor popping up much to both the chagrin and joy of Syrian administrators seeing it as justification of it being secessionist and American-backed in origin.
The main reason though with the lack of 'spirit' is that some Kurds are unsure that the any subsequent government would ditch the Arab-centered policies that Ba'ath and pre-Ba'ath had used. It's not worth it for them to put in so much effort into this, especially since the rest of the country seemingly ignored them when they protested in 2004 after murders of some youth by the police in a soccer match (government listed reasons including but not limited to thuggery by the youth, secessionist sentiment through flags, and supporting imperialism through chants for Dubya). Why stick your neck out for them when they didn't do so for you?
Plus, a very major concern among those is the role Turkey has had in supporting the opposition groups, be it in their 'peaceful' form as the Syrian National Council by giving them a place to have meetings and diplomatic support, or giving the Free Syria Army safe haven in Hatay and other areas across the border. With Turkey's treatment of the Kurds in Turkey as it is, plus the prior history of Syria's former support of the PKK in the 1980s and 1990s until it ended, it doesn't provide them with much comfort of a possible Syria that has strong influence from Turkey that will probably move them even further from any chance at getting genuine rights. Turkey would not want such recognitions nearing on a federal system that's a common argument in those circles, lest it further agitate Kurds in Turkey as the situation in Iraq has done (despite the economic dominance Turkey has in the Kurdish region there currently).
When Arab League observers were brought to one of the main Kurdish settlements in the northeast, the government took them to the Assyrian neighborhoods who applauded the government's 'protection' against their Kurdish neighbors who they said were trying to rob and kill them, to reinforce the government's position that This is classic use of dividing the self-contained interests of minorities and pinning them against one another in a state.
I'm failing still to see how this kind of aggrandizing about the danger towards minorities is different from Mubarak's own position that the Copts and other minorities relied on his government to protect them from the Islamists and others who would come to harm them if he was gone. These were real possibilities- and I wasn't really seeing the same harping on about how bad Egyptian protestors were if they were to overthrow the government.
IMO the only group of people who really stand to suffer serious repercussions if the Assad government is taken down are the Alawites, due to the perception of them being favored by the government over the 'majority'. In effect this underscores the very sectarian nature of the conflict, despite the opposition's claims to the contrary.
"Syrian Children being shot in the knees and detained in woeful conditions"
From article:
"On Tuesday, Radhika Coomaraswamy, the UN special representative for children and armed conflict, said they had received claims that the rebel Free Syrian Army was using children as fighters."
Maybe it's because children are being used by the "Free" Syrian Army as child soldiers? People completely disregard the fact that it's a full blown civil war and the Free Syrian Army are proxies of Saudi Arabia & NATO like the rebels in Libya.
"Machinery in itself is a victory of man over the forces of nature, but in the hands of capital it makes man the slave of those forces" - Uncle Karl
Communism in the Middle East as a movement (potentially would) destroys U.S. buisness interests in the region, much like Southeast asia and latin america. Islamists aren't entirely pro colonialism, but they're Moralist Neo Liberalists.
That's different from the U.S. alligning itself with an Imperialist superpower against anothef.
[FONT="Courier New"] “We stand for organized terror - this should be frankly admitted. Terror is an absolute necessity during times of revolution. Our aim is to fight against the enemies of the Revolution and of the new order of life. ”
― Felix Dzerzhinsky [/FONT]
لا شيء يمكن وقف محاكم التفتيش للثورة
Nope, i'm not making a judgement on the rebels as a mass, as they aren't a homogenous group. If I were fighting with the allies against Fascism in WW2, I wouldn't automatically tag all anti-fascists with the same brush.
My point is that there can be no support for Assad in the name of anti-imperialism, for he and his regime are perpetrating crimes just as bad as the imperialists, within the context of a war situation.
1. How can it be a full blown civil war, if it is being fought on behalf of foreign elements?
2. I'm amazed at how casual you are about shooting children in the kneecaps and putting the blame on the other side. I bet you don't have a go at the palestinians when they use children as human shields.
The same way the Whites fought in part on behalf of foreign elements and still participated in a civil war.
If children are being used as child soldiers then some of them might get shot in the kneecaps while they're fighting.... Israel accuses Palestinians of using children as "human shields" because they don't think it's proper that Palestinian children are living on their "god-given land", not the same situation.
