Capitalist Temptations | Wanna get rid of those stupid ads? Us too! Help us to be non-dependent from corporate money again and sign up for a monthly donation now!

Thread: Bashar Al Assad

Results 1 to 20 of 145

  1. #1
    Join Date Oct 2016
    Posts 109
    Organisation
    Socialist Worker Party
    Rep Power 1

    Default Bashar Al Assad

    Syria is rife with economic inequality before bashar al assad took the reigns, but should we support him in the syrian civil war, if we shouldn't then who should we support. Also what do you think the outcome of the syrian civil war will be? Everybody says that bashar al assad is going to win after Aleppo, but I really think this war is going to drone on for three more years before any kind of resolution is passed, just my prediction
  2. #2
    Join Date Jan 2017
    Posts 82
    Rep Power 1

    Default

    Assad used weapons of mass destruction against his own people. Obviously we shouldn't support him.

    We should support the Kurds in my opinion. Many of them are communists. Even those who are not want to liberate their people from the oppression of the Syrians.

    I agree that the war will go on for many years, mainly because the great powers have different interests so they send weapons and money to the various factions again and again. It would be impossible to predict who will win the war eventually at this point.
  3. #3
    Join Date Jul 2016
    Posts 95
    Rep Power 2

    Default

    There is a circlejerk about the Kurds being the agents of US and NATO imperialism, but that's not a really valid reasoning, because the other alternatives are Assad or Islamists really, and since Assad is a slave to Russian imperialism, and Islamic factions are of course unacceptable, the closest thing we have is still the Rojava project and the Kurdish freedom fighters. Their alliance with the US is surely problematic but in this current situation, I don't really care about it. In this war, if you have a powerful ally to realize your goals, and stick to your goals, it's the best thing you can do. If you also manage to defeat ISIS in battle from time to time, its even better. What's the future of Rojava and the Kurdish struggle? We can't know, but right now they are the only acceptable faction for a socialist to support. (Even if I have some major problems with the movement; like the question of national liberation, ideology of democratic confederalism and how it gives opportunity of class collaboration, etc. But when it comes down to some kind of genuine revolutionary movement I have disagreements with versus a capitalist dictator and ultra-reactionary Islamists, I surely take the revolutionary movement over the other two.)

    So yeah. In this conflict, for me at least, it's either Rojava or nothing.
  4. #4
    Join Date Mar 2008
    Location traveling (U.S.)
    Posts 14,524
    Rep Power 62

    Default

    The whole Syria thing is really more of a *geopolitical* dynamic rather than a *local* one:



    Joint Russian, Turkish bombing campaign in Syria deepens NATO crisis

    By Bill Van Auken

    20 January 2017

    The launching of coordinated air strikes by Russian and Turkish warplanes against Islamic State (ISIS) targets in northern Syria Wednesday has further exposed the crisis gripping Washington’s intervention in the war-ravaged Middle Eastern country, as well as the deepening contradictions plaguing the NATO alliance on the eve of Donald Trump’s inauguration as US president.

    The bombing campaign struck targets around the Syrian town of al-Bab, the scene of bloody fighting between Turkish troops and ISIS militants over the past several weeks.
  5. #5
    Join Date Mar 2008
    Location traveling (U.S.)
    Posts 14,524
    Rep Power 62

    Default Sign Petition in Support of Rep. Tulsi Gabbard's Stop Arming Terrorists Act

    Sign Petition in Support of Rep. Tulsi Gabbard's Stop Arming Terrorists Act


    Dear Friends of Peace and Justice,

    Hands Off Syria Coalition and several other national peace organizations in the United States have jointly initiated a public campaign in support of Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard’s STOP ARMING TERRORISTS ACT (H.R. 608), which she originally introduced to the Congress on December 8, 2016.

    H.R. 608 is a bipartisan bill, which has been endorsed by Rep. Barbara Lee (D-California), Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky), Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vermont), Rep. Walter B. Jones (R-North Carolina), and Rep. Ted Yoho (R-Florida).

    Rep. Gabbard’s Stop Arming Terrorists Act is aiming “To prohibit the use of United States Government funds to provide assistance to Al Qaeda, Jabhat Fateh al-Sham, and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and to countries supporting those organizations...”. More specifically, it demands that “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no funds made available to any Federal department or agency may be used to provide covered assistance to Al Qaeda, Jabhat Fateh al-Sham, and ISIL, and any individual or group that is affiliated with, associated with, cooperating with, or adherents to such groups.”

    We believe that Congresswoman Gabbard’s bill is a very courageous and important first step toward ending the U.S. Government’s policy of forced regime change in other countries with the help of terrorist organizations. This policy has led to endless wars in the past decades, and has cost trillions of dollars at the expense of American taxpayers.

    H.R. 608 has been referred to both the House Intelligence Committee and the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Given the present state of politics in our country, the chance of these committees approving the bill seems very slim in the absence of massive public expression of support for it.

    For this reason, we strongly urge all supporters of peace and justice in the United States to sign this joint petition in support of Rep. Gabbard’s bill. Your signed petition will be immediately emailed to the 65 members of both committees of the House of Representatives.

    To sign the petition, please click on the link below:

    http://hr608.info

    We also urge you to share this link with as many people and organizations as you can and encourage them to add their signatures to the petition.

    Together, we can make a difference.

    Thank You!
    Coordinating Committee
    Hands Off Syria Coalition

    Twitter Facebook Link

    Copyright © 2017 Hands Off Syria Coalition, All rights reserved.
    You are on this list because you signed HOSC's Points of Unity Statement.

    Want to change how you receive these emails?
    You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list







    This email was sent to [email protected]
    why did I get this? unsubscribe from this list update subscription preferences
    Hands Off Syria Coalition · P.O. Box 8693 · Haledon, NJ 07538 · USA

    Email Marketing Powered by MailChimp
  6. #6
    Join Date Aug 2008
    Posts 3,082
    Organisation
    The Socialist Party of Great Britain
    Rep Power 37

    Default

    Couldn't socialists perhaps not offer support to any sides in the Syrian Civil War?
  7. #7
    Join Date Mar 2008
    Location traveling (U.S.)
    Posts 14,524
    Rep Power 62

    Default


    Couldn't socialists perhaps not offer support to any sides in the Syrian Civil War?

    Then you're not an anti-imperialist.
  8. #8
    Join Date Oct 2011
    Location UK
    Posts 945
    Rep Power 28

    Default

    Couldn't socialists perhaps not offer support to any sides in the Syrian Civil War?
    I think any 'support' that socialists could give would be pretty meaningless anyway however I basically agree with you. I mean, I don't realistically think workers living under the ISIS regime can properly organise and I don't want women or workers of any stripes to live under those conditions so I would prefer for 'ISIS' to not exist but I don't think that trying to carbon copy liberal democracy to support Western imperialism or propping up a cold war dictatorship to support Russian imperialism offers much to the workers either.
    Modern democracy is nothing but the freedom to preach whatever is to the advantage of the bourgeoisie - Lenin

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to GiantMonkeyMan For This Useful Post:


  10. #9
    Join Date Aug 2008
    Posts 3,082
    Organisation
    The Socialist Party of Great Britain
    Rep Power 37

    Default

    Then you're not an anti-imperialist.
    No, I'm a socialist which can only be against all imperialisms whether US, Russian or Syrian imperialism. Are you?
  11. #10
    Join Date Mar 2008
    Location traveling (U.S.)
    Posts 14,524
    Rep Power 62

    Default


    I think any 'support' that socialists could give would be pretty meaningless anyway however I basically agree with you.

    In the absence of a fully capable independent anti-clerical working class movement there, the dynamics default to that of bourgeois geopolitics. I'm just the messenger here.



    I mean, I don't realistically think workers living under the ISIS regime can properly organise and I don't want women or workers of any stripes to live under those conditions so I would prefer for 'ISIS' to not exist

    Then what does it *take* for ISIS to not-exist any longer -- ?



    but I don't think that trying to carbon copy liberal democracy to support Western imperialism or propping up a cold war dictatorship to support Russian imperialism offers much to the workers either.

    It's actually politically *worse* than nation-state imperialism.

    Unfortunately the U.S. has been *supporting* ISIS indirectly, and now people in the U.S. (not to mention many other countries) are becoming the victims of entirely preventable terrorist attacks.



    [T]he last ISIS-affiliated attack in the United States occurred in November, when Somali refugee Abdul Razak Ali Artan drove a car into a group of people after pulling a fire alarm on a building.
    - - - Updated - - -


    No, I'm a socialist which can only be against all imperialisms whether US, Russian or Syrian imperialism. Are you?

    You should consider that the U.S. was the instigator of the invasion of Syria, for imperialist purposes.

    These three countries' international interventions are *not* comparable by scale, and so there's no such thing as Russian or Syrian "imperialism".

    Syria should be returned to the Syrian people so that they can handle their own matters *internally*, as regarding Assad -- anything else, as from the West / NATO, is imperialist.
  12. #11
    Join Date Mar 2008
    Location traveling (U.S.)
    Posts 14,524
    Rep Power 62

    Default Leaked Hillary Clinton emails show U.S. allies Saudi Arabia and Qatar supported ISIS

    News Updates from CLG
    02 February 2017
    http://www.legitgov.org/
    All links are here:
    http://www.legitgov.org/#breaking_news

    Previous editions: Trump rips up controversial TPP 'trade' deal and says getting out is 'a great thing for the American worker'

    Leaked Hillary Clinton emails show U.S. allies Saudi Arabia and Qatar supported ISIS --Emails released by WikiLeaks add to the growing body of evidence that [US-backed] Gulf regimes have backed the Islamic State | 11 Oct 2016 | A recently leaked 2014 email from Hillary Clinton acknowledges, citing Western intelligence sources, that the U.S.-backed regimes in Saudi Arabia and Qatar have supported ISIS [I-CIA-SIS]. "We need to use our diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets to bring pressure on the governments [regimes] of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL and other radical Sunni groups in the region," the document states. This adds to a growing body of evidence that theocratic Gulf monarchies have helped fuel the surge of extremist groups throughout the Middle East. Another newly released email, from January 2016, includes an excerpt from a private October 2013 speech in which Clinton acknowledged that "the Saudis have exported more extreme ideology than any other place on earth over the course of the last 30 years."
  13. #12
    Join Date Aug 2008
    Posts 3,082
    Organisation
    The Socialist Party of Great Britain
    Rep Power 37

    Default


    You should consider that the U.S. was the instigator of the invasion of Syria, for imperialist purposes.

    These three countries' international interventions are *not* comparable by scale, and so there's no such thing as Russian or Syrian "imperialism".

    Syria should be returned to the Syrian people so that they can handle their own matters *internally*, as regarding Assad -- anything else, as from the West / NATO, is imperialist.
    You're using 'imperialism' in an Orwellian way to apply to some (Western) countries and not others. 'Imperialism' is not about scale. Your definition is double standards.
  14. #13
    Join Date Jun 2016
    Location Lebanon
    Posts 68
    Organisation
    You Stink Campaign
    Rep Power 2

    Default

    I don't think supporting Bashar Al Assad is a good idea, or even the Islamists , or the Kurds.
    Every militia has it's own interest, during the war the warlords win and the civilians lose.
    As a Lebanese, the civil war from 1975-1990 left the people behind, but the leaders of the militias are now the politicians of Lebanon.
  15. #14
    Join Date Mar 2008
    Location traveling (U.S.)
    Posts 14,524
    Rep Power 62

    Default


    You're using 'imperialism' in an Orwellian way to apply to some (Western) countries and not others. 'Imperialism' is not about scale. Your definition is double standards.

    No, it isn't -- obviously I disagree with you.

    I'll be open-minded, though, to some reasoning and/or evidence, if you want to make a case for an alleged comparability between U.S. / Western / NATO imperialism, and the geopolitical influence of Syria or Russia.
  16. #15
    Join Date Aug 2008
    Posts 3,082
    Organisation
    The Socialist Party of Great Britain
    Rep Power 37

    Default

    All sides are waging war at the behest of the ruling-classes not against them. None have as their aim, a socialist society. One example would be Russian influence in the Crimea.
  17. #16
    Join Date Mar 2008
    Location traveling (U.S.)
    Posts 14,524
    Rep Power 62

    Default


    All sides are waging war at the behest of the ruling-classes not against them. None have as their aim, a socialist society. One example would be Russian influence in the Crimea.

    Yes, from a *class* perspective you're absolutely correct and I have no quarrel -- but circumstances / social conditions in a place like Syria can't just wait around for a proletarian revolution. Many people have *fled* and are now refugees, while ISIS and its Western imperialist backers continue their warfare, there and in Iraq (etc.).

    I find it curious that given the 'realpolitik' of the situation you'd rather side with the *U.S.* line, as regarding Russia and the Crimea, rather than a more national-liberation stance which would favor Crimea versus fascist Ukraine.
  18. #17
    Join Date Aug 2008
    Posts 3,082
    Organisation
    The Socialist Party of Great Britain
    Rep Power 37

    Default

    I'm not proposing social conditions / circumstances in Syria should be 'just waiting around'. But I find it strange that Western countries engaging in military interventions you class as 'imperialism' but when Russia sends troops into Crimea, and administers Crimea as a Russian territory, this is not 'imperialism'. Or when the bombs dropped on Mosul, Iraq are imperialist but those dropped on Aleppo, Syria are anti imperialist?
  19. #18
    Join Date Mar 2008
    Location traveling (U.S.)
    Posts 14,524
    Rep Power 62

    Default


    I'm not proposing social conditions / circumstances in Syria should be 'just waiting around'. But I find it strange that Western countries engaging in military interventions you class as 'imperialism' but when Russia sends troops into Crimea, and administers Crimea as a Russian territory, this is not 'imperialism'.

    You chose a bad example, unfortunately:



    Crimean status referendum, 2014

    A referendum on the status of Crimea was held on March 16, 2014, by the legislature of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea as well as by the local government of Sevastopol (both subdivisions of Ukraine), following Russian military takeover of the peninsula. The referendum asked local population whether they wanted to join Russia as a federal subject, or if they wanted to restore the 1992 Crimean constitution and Crimea's status as a part of Ukraine.

    The official result from the Autonomous Republic of Crimea was a 96.77 percent vote for integration of the region into the Russian Federation with an 83.1 percent voter turnout.[a][1] The Mejlis Deputy Chairman Akhtem Chiygoz felt that the actual turnout could not have exceeded 30–40 percent, arguing that to be the normal turnout for votes in the region.[17]

    Following the referendum, The Supreme Council of Crimea and Sevastopol City Council declared the independence of the Republic of Crimea from Ukraine and requested to join the Russian Federation.[18] On the same day, Russia recognized the Republic of Crimea as a sovereign state.[19][20]

    ---



    Or when the bombs dropped on Mosul, Iraq are imperialist but those dropped on Aleppo, Syria are anti imperialist?

    Which bombs, from which countries, are you talking about -- ?

    There have been anti-ISIS offensives in both of those cities.
  20. #19
    Join Date Aug 2008
    Posts 3,082
    Organisation
    The Socialist Party of Great Britain
    Rep Power 37

    Default

    Why did Russia surreptiously send troops in before the referendum took place. And why did the referendum return 96.77% in favour? Are there any other major free elections where this sort of figure appears and is verified independently?

    Imagine you're on your way to work or to spend your wages buying groceries, would you rather be blown up by a Javelin bomb in Mosul, Iraq or by a Metis bomb in Aleppo, Syria. Must you support one of the bomb droppers armed forces? Or would you perhaps consider both of these bombs and the members of the working-class they destroy as unnecessary to support. My answer would be to support neither side, because I'm hoping this illustrates, so-called 'anti-imperialist' struggles and bombs are just as much a sham as 'imperialist' bombs.
  21. #20
    Join Date Mar 2008
    Location traveling (U.S.)
    Posts 14,524
    Rep Power 62

    Default


    Why did Russia surreptiously send troops in before the referendum took place. And why did the referendum return 96.77% in favour? Are there any other major free elections where this sort of figure appears and is verified independently?

    Imagine you're on your way to work or to spend your wages buying groceries, would you rather be blown up by a Javelin bomb in Mosul, Iraq or by a Metis bomb in Aleppo, Syria. Must you support one of the bomb droppers armed forces? Or would you perhaps consider both of these bombs and the members of the working-class they destroy as unnecessary to support. My answer would be to support neither side, because I'm hoping this illustrates, so-called 'anti-imperialist' struggles and bombs are just as much a sham as 'imperialist' bombs.

    Yeah, I hear you, and my standard answer here is that 'no one is doing any flag-waving'.

    Think of it as a *nominal* geopolitical 'support', so that if things get hairy the world can depend on mass popular political sentiment instead of on professional bourgeois politicians. This, though, of course, is not a 'call' for such, because all of us here are partisan to working class power instead of bourgeois power, entirely.

    When world events take away the clock, though, forcing us to take-sides in a geopolitical standoff, we need to be ready to be vocal. Here's an example:



    Ghouta chemical attack


    The Ghouta chemical attack occurred in Ghouta, Syria, during the Syrian Civil War in the early hours of 21 August 2013. Two opposition-controlled areas in the suburbs around Damascus, Syria were struck by rockets containing the chemical agent sarin. Estimates of the death toll range from at least 281 people[3] to 1,729.[14] The attack was the deadliest use of chemical weapons since the Iran–Iraq War.[15][16][17]

    Inspectors from the United Nations Mission already in Syria to investigate an earlier alleged chemical weapons attack,[18](p6)[19] requested access to sites in Ghouta the day after the attack,[20][21][22][22][23][24] and called for a ceasefire to allow inspectors to visit the Ghouta sites.[20] The Syrian government granted the UN's request on 25 August,[25][26][27] and inspectors visited and investigated Moadamiyah in Western Ghouta the next day, and Zamalka and Ein Tarma in Eastern Ghouta on 28 and 29 August.[18](p6)[28][29]

    The UN investigation team confirmed "clear and convincing evidence" of the use of sarin delivered by surface-to-surface rockets,[18][30] and a 2014 report by the UN Human Rights Council found that "significant quantities of sarin were used in a well-planned indiscriminate attack targeting civilian-inhabited areas, causing mass casualties. The evidence available concerning the nature, quality and quantity of the agents used on 21 August indicated that the perpetrators likely had access to the chemical weapons stockpile of the Syrian military, as well as the expertise and equipment necessary to manipulate safely large amount of chemical agents."[31] It also stated that the chemical agents used in the Khan al-Assal chemical attack "bore the same unique hallmarks as those used in Al-Ghouta."[31][32][33]

    The Syrian opposition,[34] as well as many governments, the Arab League and the European Union[35][36][37] stated the attack was carried out by forces of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.[38] The Syrian and Russian governments blamed the opposition for the attack,[34] the Russian government calling the attack a false flag operation by the opposition to draw foreign powers into the civil war on the rebels' side.[39] Åke Sellström, the leader of the UN Mission, characterized government explanations of rebel chemical weapons acquisition as unconvincing, resting in part upon "poor theories."[40]

    Several countries including France, the United Kingdom, and the United States debated whether to intervene militarily against Syrian government forces.[41][42][43][44] On 6 September 2013, the United States Senate filed a resolution to authorize use of military force against the Syrian military in response to the Ghouta attack.[45] On 10 September 2013, the military intervention was averted when the Syrian government accepted a US–Russian negotiated deal to turn over "every single bit" of its chemical weapons stockpiles for destruction and declared its intention to join the Chemical Weapons Convention.[46][47]



    In contrast to the positions of their governments, polls in early September indicated that most people in the US, UK, Germany and France opposed military intervention in Syria.[236][237][238][239][240] One poll indicated that 50% of Americans could support military intervention with cruise missiles only, "meant to destroy military units and infrastructure that have been used to carry out chemical attacks."[241] In a survey of American military personnel, around 75% said they opposed air strikes on Syria, with 80% saying an attack would not be "in the U.S. national interest".[242] Meanwhile, a Russian poll suggested that most Russians supported neither side in the conflict, with less than 10% saying they supported Assad.[243]

Similar Threads

  1. How to you guys feel about Bashar Al-Assad?
    By VictorSola in forum Opposing Ideologies
    Replies: 81
    Last Post: 16th February 2014, 13:55
  2. Bashar Al-Assad Jr. :"I want them (the USA) to attack sooo much"
    By Flying Purple People Eater in forum News & Ongoing Struggles
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 10th September 2013, 19:07
  3. Chairman Mao Tse-Tung vs Bashar Al Assad
    By Let's Get Free in forum News & Ongoing Struggles
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 28th December 2012, 19:06
  4. Bashar Al-Assad
    By Vyacheslav Brolotov in forum News & Ongoing Struggles
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 26th February 2012, 17:51
  5. Some on the Left supporting Bashar Al Assad ( A Syrian perspective)
    By RadicalRed in forum News & Ongoing Struggles
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 15th February 2012, 14:26

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts