The Syrian Conflict Thread

I have to agree, the US hasn't quite covered itself in glory with the way it's handled Syria, actually most of the west has made some stupid short sighted decisions, after the fck-up that the Arab Spring caused in Libya and Egypt you would think they might have decided destabilising other ME governments and encouraging armed insurrection was a bad idea.
 
Putin? Why? Did he start the war? Arm the terrorists? Destabilize syria and iraq?

AM I missing something? The russians and assad never wanted war so why is this their fault? I am sorry but I could go to syria under assad and go to a night club and not get my head cut off.

The solution was peaceful protest till the regime had to change with pressure from the international community. What happened was war with massive loss of life and the americans arming radical terrorists.

I wonder how the USA with the best intelligence in the world does not know where it's weapons are going? Where isis sells it's oil. Who the hell they are arming? The russians have to tell them? Come now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wELCDCPsw6M

Who is doing the indiscriminate carpet bombing 1940 style? Father christmas? bad boy he is then don't you think?
 
Who is doing the indiscriminate carpet bombing 1940 style? Father christmas? bad boy he is then don't you think?

If we went to war with say lesotho and we had to bomb them we would be using the same type of bombing. It is cheap and effective. Trust me if they are deliberately targeting civilians you would see the death toll rise to millions in a month.

You can blame putin for his army not having $200 000 smart bombs or you can understand only mad men fight with money they probably don't have.
 
If we went to war with say lesotho and we had to bomb them we would be using the same type of bombing. It is cheap and effective. Trust me if they are deliberately targeting civilians you would see the death toll rise to millions in a month.

You can blame putin for his army not having $200 000 smart bombs or you can understand only mad men fight with money they probably don't have.

I understand that logic clearly, what I do not understand and cannot fathom is the double standards where the USA is all evil when a hospital is hit or civilians collaterally die but the exact same people are either quiet when Russia does the same and worse by using their old tactics or they come here and be apologetic about it. See the countless threads where the USA used drones and civilians died. Russia is not mostly bombing ISIL but rather Assad opposition!
 
I understand that logic clearly, what I do not understand and cannot fathom is the double standards where the USA is all evil when a hospital is hit or civilians collaterally die but the exact same people are either quiet when Russia does the same and worse by using their old tactics or they come here and be apologetic about it. See the countless threads where the USA used drones and civilians died. Russia is not mostly bombing ISIL but rather Assad opposition!
Did Russia ever claim it was coming to save Syria and bring democracy to the region? Nope.

Does the United States try to claim as much in every last place it intervenes? Yup.

America gets judged according to what they say they are doing; Russia the same. You've mentioned the American bombing of the hospitals more than I have. If you're going to start passing yourself off as the saviour of the world, that's the standard you're going to get judged by, too.
 
If you're going to start passing yourself off as the saviour of the world, that's the standard you're going to get judged by, too.

There we go :D .....let it sink in ....... thanks for admitting the double standards.
 
There we go :D .....let it sink in ....... thanks for admitting the double standards.
It's really not a double standard to judge people according to how honestly they represent their own intentions.

It's really not a double standard to judge people according to what they claim they're going to do. American politicians can't help but talk about "protecting the global community" and "promoting human rights" and the "responsibility to protect". If they were sincere about those things then they'd act differently.

But they lie about it and give the idea of promoting human rights etc. a bad name. It's exactly the same with what happened here thanks to Apartheid. Because of those idiots, now you have an entire generation in this country that's hostile to anything and everything they perceive to be "white" for no other reason than its whiteness. Thanks a lot for nothing, Verwoerd.

On the other hand, Russia openly stated that it was going to Syria to kill "terrorists" (not merely ISIS) and that Putin openly admitted that he was supporting Assad and the Syrian regime before the bombing even got underway on CBS. For all your complaining about Russia's actions, no one has provided Russia with any kind of answer as to exactly who the moderates are. And the truth is that the vast majority of the "opposition" are extremist Salafist Islamists who aren't even native to Syria and who are being bankrolled by Sunni regional powers for political reasons.

So is Russia doing what it's saying it's doing? Yes. Is America? No.

Double standard? I think not.
 
I understand that logic clearly, what I do not understand and cannot fathom is the double standards where the USA is all evil when a hospital is hit or civilians collaterally die...

It is completely unacceptable on both sides. There are no ifs ands or buts, it is evil to bomb hospitals and to kill innocent people, innocent children... if we will not accept the excuse of "this is war and people die" if it were our own families getting killed, then we should not accept that excuse if it is civilians getting killed halfway across The World.

It is not acceptable, from both sides and it is an evil act no matter who does it.

...but the exact same people are either quiet when Russia does the same and worse by using their old tactics or they come here and be apologetic about it. See the countless threads where the USA used drones and civilians died. Russia is not mostly bombing ISIL but rather Assad opposition!

Anyone who says one side is evil for doing the exact same thing the other side is doing has some agenda and are not objective, they should be ignored.

Truth of the matter is that if you look at say for example Libya. America has done such a great jobn of de-stabilizing a country which was being run effectively, all under the guise of "we are liberating the people". Meanwhile their agenda had nothing to do with liberating people. The only kind of people I can despise more than murderers are murderers who do it under the guise of "we're doing it for freedom YE!". That is pathetic and just like our South African government relies on the uneducated masses, they rely on the general stupidity and "MURICA YEEEHHHH!!!" crowd.

Look at how well Trump is doing, what does that tell you about the average American's intelligence level?
 
Did Russia ever claim it was coming to save Syria and bring democracy to the region? Nope.

Does the United States try to claim as much in every last place it intervenes? Yup.

America gets judged according to what they say they are doing; Russia the same. You've mentioned the American bombing of the hospitals more than I have. If you're going to start passing yourself off as the saviour of the world, that's the standard you're going to get judged by, too.

So if America came straight out and said they were there to fsk schit up for Merica and capitalism you would judge them less harshly?

Btw on the scale of honesty Russia isn't better, they are probably worse.
 
Last edited:
It is completely unacceptable on both sides. There are no ifs ands or buts, it is evil to bomb hospitals and to kill innocent people, innocent children... if we will not accept the excuse of "this is war and people die" if it were our own families getting killed, then we should not accept that excuse if it is civilians getting killed halfway across The World.

It is not acceptable, from both sides and it is an evil act no matter who does it.


Anyone who says one side is evil for doing the exact same thing the other side is doing has some agenda and are not objective, they should be ignored.

Truth of the matter is that if you look at say for example Libya. America has done such a great jobn of de-stabilizing a country which was being run effectively, all under the guise of "we are liberating the people". Meanwhile their agenda had nothing to do with liberating people. The only kind of people I can despise more than murderers are murderers who do it under the guise of "we're doing it for freedom YE!". That is pathetic and just like our South African government relies on the uneducated masses, they rely on the general stupidity and "MURICA YEEEHHHH!!!" crowd.

Look at how well Trump is doing, what does that tell you about the average American's intelligence level?

Well he's banning muslims from entering Murica :whistle: that's quite a good start :cool:
 
So if America came straight out and said they were there to fsk schit up for Merica and capitalism you would judge them less harshly?
Yup.

Btw on the scale of honesty Russia isn't better, they are probably worse.
In this case? Nope. Russia's outright said they're defending Assad. While they're doing it for geopolitical reasons, preserving the legitimate Syrian government is still the best way of combatting ISIS. And thankfully even the US is now willing to accept this.
 
New Russian Air Defenses in Syria Keep U.S. Grounded

There is a new crisis for the international effort to destroy the Islamic State, created by the Kremlin. The U.S. has stopped flying manned air-support missions for rebels in a key part of northern Syria due to Russia’s expansion of air defense systems there, and the Barack Obama administration is scrambling to figure out what to do about it.

Russia’s military operations inside Syria have been expanding in recent weeks, and the latest Russian deployments, made without any advance notice to the U.S., have disrupted the U.S.-led coalition's efforts to support Syrian rebel forces fighting against the Islamic State near the Turkey-Syria border, just west of the Euphrates River, several Obama administration and U.S. defense officials told us. This crucial part of the battlefield, known inside the military as Box 4, is where a number of groups have been fighting the Islamic State for control, until recently with overhead support from U.S. fighter jets.

But earlier this month, Moscow deployed an SA-17 advanced air defense system near the area and began “painting” U.S. planes, targeting them with radar in what U.S. officials said was a direct and dangerous provocation. The Pentagon halted all manned flights, although U.S. drones are still flying in the area. Russia then began bombing the rebels the U.S. had been supporting. (U.S. manned airstrikes continue elsewhere in Syria.)

Inside the top levels of the administration, officials are debating what to do next. The issue is serious enough that Secretary of State John Kerry raised it with Russian President Vladimir Putin when they met on Tuesday, and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General John Dunford has discussed it with his Russian counterpart as well, a spokesman for U.S. Air Force Central Command told us.

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-12-17/new-russian-air-defenses-in-syria-keep-u-s-grounded

Putin told Kerry to F... Off
 
Dozens killed in suspected Russian strikes

At least 43 people have been killed in a series of air strikes believed to have been carried out by Russian planes in the Syrian city of Idlib, according to activists and residents.
A marketplace, homes and official buildings were all hit, reports say. Bodies were still being pulled from the rubble, a civil defence worker said.
Russia has not confirmed whether it carried out strikes in the area.
Russia began an air campaign to bolster President Bashar al-Assad in September.

It says it has targeted only "terrorists", above all jihadist militants from the Islamic State (IS) group, but activists say its strikes have mainly hit Western-backed rebel groups.
The Local Co-ordination Committees, a network of anti-regime activists, said that more than 170 people had been injured in the strikes.

A coalition of Islamist anti-government rebels captured the city of Idlib earlier this year.
It is only the second provincial centre to fall into rebel hands during the conflict, after Raqqa was seized by IS.
Their advances in the area pose a threat to the nearby coastal region, which is a bastion of support for the government of President Assad.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-35145806
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X