News Assad's inner circle trying to covertly defect to rebels

[Skrew]

I will support a dictatorship who acts in my interests over a democracy which degenerates into a muslim theocracy.

 

[chiro]

It isn't difficult to understand: we don't like it when people slaughter lots of innocent civilians.

So what if you your government does it? Or any government with any affiliation to yours in any capacity? Is it OK then?

 

[russ_watters]

So what if you your government does it? Or any government with any affiliation to yours in any capacity? Is it OK then?

No, and people have already tried this logical fallacy distraction. Please read Zooby's post #12 and stay on topic.

 

[russ_watters]

Yes, the opposition and warmongers.

Warmongers? People are already dying, are they not? What you really are missing is that what we really want is an end to the bloodshed. Removal of Assad's regime and change to democracy is a secondary consideration that wouldn't even exist if the country weren't already seeing this bloodshed. And if Assad's regime and his followers weren't the main culprit -- if we saw evidence that it was following the rules of war and it was the other side doing most of the killing of civilians -- we'd support his side. It is telling that not even the African Union supports him. About the only countries that do are rogue dictatorships like his and countries that sell him weapons. The defections from his regime (the subject of the thread) are also telling.

You call self-governed tribes, outlaw gangs and militia...went better? than what...?

There are no guarantees about what comes after a revolution. What went better than I expected is that we were able to help end the revolution with airborne protection only.

Define dictatorship? I would rather have a dictatorship that gives people some personal freedom and life without imposing strict religion, than having religious bigots who want to make a mosque-based state under the name of democracy.

Westerners never prefer dictatorship, even if it was a benevolent one as you suggest -- which we don't agree it is.

But there's one better alternative, living the situation with a sense of logic and history.

No, that certainly is not better. A person's personal experiences are highly limited and biased. Getting a full picture of what is going on requires quality media coverage. Consider 9/11: I wasn't in New York when it happened, I saw it on TV.

Now my questions have not been answered yet, about the double standards where democracy really sucks under the oil-freak dictators.

What double standards? We don't like the government of countries such as Saudia Arabia, but they're not currently killing a bunch of civilians, are they?

Lets take a quick step back: Reports we in the West get indicate something like 15,000 people have died, mostly civilians, in the past 15 months or so. That's a situation we don't like. Is that claim of fact anywhere close to accurate in your opinion? Do you like it? Do you think we should ignore the deaths of so many people?

 

[chiro]

This is the "Tu Quoque" variation of the Ad Hominem logical fallacy, BobbyWhy.

Since when is the truth anything but?

By peoples deeds shall you know them: there is no logical fallacy to the actions especially those that have been documented on a medium like video of any individual or group. Call a spade a spade, your government along with many others committed atrocities and attempt to convey the message that 'war is peace'.

Aside from the topic of the thread concerning Syria, this is a point of concern and is highly relevant when it comes to the discussion of force especially in the context of one at the level of a nation state.

There is no logical fallacy to truth, and the facts are that nation states commit atrocities often in the guise of 'peace' to stop 'blood-shed' and 'war'. There is no logical fallacy to what has and is happening right now.

Its disgusting how the language has been so perverted to be completely devoid of meaning and how things are defined the way people want them to be rather than what they really are.

 

[russ_watters]

Since when is the truth anything but?
...

There is no logical fallacy to truth...

You need to learn how logic works. A fact may or may not be relevant to a line of discussion and ones that are not relevant should be left out.

Regardless, this isn't the place to discuss this. Please read our faq on logic and start a thread if you don't understand something.

 

[dijkarte]

Warmongers? People are already dying, are they not? What you really are missing is that what we really want is an end to the bloodshed...

With your superficial information about the subject, apparently you're mislead by your only source of information the least corrupt media.

Do more unbiased research, you get Google!

 

[lisab]

With your superficial information about the subject, apparently you're mislead by your only source of information the least corrupt media.

Do more unbiased research, you get Google!

What criteria do you use to distinguish biased from unbiased research?

 

[dijkarte]

What criteria do you use to distinguish biased from unbiased research?

Simple. I can ask a question and they either avoid it, or they try justify their answer.

 

[russ_watters]

You ask sources questions -- you are in direct contact with them? Who are your sources? And don't tell me to google myself for your sources. This game is wearing thin. If you have better sources for information, share them, don't just make assertions about them (and ours).

 

[rootX]

It's making me bit wary who is supporting terrorism in Syria. Rebels by themselves shouldn't be able to put up so much resistance. I have to wonder why state still hasn't suppressed the rebellion.

As for biased or unbiased information, nothing coming out of Syria is verified. BBC has asserted this countless times that because of journalists restriction in Syria, it is hard to see how true are the claims made by both sides.

 

[dijkarte]

Correct me if I'm wrong but this war has been for long and they are still fighting, no winner. However, the reported killings by the media is from only one side. So the rebels got some kind of very advanced technology that make them fight and stay in the ground without killing. Oh wait, they did some terrorist bombing targeting government, streets and the police. Oh wait, the gov did that? How moronic...

 

[russ_watters]

You are just trolling now: no one has suggested the opposition hasn't killed anyone.

Please respond to my previous question about your sources/information.

 

[dijkarte]

Please respond to my previous question about your sources/information.

It's hard for you to understand if you are not from there. End of story.

 

[lisab]

It's hard for you to understand if you are not from there. End of story.

I'd categorize that as a very weak argument .

 

[russ_watters]

It's hard for you to understand if you are not from there. End of story.

No, you said you have sources that are available on the internet. Provide them!

 

[Dotini]

Here are links to mainstream press reports, not at all hard to find, which tend to substantiate significant fractions of what is vouchsafed in those alternative media articles (which were rather sternly demanded from a reluctant dijkarte by his interlocutor).

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-syria-cia-20120725,0,6946873.story

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/25/w...to-syrias-conflict.html?_r=3&src=me&ref=world

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...ligence-gaps/2012/07/23/gJQAW8DG5W_story.html

Respectfully submitted,
Steve

 

[Dotini]

The pot is now set to boil: http://www.timesofisrael.com/turkey-mobilizes-tanks-and-missiles-to-border-with-kurdish-syria/
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/07/26/157943/assad-hands-control-of-syrias.html

Turkey has just now mobilized tanks, troops and missiles against an unacceptable breakaway Kurdish region that has declared autonomy from Damascus. International war to follow?

Meanwhile, Alawites are retreating to Latakia. It seems soon the bulk of Syria will be in the hands of the Sunni majority, and the minority Druze, Kurds, Christians, Shia, not to mention drinkers, shavers, and Western dressed and coiffed women will be fending for themselves. Muslim versus Muslim, Arab versus Arab. This is excellent divide and conquer strategy, something Sun Tzu or Niccolo Machiavelli would be proud of.

Democracy has it's rightful and hard-won place in the modern world, but it has always been susceptible to the tyranny of the majority.

Respectfully submitted,
Steve

 

[rootX]

In recent news Annan resigned:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19099676

Security council members are still pointing fingers and blaming each other:

Writing on Twitter, the US ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, thanked Mr Annan for his "dedication, service and determined efforts", but said those who had blocked UN resolutions had "made his mission impossible".

 

[rootX]

The pot is now set to boil: http://www.timesofisrael.com/turkey-mobilizes-tanks-and-missiles-to-border-with-kurdish-syria/
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/07/26/157943/assad-hands-control-of-syrias.html

Turkey has just now mobilized tanks, troops and missiles against an unacceptable breakaway Kurdish region that has declared autonomy from Damascus. International war to follow?

Meanwhile, Alawites are retreating to Latakia. It seems soon the bulk of Syria will be in the hands of the Sunni majority, and the minority Druze, Kurds, Christians, Shia, not to mention drinkers, shavers, and Western dressed and coiffed women will be fending for themselves. Muslim versus Muslim, Arab versus Arab. This is excellent divide and conquer strategy, something Sun Tzu or Niccolo Machiavelli would be proud of.

Democracy has it's rightful and hard-won place in the modern world, but it has always been susceptible to the tyranny of the majority.

Respectfully submitted,
Steve

If I were Syrian, as a non-Sunni, I would have preferred to live under Assad. I fear regime change will put Syria decades back. But only had Assad known that reforms are must:
http://meria.idc.ac.il/journal/2007/issue2/Raphaeli.pdf (20007)

Even if you read any article on Libya,Tunisia, or Egypt economic/social reforms, you would see exactly the same problem. These problems were known for more than a decade but why the Western nations also ignored them? Democracy isn't the correct solution in the short run, it will only over-complicate and delay the the economic/social reforms that these countries need IMO.

 

[rootX]

Syria and Turkey tensions were rising but now even Lebanon seems to be getting caught:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20017397

 

[Astronuc]

If I were Syrian, as a non-Sunni, I would have preferred to live under Assad. I fear regime change will put Syria decades back. But only had Assad known that reforms are must:
http://meria.idc.ac.il/journal/2007/issue2/Raphaeli.pdf (20007)

Even if you read any article on Libya,Tunisia, or Egypt economic/social reforms, you would see exactly the same problem. These problems were known for more than a decade but why the Western nations also ignored them? Democracy isn't the correct solution in the short run, it will only over-complicate and delay the the economic/social reforms that these countries need IMO.

Some folks don't like living under an oligarchy or autocratic regime, especially those in the disadvantaged majority.

It's not clear that economic/social reforms will occur anytime soon under regimes like those of Assad or Mubarak.

 

[rootX]

Some folks don't like living under an oligarchy or autocratic regime, especially those in the disadvantaged majority.

It's not clear that economic/social reforms will occur anytime soon under regimes like those of Assad or Mubarak.

Neither it's clear when the new governments will have sufficient powers to carry out the much needed reforms that led to the riots and if they will still be willing to carry the country ahead not backwards.