Rebels take Syrian Christian village

[SherriMunnerlyn]

How does US prevent another Maloula from happening, as we arm the rebels? Or do the Christians of Syria mean nothing to you?

The Christians of Syria don't mean any more or any less to me than the other civilians of Syria. I'm more concerned with humans in general and don't play favorites among religious and ethnic lines. I find such factionalism disgusting.

My perspective on the war, comes not from the concern of any one microcosm of the country, but out of concern for the stability, well being, and security of the entire region.

And to answer your question: we don't prevent another one. We can't. That's one reason why war is pretty shitty.

The Opposition are committing atrocities of their own against Christians and nonChristians. Why should the US arm them so they can injure and terrorize and kill more innocent civilians in Syria?

 

[Osomir]

The Opposition are committing atrocities of their own against Christians and nonChristians. Why should the US arm them so they can injure and terrorize and kill more innocent civilians in Syria?

So that they can effectively fight the groups that are engaging in such atrocities? You don't want the ISI(S) and Al Nusra to be dominant do you?

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

The Opposition are committing atrocities of their own against Christians and nonChristians. Why should the US arm them so they can injure and terrorize and kill more innocent civilians in Syria?

So that they can effectively fight the groups that are engaging in such atrocities? You don't want the ISI(S) and Al Nusra to be dominant do you?

They will use arms to fight together with Al Qaeda against Assad. And the US does not need to be arming Al Qaeda.

 

[Osomir]

They will use arms to fight together with Al Qaeda against Assad. And the US does not need to be arming Al Qaeda.

They don't enjoy each others company as much as you seem to think they do. Al Qaeda beheaded an FSA leader and assassinated another. There are very real tensions behind the front line. Al Nusra is tolerated in some areas simply because they are the best armed due to their foreign backing.

We don't arm Al Qaeda. That's always been a fallacy that ignores current divisions within the opposition to Assad.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

. See how they worked together in attacking a Syrian Christian village.

 

[Ropey]

They will use arms to fight together with Al Qaeda against Assad. And the US does not need to be arming Al Qaeda.

They don't enjoy each others company as much as you seem to think they do. Al Qaeda beheaded an FSA leader and assassinated another. There are very real tensions behind the front line. Al Nusra is tolerated in some areas simply because they are the best armed due to their foreign backing.

We don't arm Al Qaeda. That's always been a fallacy that ignores current divisions within the opposition to Assad.

 

[Osomir]

See how they worked together in attacking a Syrian Christian village.

How is this in any way a rebuttal to my above post?

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

See how they worked together in attacking a Syrian Christian village.

How is this in any way a rebuttal to my above post?

Anyone who thinks arming more men to participate in more attacks like that has no morality and no conscience.

 

[Osomir]

Anyone who thinks arming more men to participate in more attacks like that has no morality and no conscience.

I'm not advocating support for the Al Nusra Front. At this point you're simply starting to be dishonest in your depiction of the rebel opposition.

 

[hortysir]

Oh no.

Let's stop calling them rebels. They are terrorists. They are paid mercenaries. They are jihadists.

Pray for the Christians. They are doomed unless Assad wins.

The surveyors and experts are already in the planning stage of building The Temple.
When it is finished, girlfriend, we are in for a fun ride!!!

Hallelujah!!

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Anyone who thinks arming more men to participate in more attacks like that has no morality and no conscience.

I'm not advocating support for the Al Nusra Front. At this point you're simply starting to be dishonest in your depiction of the rebel opposition.

Supporting the Opposition in Syria is supporting the Al Nusra Front.

 

[Osomir]

Anyone who thinks arming more men to participate in more attacks like that has no morality and no conscience.

I'm not advocating support for the Al Nusra Front. At this point you're simply starting to be dishonest in your depiction of the rebel opposition.

Supporting the Opposition in Syria is supporting the Al Nusra Front.

Once again, the rebels aren't a monolith and it is disingenuous to treat them as such. Besides, I don't see you offering up any alternative.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

I'm not advocating support for the Al Nusra Front. At this point you're simply starting to be dishonest in your depiction of the rebel opposition.

Supporting the Opposition in Syria is supporting the Al Nusra Front.

Once again, the rebels aren't a monolith and it is disingenuous to treat them as such. Besides, I don't see you offering up any alternative.

Did you say you supported the FSA? What do you think about the kidnappings of journalists they engage in? Do you support that too?The US has no business being involved in Syrias civil war, I do not support involvement in that war. And my suggestion for the people of Syria is Diplomacy. It seems only Russia is arguing for pursuing that option. It is a sad day when the US desires war and not peace for people in brutal conflicts. It is a sad day when the world looks to Russia for hope for peace in conflicts, because the US opposes peace.

 

[Osomir]

Did you say you supported the FSA?

Not particularly, but I find them to be the best bet in terms of countering the ISI(S), Al Nusra, and jihadi Islamism in general in the region, and the major faction that has engaged in the fewest war crimes / crimes against humanity.

"Support" in conflict isn't always about finding a saint like group that has never done anything wrong, such groups don't really exist, and when they try to they usually fail almost immediately. One has to be a little more pragmatic.

What do you think about the kidnappings of journalists they engage in?

I am opposed to them, but I don't find them particularly shocking. War isn't very pretty.

The US has no business being involved in Syrias civil war

I disagree, letting the ISI(S) go unchecked would be horrible for both us and Israel both in terms of our own security and the security of our allies, and in terms of regional stability and future economic and political prospects. No one really wants to see Syria become another Iraq. I'm on the fence in terms of military intervention and would thus hesitate to sanction it, but we have every right and reason to be involved in the issue of the Syrian conflict.

And my suggestion for the people of Syria is Diplomacy.

That's a fine suggestion, but the reality is that's never going to work. You might as well push for a one state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, or wait for all of the DR Congo's militias to voluntarily give themselves up. Diplomacy is an important tool, but the world isn't always that simple. I'll ask you the same question I asked you previously which you ignored: When has the ISI EVER supported diplomatic processes?

It seems only Russia is arguing for pursuing that option.

The only reason why Russia is willing to step in is because we are threatening to strike Syria over the issue of chemical weapons. Without that threat you have an uninvolved Russia outside of their general support for Assad. It's politicking and threats is one way we push for action, even if that action doesn't end up involving violence.

It is a sad day when the US desires war and not peace for people in brutal conflicts.

Right, but there is no peace in Syria, so I'm not sure how the above is relevant in this case.

It is a sad day when the world looks to Russia for hope for peace in conflicts, because the US opposes peace.

Russia protects several conflict states. More than the US at least.

 

[gainzz]

The people of Maalola have lived in their area for centuries.

When the militants came into the village, ironically, they called the Christian inhabitants "Crusaders."

 

[dilloduck]

Did you say you supported the FSA?

Not particularly, but I find them to be the best bet in terms of countering the ISI(S), Al Nusra, and jihadi Islamism in general in the region, and the major faction that has engaged in the fewest war crimes / crimes against humanity.

"Support" in conflict isn't always about finding a saint like group that has never done anything wrong, such groups don't really exist, and when they try to they usually fail almost immediately. One has to be a little more pragmatic.

What do you think about the kidnappings of journalists they engage in?

I am opposed to them, but I don't find them particularly shocking. War isn't very pretty.



I disagree, letting the ISI(S) go unchecked would be horrible for both us and Israel both in terms of our own security and the security of our allies, and in terms of regional stability and future economic and political prospects. No one really wants to see Syria become another Iraq. I'm on the fence in terms of military intervention and would thus hesitate to sanction it, but we have every right and reason to be involved in the issue of the Syrian conflict.



That's a fine suggestion, but the reality is that's never going to work. You might as well push for a one state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, or wait for all of the DR Congo's militias to voluntarily give themselves up. Diplomacy is an important tool, but the world isn't always that simple. I'll ask you the same question I asked you previously which you ignored: When has the ISI EVER supported diplomatic processes?



The only reason why Russia is willing to step in is because we are threatening to strike Syria over the issue of chemical weapons. Without that threat you have an uninvolved Russia outside of their general support for Assad. It's politicking and threats is one way we push for action, even if that action doesn't end up involving violence.

It is a sad day when the US desires war and not peace for people in brutal conflicts.

Right, but there is no peace in Syria, so I'm not sure how the above is relevant in this case.

It is a sad day when the world looks to Russia for hope for peace in conflicts, because the US opposes peace.

Russia protects several conflict states. More than the US at least.

Nothing is peaceful in the middle east but when a number of opposition groups ( including the CIA ) decide to overthrow a government it would be silly not to expect things to be worse.

 

[Osomir]

Nothing is peaceful in the middle east but when a number of opposition groups ( including the CIA ) decide to overthrow a government it would be silly not to expect things to be worse.

I think North Africa is more stable and "better" now that Gaddafi is gone. Sure there was weapon spill over into Mali which sparked a civil conflict and French invasion and Libya is still recovering, but that' nothing compared the the instability that Gaddafi inflicted on the region during his reign.

Assad was / is a great force for regional instability as well. One reason why turkey has been able to come to terms with the PKK for example is because the PKK lost Assad as a financial backer when the Kurds rose up against him as part of the civil conflict.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Nothing is peaceful in the middle east but when a number of opposition groups ( including the CIA ) decide to overthrow a government it would be silly not to expect things to be worse.

I think North Africa is more stable and "better" now that Gaddafi is gone. Sure there was weapon spill over into Mali which sparked a civil conflict and French invasion and Libya is still recovering, but that' nothing compared the the instability that Gaddafi inflicted on the region during his reign.

Assad was / is a great force for regional instability as well. One reason why turkey has been able to come to terms with the PKK for example is because the PKK lost Assad as a financial backer when the Kurds rose up against him as part of the civil conflict.

Pity the nations the US interferes in. You do not seem concerned about the people who actually live in those nations. Why do their lives have no value? Why do they not matter?

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

"Can human life be devalued like currency?"

"For months, if not years after the US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, there has been little mention of how many civilians have been killed by US forces and their allies. ...*It is outrageous, but the kind of outrage that becomes less shocking with time.In Afghanistan, it is still impossible to even narrow down the numbers with any plausible accuracy simply because there have been too many casualties, and little time and resources has been invested in knowing how many. And of course, there is much politics in that, for US media sources would do whatever it takes to estimate victims of terrorism, but little to estimate victims of its government's own wars.*The Los Angeles Times estimated that up to 1,201 civilians were killed between October 2001 and February 2002 (reported on June 2, 2002). The British Guardian estimated that up to 20,000 Afghans died as an indirect result of the initial US airstrike and ground invasion (reported May 20, 2002)."

"As for Iraq, Casualties.org, founded in May 2003, didn't bother to tend to Iraqi civilian casualties until nearly two years later. It was then called Iraq Coalition Casualty Count, and until now its main focus has certainly not been the hundreds of thousands of deaths at the hands of these military coalitions. According to Iraq Body Count website, as of the writing of this article, between 114,164 – 125,081 civilians were killed, and "further analysis of the WikiLeaks' Iraq War Logs may add 11,000 civilian deaths. "But of course, the numbers are much higher and they continue to rise, as the US has created a political atmosphere that set the stage for a protracted conflict. On August 1, the UN mission in Baghdad released new casualty figures: At least 4,137 civilians have been killed and 9,865 injured so far this year, and 1,057 Iraqis were killed in July alone, reported the BBC. Since then, hundreds more were killed."

"The civil war in Syria has done more than enough to devalue human lives as well. The UN and other groups calculate the toll as a result of the brutal fighting at around 100,000. The site of dead bodies piled on top of one another has become a news media staple.*"

Politics of death: Human lives devalued in the Middle East | Maan News Agency

Certainly, lives are devalued. And I add that a number of groups have actually placed the dead in the Iraq War at over 1 million.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

"Syrian rebel fighters apparently executed three Christians fleeing the fighting in Maaloula this week, Britain's*Sky News*reported. Hundreds of Christians held a funeral in Damascus for the men, who were cousins.*Sky News*reports the men were trying to escape the Christian*town of Maaloula, which has been under attack by rebel troops. The men reportedly were killed by forces with the al Qaeda linked Jabha al-Nour. Mourners say two of the victims had their throats cut and another was shot." Syrian Rebels Execute Christian Villagers - World - CBN News - Christian News 24-7 - CBN.com