Skip to main content

View Diary: BREAKING: Senior Syrian Officers Defect (52 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  So apparently you support Assad's shelling? (0+ / 0-)

    Since you quote favorably the statement of a Syrian official that they "had" to shell Homs [with 120mm artillery & 260mm motars -larger than anything the US Army has] because some people in those neighborhood were shooting at them with rifles and RPGs.

    This sound like the Vietnam War story that "We has to destroy the village, to save it."

    Do you really support such a policy? So if Obama has the Army open up on Oakwood, CA with tanks and says its because "Armed Gangs" [shoreline crips] were shooting at cops, you'll give him the same attaboy you giver Assad?

    The other proble is that Assad is lying. The brutality is 99% one side, from the Syrian 1%.

    Remember history, Clay Claiborne, Director Vietnam: American Holocaust - narrated by Martin Sheen

    by Clay Claiborne on Sat Jun 23, 2012 at 07:39:39 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  There are two sides to every story. You just (0+ / 0-)

      want to portray one side. Anyone who attempts to show both automatically becomes a supporter of the "enemy".

      I do not support Assad nor do I support the foreign armed opposition. Your kind of thinking is why these crises get out of hand and cause the deaths of thousands.

      Why don't you watch your own documentary again to see how atrocities are committed by both sides. Vietnam is a perfect example of how propaganda was used to mislead the public in order to go to war for regime change.

      Here's a good documentary on the tools of propaganda and how they are applied:

      The Power Principle – II: Propaganda

      •  The NLF didn't commit many atrocities. (0+ / 0-)

        Because they depended on growing popular support to win, not terror. The Syrian opposition also depends on growing popular support to win, and they have been getting it, which tells me the most Syrians don't think they are responsible for the terror.

        Atrocities come with war, so almost always, over time, you will be able to find atrocities committed by both sides and that allows people like you the speak in terms of black and white and draw a false equivalency like; Both sides committed atrocities. True, but only one side relies on atrocities as its method of suppressing the people. One side is using artillery, jets, attack helicopters, 260 mm mortars and tanks against civilian population centers. [ Oh yes, explosions in Damascus - we don't know who is really behind them no matter what SANA says]  One side is responsible for all of the killing, both in the sense that they are responsible for the vast majority of the killing directly and also for the defensive killing done by people who started out as peaceful protesters.

        What you are doing here in post after post after post is trying to excuse Assads policies and attack the opposition.

        Assad is a mass murderer. He has killed 15 thousand in 15 months and he is escalating the killing now with warplanes and attack helicopters and still you are opposed to regime change.

        Meaning you want a lot more Syrian to die or submit to his tyranny.

        I think that pretty much sums up your position once the dust has settled.

        Remember history, Clay Claiborne, Director Vietnam: American Holocaust - narrated by Martin Sheen

        by Clay Claiborne on Sat Jun 23, 2012 at 12:48:40 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The VCI got involved in and escalated atrocities (0+ / 0-)

          as a response to the American Phoenix Program. They started killing and terrorizing anyone they thought was involved with the US operation. They even had a 400 "neutralization quota" to match the US's quota system. So, the ordinary people ended up suffering twice as much.

          One side is using artillery, jets, attack helicopters, 260 mm mortars and tanks against civilian population centers.
          Are we talking Iraq or Afghanistan here?
          One side is responsible for all of the killing, both in the sense that they are responsible for the vast majority of the killing directly and also for the defensive killing done by people who started out as peaceful protesters.
          That sounds like a child's excuse for a squabble - "Mommy, HE started it."
          Meaning you want a lot more Syrian to die or submit to his tyranny.

          I think that pretty much sums up your position once the dust has settled.

          My position can be best summed up by this report:
          Article of Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov “On the Right Side of History”

          The more large-scale social movements appeared in the countries of the region, the more urgent became the issue of what policy should be pursued by external actors and the entire international community. Numerous expert discussions on that matter and subsequent practical actions of States and international organizations have outlined two main approaches: either to help the Arab peoples determine their own future by themselves, or to try to shape a new political reality to one's taste while taking advantage of the softening of state structures that had long been too rigid.
          ...
          For us, the issue of who is in power in Syria is not the major one; it is important to put an end to civilian deaths and to start a political dialogue in a situation where the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of the country will be respected by all external actors. No violence can be justified. The shelling of residential areas by government troops is unacceptable, but it cannot be viewed as an indulgence for terrorist acts in Syrian cities, for murders conducted by insurgents opposed to the regime, including those of Al-Qaida.

          The logic that dictates the need to break the vicious circle of violence has manifested itself in the unilateral support that members of the UN Security Council have given to the Annan Plan. We are upset by the claims and actions of some actors involved in the Syrian situation that manifest their stake on the failure of the Special Envoy's efforts. Among them, are the calls of the Syrian National Council (SNC) leadership for foreign intervention. It is unclear how such claims would help SNC sponsors to unite the Syrian opposition under its umbrella. We stand for the integration of the Syrian opposition only on the platform of preparedness for political dialogue with the government - in exact accordance with the Annan Plan.
          ...

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site