U.S. training Syrian Rebels how to administer 'liberated' towns - Polidicks

[QUOTE=smurfy;37480780]Checking the [url=http://www.libyaherald.com/]Libya Herald[/url] every few days will do it, the main feed on the left of their site is all the Libya news you need and no irrelevant bullshit[/QUOTE] Thanks dude.

[QUOTE=Governor Goblin;37479988]About none of any of that was correct[/QUOTE] The FSA consists of civilian fighters and there are several islamic militant groups who fights against assad because they want a piece of the cake, but also because Assad does not want Syria to be a islamic state. In other words, they want to create a syria with islamic law. whilst Assad wishes to keep Religion and state seperate. There is alot of fear that these groups and the sunni who belong to the majority will in the turmoil of war take the oppurtunity to kill and drive out chirstians, alawite and shia minorities. This problem is very real and there have been alot of kidnappings recently. During the last UN observer mission they came to the conclusion that both sides had commited act of violence. In our western media all we get to hear about are these massacres, murders and chemical weapons. why should all our opinions of a country be driven by fear? It is obvious that our media does not want us to get the full picture of a situation. The same goes for pro-assad media, it is just as bad as the west. There is always a constant fear-mongering blame game. It would be terrible if people came to their senses and realized how corrupt everything really is. But ofcourse! if you tell someone something over and over again, they will belive just about anything. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_manipulation[/url] Not a proxy war? The syrian conflict is the best example of a proxy war ever.

[QUOTE=Stalk;37481922]The FSA consists of civilian fighters and there are several islamic militant groups who fights against assad because they want a piece of the cake, but also because Assad does not want Syria to be a islamic state. In other words, they want to create a syria with islamic law. whilst Assad wishes to keep Religion and state seperate. There is alot of fear that these groups and the sunni who belong to the majority will in the turmoil of war take the oppurtunity to kill and drive out chirstians, alawite and shia minorities. This problem is very real and there have been alot of kidnappings recently. During the last UN observer mission they came to the conclusion that both sides had commited act of violence. In our western media all we get to hear about are these massacres, murders and chemical weapons. why should all our opinions of a country be driven by fear? It is obvious that our media does not want us to get the full picture of a situation. The same goes for pro-assad media, it is just as bad as the west. There is always a constant fear-mongering blame game. It would be terrible if people came to their senses and realized how corrupt everything really is. But ofcourse! if you tell someone something over and over again, they will belive just about anything. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_manipulation[/url] Not a proxy war? The syrian conflict is the best example of a proxy war ever.[/QUOTE] Oh god 1. You're wrong 2. You're wrong and arguing with GG 3. You're arguing with GG and all you have for evidence is a Wikipedia article on media manipulation. RIP

[QUOTE=Stalk;37481922]During the last UN observer mission they came to the conclusion that both sides had commited act of violence. In our western media all we get to hear about are these massacres, murders and chemical weapons. why should all our opinions of a country be driven by fear? It is obvious that our media does not want us to get the full picture of a situation. The same goes for pro-assad media, it is just as bad as the west. There is always a constant fear-mongering blame game. It would be terrible if people came to their senses and realized how corrupt everything really is. But ofcourse! if you tell someone something over and over again, they will belive just about anything. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_manipulation[/url][/QUOTE] The reason "all we get to hear about" is pro-government crimes, is that according to the [url=http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/RegularSession/Session21/A-HRC-21-50.doc]UN HCR report[/url] that you mentioned, "the violations and abuses committed by anti-Government armed groups do not reach the gravity, frequency and scale of those committed by Government forces and the Shabbiha." However, when such crimes happen they do receive attention, for example here's a [url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19084287]BBC article[/url] on rebels executing Shabbiha prisoners in Aleppo. [QUOTE=Stalk;37481922]The FSA consists of civilian fighters and there are several islamic militant groups who fights against assad because they want a piece of the cake, but also because Assad does not want Syria to be a islamic state. In other words, they want to create a syria with islamic law. whilst Assad wishes to keep Religion and state seperate. There is alot of fear that these groups and the sunni who belong to the majority will in the turmoil of war take the oppurtunity to kill and drive out chirstians, alawite and shia minorities. This problem is very real and there have been alot of kidnappings recently.[/QUOTE] This claim is kind of hard to refute. Certainly there are some elements within the Syrian opposition that would like to see a fundamentalist Islamic state established, but what proportion of the opposition do they constitute? It's pretty much impossible to tell, but we do know that the Free Syrian Army [url=http://www.free-syrian-army.com/en/about-us/]claims[/url] to have no religious affiliation or political goals beyond the removal of Assad, and for what it's worth, the Syrian National Council [url=http://www.syriancouncil.org/en/issues.html]says[/url] it will guarantee all of its citizens human rights "without any discrimination on the basis of ethnic origin, religion, or gender." The notable exception is obviously gender, but it's debatable how important the SNC even is as they don't appear to have any real authority on the ground right now. It's pissing me off that I can't find this article now, but I read on Al-Jazeera a month or two ago the story of a rebel who joined the FSA but found them to be disorganised and inexperienced, and so he left and joined Al-Qaeda instead, which has existed for much longer and is able to mount much more effective attacks. If this is a common trend, then I guess it's up in the air how many of the Al-Qaeda fighters are actually interested in the ideology, but who knows. [QUOTE=Stalk;37481922]Not a proxy war? The syrian conflict is the best example of a proxy war ever.[/QUOTE] You've provided no evidence for this so whatever, but I can't really say why I [i]wouldn't[/i] consider this a proxy war. Other people should post about this. I'm just going to back to your first post though [QUOTE=Stalk;37479685]This war is truly not about democracy or freedom. Syria economy is mainly based on oil and the country got a strategic location by the mediterranean sea. For the west having access to these areas would allow more oil to flow from the middle east.[/QUOTE] I'm tired of this oil shit. Syria produces a fucking tiny amount of oil; here's just a few of the places that [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_production]produce more oil than Syria[/url]: the United States, the United Kingdom, Texas, Egypt, Australia, Argentina, North Dakota. Besides which, [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Syria_oil_exports_by_destination_country_2010.gif]before the war[/url] Syria exported oil almost exclusively to EU countries, but as part of sanctions the EU has [url=http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/128379.pdf]brought in an import ban[/url] on oil from Syria. They're actually depriving themselves of oil in response to this war.

[QUOTE=Stalk;37481922]The FSA consists of civilian fighters and there are several islamic militant groups who fights against assad because they want a piece of the cake[/quote] There are about 40,000 fighters in the FSA. Most of them are civilians and FORMER MILITARY. The FSA itself was originally started by Riad al-Asaad and defecting Syrian military. They didn't do it because they "wanted a piece of the cake" they did it because they're not really into the whole massacres and dictatorship thing. It all started with disobeying orders to kill protesters. Lets assume for a second there are Islamic militants in the group. So what? The sheer number of Defectors and Arab Spring protesters outnumber the Islamic militants. They're such small numbers, to the point where I doubt the existence, that it doesn't matter in the slightest. They're just fighters. They follow the FSA. Even then, you haven't proved it. Any proof of this is basically hearsay or assumptions. al-Qaeda leaders called for support of the FSA, that isn't the FSA's fault. The only other real claim is by Assad himself, claiming that Salafists are in the FSA. As for the al-Qaeda claim, unless they have strong presence in Syria, the only real way they'll get fighters there is by foreign means. And that's a small number. The most foreigners coming into Syria to fight for the FSA is about 300 from Lebanon. And that's just assuming they're al-Qaeda which they're most likely not. [quote]but also because Assad does not want Syria to be a islamic state.[/quote] Assad is basically the Syrian equivalent of Saddam Hussein. He's secular for the most selfish reason imaginable. You think he's protecting Sunni minorities and Christians out of the good of his heart? Fuck no, it's a ploy to garner support. Saddam did it. Mubarack did it. It's all the same shit. [quote]In other words, they want to create a syria with islamic law.[/quote] You do realise that the military leaders themselves are also secular. This wasn't some religious matter, it was an ethical one. [quote]whilst Assad wishes to keep Religion and state seperate.[/quote] That's all well and good, but when you're a murdering bastard, it doesn't matter. [quote]There is alot of fear that these groups and the sunni who belong to the majority will in the turmoil of war take the oppurtunity to kill and drive out chirstians, alawite and shia minorities. This problem is very real and there have been alot of kidnappings recently.[/quote] The groups that are being currently "threatened" are being targeted because of their relationship with Assad. You know what else is a VERY real threat? Shabiha groups. Civilian supporters of Assad who have slaughtered countless protesters and kidnapped/killed dissidents. They look for those people, who usually are in the groups Assad protected. In Homs, Christian groups were driven out. Not because of their religion, but because of the relationship between the Syrian Christian community and Assad's regime. It's shitty and probably unnecessary, but Christian refugees are the least of your worries when you have some psychotic megalomaniac slaughtering thousands of people. [quote]During the last UN observer mission they came to the conclusion that both sides had commited act of violence.[/quote] Last UN observer mission was about the use of young people in the FSA. No idea what you're talking about. [quote]In our western media all we get to hear about are these massacres, murders and chemical weapons. why should all our opinions of a country be driven by fear? It is obvious that our media does not want us to get the full picture of a situation.[/quote] They do give a full picture. Assad is a murdering nutcase and the FSA are a resistance group, plagued with the same issue any resistance group had. You think the French resistance was immune to these issues? Sure, they're shitty, we all can agree, but that doesn't mean the cause isn't just. [quote]The same goes for pro-assad media, it is just as bad as the west.[/quote] It most CERTAINLY is not. [quote]There is always a constant fear-mongering blame game.[/quote] It's quite justified here, mate. [quote]It would be terrible if people came to their senses and realized how corrupt everything really is. But ofcourse! if you tell someone something over and over again, they will belive just about anything.[/quote] Where the fuck would that leave us? We condemn the FSA? Syria goes back into the hands of Assad and EVERYTHING gets worse there? Wow, you curbed some shit that the FSA did, good job, now everything is worse then anything they ever did. [quote][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_manipulation[/url][/quote] The ONLY evidence if you have is this? Are you fucking kidding me? Is this a joke? [quote]Not a proxy war? The syrian conflict is the best example of a proxy war ever.[/QUOTE] It's not a proxy war, you have no idea what you're talking about.

[QUOTE=Devodiere;37477118]Can you imagine 20 years from now, the US is attacked by Syrian bureaucrats flying a filing cabinet into the IRS. And all because we supplied them with administrative tactics turning them into a lawful and civil governmental wasteland.[/QUOTE]I don't actually think anyone would be upset about a rocket-powered filing cabinet somehow flying from Syria into a IRS building. Can you imagine all the papers that would need to be cleaned up, though? There would be a whole trail of them across the Atlantic. :(

[QUOTE=Devodiere;37477118]Can you imagine 20 years from now, the US is attacked by Syrian bureaucrats flying a filing cabinet into the IRS. And all because we supplied them with administrative tactics turning them into a lawful and civil governmental wasteland.[/QUOTE]I was going to put a video of the Crimson Permanent Assurance scene from Monty Python's Meaning of Life, but copyright claims have purged any decent videos of it :c

[QUOTE=RentAhobO;37475481]Again the U.S. is sticking its nose into places where it does not belong. Constantly trying to push their colonialistic agenda forwards.[/QUOTE] As they have always done before. Here in Brazil they made us suffer from a military dictatorship for more than 20 years, destroying lots of nacional companies, expelling many intellectuals and mostly stopping the development of our country as a whole. The protests here have political interests from the US, since the government party does not feel like being another puppet like colombia or paraguay (who has an illegal president).

Holy shit it's 2012. The world hasn't ended yet awesome.

Huh. Well that's certainly one way to help the rebels. And likely infinitely more effective than a brigade of tanks. [QUOTE=RentAhobO;37475481]Again the U.S. is sticking its nose into places where it does not belong. Constantly trying to push their colonialistic agenda forwards.[/QUOTE] How is teaching the rebels how to set up a stable government for the civilians living in areas they've captured colonialist? I don't see it.

[QUOTE=EpicEcko;44240930]yadda yadda yadda us american pigs are bad[/QUOTE] [B]Someone lock this fucking thread before it gets out of hand[/B]

[QUOTE=T553412;44241068][B]Someone lock this fucking thread before it gets out of hand[/B][/QUOTE] And all that yadda yadda Russians are bad from the forums are allowed? Im getting sick of this forum.

[QUOTE=EpicEcko;44241141]And all that yadda yadda Russians are bad from the forums are allowed? Im getting sick of this forum.[/QUOTE] The difference is Russia is being an aggressor towards Ukraine to try and expand (I believe) whereas the USA is trying to teach Syrians how to make a government that isn't complete shit. Please, I'd love to see you try to make a connection between the two acts, because they're pretty much incomparable.

[QUOTE=ThePinkPanzer;37476405]deh r in it 4 deh oil!!!!11 rp revoluton 2012 fuk deh poleeeece!!!!!! [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Don't post like this even if it is meant as satire it's still very annoying for everyone" - verynicelady))[/highlight][/QUOTE] I miss you, kind of, actually not sure.

[QUOTE=Starlight 456;44241179]The difference is Russia is being an aggressor towards Ukraine to try and expand (I believe) whereas the USA is trying to teach Syrians how to make a government that isn't complete shit. Please, I'd love to see you try to make a connection between the two acts, because they're pretty much incomparable.[/QUOTE] You see what T553412 complained about was what i said about US interventions here in Brazil, which supported the overthrow of the democratically elected president, Goulart, and installed a dictatorship "against communism", fully aligned with U.S. interests (if not the US already had military fighters landed in the northeast). I just related that to what the whole forum claims to be a imperialist move from Russia towards Ukraine, which was nothing near what US did here.

[QUOTE=RentAhobO;37475481]Again the U.S. is sticking its nose into places where it does not belong. Constantly trying to push their colonialistic agenda forwards.[/QUOTE] I fucking WISH it was colonialism. Colonialism would be smart compared to the shit we've done in the past century. Colonialism generally implies you're bringing along some culture. Okay. I know some people will disagree with me, so let me go over the US's general modus operandi for the past 50-70 years. 1. Find the craziest assholes you can that hate the people you want to remove. 2. Give them training and arm them to the fucking teeth. At least the last I knew we destroyed or shipped back all of our weapon caches in Afghanistan, but the issue remains. At least with colonialism you can have a degree of cultural exchange and you're not just handing the region over to psychopathic zealots. With colonialism you actually take on a burden of responsibility.

[QUOTE=Grimhound;44241390]I fucking WISH it was colonialism. Colonialism would be smart compared to the shit we've done in the past century. Colonialism generally implies you're bringing along some culture. Okay. I know some people will disagree with me, so let me go over the US's general modus operandi for the past 50-70 years. 1. Find the craziest assholes you can that hate the people you want to remove. 2. Give them training and arm them to the fucking teeth. At least the last I knew we destroyed or shipped back all of our weapon caches in Afghanistan, but the issue remains. At least with colonialism you can have a degree of cultural exchange and you're not just handing the region over to psychopathic zealots. With colonialism you actually take on a burden of responsibility.[/QUOTE] The thing is, what if you dont want colonialism in your country, but it is forced to you until you have to decide between being "colonized" or a civil war, due to the other countries support to the opposition parties. This is exactly what happened in Brazil. The southern forces had to give up the fight against the dictatorship otherwise there would be a civil war, with the support of the US to the right-wing militants. And by colonialism you mean giving all the airplanes from a national company to foreign company and extinguish this company by court order, then i think i will never be able to accept it.

[QUOTE=EpicEcko;44241488]The thing is, what if you dont want colonialism in your country, but it is forced to you until you have to decide between being "colonized" or a civil war, due to the other countries support to the opposition parties. This is exactly what happened in Brazil. The southern forces had to give up the fight against the dictatorship otherwise there would be a civil war, with the support of the US to the right-wing militants.[/QUOTE] Oh, I'm not saying that it's a good alternative to democracy or that it's fair. I'm saying that I find it more honest than puppet dictators and reckless arming of fanatics. Hell, if it's done properly, colonialism can be mutually beneficial in the long run. It's just that usually you see it all about exploitation while nothing is given back. If you're taking administration of a territory you should at least develop it and improve the quality of life for the people.

[QUOTE=Grimhound;44241518]Oh, I'm not saying that it's a good alternative to democracy or that it's fair. I'm saying that I find it more honest than puppet dictators and reckless arming of fanatics.[/QUOTE] But thats exactly what happened here, it's like looking at the two sides of the same coin. These dictators have been there forever, but when they no longer belong to a particular interest, the "rebels" come to save the nation. And guess what happened in the end of the dictatorship in Brazil?

[QUOTE=TheLolrus;37475533]Colonialism? Really?[/QUOTE] Come on facemates, you just can't pretend to answer back with an answer as simple as his statement. There is really a lot of political theory that endorses the idea (See: Noam Chomsky, the prominent example) that behind each "help" there is also a push to out compete other global powers and add/sum up backers in the global arena. You may not see it as colonialism, but in the 70's and 80's the US messed a lot of shit up around here saying they were "helping".

[QUOTE=Grimhound;44241518]Hell, if it's done properly, colonialism can be mutually beneficial in the long run. It's just that usually you see it all about exploitation while nothing is given back. If you're taking administration of a territory you should at least develop it and improve the quality of life for the people.[/QUOTE] It almost never happened in history, and when it did the colonized territory had to accept your terms in exchange for development given to them, which results in a debt with the colonizer.

those imperialist pigdog americans, how DARE they