Standard fare for our resident dictator fanboys. Its because they can't defend their dictators against truthbombs and have to obfuscate by accusing country a or b of also having done something bad.
Putin and Russia in Syria
- Thread starter Dans
- Start date
Standard fare for our resident dictator fanboys. Its because they can't defend their dictators against truthbombs and have to obfuscate by accusing country a or b of also having done something bad.
Meh, I never claimed to be on a mission to "spread democracy and topple dictatorships". I'm merely pointing out the hypocrisy of those who do.
You're the ones who are trying to argue morality here, when you have none of it (not you personally but your nation and its allies). I'm merely exposing that fact, and understandably it hurts.
It's not "country a or b". It's you and your allies.
You're lying your a** off here about how much you care about democracy and human rights, and I'm merely exposing your lies. I can understand why you would be mad about that though.
I'm not lying and if you're going to resort to that sort of nonsense I'll gladly escort you out of here.
No, you're making excuse after excuse for Assad, and your argument is floundering all over the place. And anytime someone pulls you up on it, you begin talking about Bahrain, the US or whoever. You deflect because you have no real defence for him other than 'yea but [x] do it' which is moronic.
Pointing out hypocrisy by being a hypocrite. Makes sense, danny boy.
Well, to be accurate your governments are lying and you're just playing along.
I'm not playing along. Keep digging though.
Do you want me to answer, or should I talk about the position of [x] in [y] and post a link and then claim I'm pointing out hypocrisy?
Now that wouldn't be very democratic, would it?
Something you as Russian may appreciate.
I will always keep pointing out hypocrisy when necessary. And it's not like I'm the only one doing it...
In the ISIS in Iraq and Syria thread:
As opposed to the Russian way of stealing land from another country and lying about it to the mothers of dead Russian troops who were never in Ukraine ? That's some moral compass you have.
And those are just a few examples. So that [x] and [y] are ok?
When you claim to hold the moral high ground, or try to base a position on a moral argument, then don't be surprised when people call you out on your hypocrisy. Everybody should expect and accept that.
As for my original question, please answer however you want.
@Danny1982 - again, it's petty deflection and you're totally missing the point. Raoul and JaF talking about Russia and Putin are wholly relevant to the discussion as Putin is involved in the Syrian conflict.
I mention Assad and you start deflecting talking about Bahrain. How is that relevant? You just come out with irrelevant nonsense rather than sticking to the issue.
I mention Assad and you start deflecting talking about Bahrain. How is that relevant? You just come out with irrelevant nonsense rather than sticking to the issue.
Interesting Danny. You can tell your points are winning when people resort to name calling or threatening bans.
It is pointless to debate with that though, but please don't be put off posting.
There is no right in this as you and antihenry are pointing out, however for some people there must be good and bad guys.
Brought up on westerns and the like.
It is pointless to debate with that though, but please don't be put off posting.
There is no right in this as you and antihenry are pointing out, however for some people there must be good and bad guys.
Brought up on westerns and the like.
Unlike the US, Saudi Arabia and the UK...?!
I don't expect you to be neutral in this conflict, but a little more objectivity will help.
And you still didn't answer my question.
Thanks. I have no problem with the name calling here, I'm used to it now. At least now everybody can see what's really happening in Syria.
Have I said anything about the US, SA? Also - the UK have only got involved in the last few weeks.
Anyway - you still do deflect when you're called up on Assad, and your own silence on him and his actions are deafeningly loud.
To your question - I've discussed with Kaos in the other thread my position on the Kurds. If you are that interested on it, you can go find it.
Have I said anything about the US, SA? Also - the UK have only got involved in the last few weeks.
Anyway - you still do deflect when you're called up on Assad, and your own silence on him and his actions are deafeningly loud.
To your question - I've discussed with Kaos in the other thread my position on the Kurds. If you are that interested on it, you can go find it.
No you didn't. You were just talking about how you think they shouldn't get their own state, and I'm not talking about that. You know what I'm talking about (because I just posted it and quoted exactly what I asked you about).Come on Danny, Don't say @LeChuck Is only interested in Bashir. Having read this forum for a while now it seems to me that he is quite even handed in his condemnation of dictators full-stop.Defend Assad?
It's a war of two sides, and I'm clear about what I don't want in Syria.
If you want to talk about torture, then how about you talk about Bahrain (the capitol of torture)?
https://www.hrw.org/news/2015/11/22/bahrain-detainees-tortured-abused
Or your Saudi Arabia, or even the US prisons, ...
However, for some odd reason
Most of us here are saying that Bashir and all the other actors in the conflict are almost as bad as each other, you seem to believe that as bad as Bashir is at least he's murdering Islamist's... They're still humans though bro.
Oh really? Please show me. He even defended Al-Nusra ffs.
No, they're not almost as bad as each other. The Wahhabi ideology is far more dangerous imo. At the very least, Assad is somebody you can negotiate with.
Of course they're all humans, including those brainwashed idiots who murdered 160 civilians in Paris. That's why I think what we should be doing now is concentrating on the real problem we have, Saudi Arabia and its terrorist ideology that's spreading in the region, before creating new vacuums for it to spread and flourish. I don't live in fantasy land like some here and I know if Assad is toppled now what will come to replace him.
In fact what I have been saying here is exactly what the Kurds (who were also oppressed by Assad) are saying now. Word for word. Should I repeat to you what they said? Do you criticise their position too?
I'm not criticising any positions bro, if you look at my previous posts you'll see that I can't stand Gulf Arabs, so Saudi and the other Emirates and Kingdoms won't get a pass from me. Assad also won't get a pass from me, I haven't forgotten the videos that started to come out in 2012 with children missing their skulls and young boys and men being executed for not saying that Bashir is their God.
If you don't believe that Bashir is responsible for the actions of his troops then how can you say that he'll keep a lid on shit when his own army is beyond his control?
After Texas, I guess we'd head to Moscow or maybe Ozero?
When Putin kills his first hundred thousand people, we can talk. Next to Dubya, he's a pacifist.
Also - you've ruined that other thread with your 3 pages worth of copy pasted crap. Can't you paraphrase? Noone's gonna read that.
With the Kurds, they're as divided in this as everyone else, and just like everyone else, they aren't as squeaky clean. The Kurdish National Council sit on the National Coalition (anti Assad), whilst some as you've pointed out are pro Assad. Some fight with the rebels, some keep to themselves to deal with IS.
To those that are pro Assad, you have to remember that traditional Kurdistan is quite a way away from Homs, Damascus, Aleppo, Idlib, so they weren't too affected by Assad's madness on his own people. The pertinent threat to them is IS. I'm sure IS were in the West and Assad was in the East, they'd be fighting Assad.
For the 100th time, I never said Assad is good. In fact, personally, I hate Assad. I hate all the Arab dictators... This nonsense about me defending Assad and putting words into my mouth is nothing more than an excuse to hide behind really.
I didn't say he's not responsible for all the actions of the Syrian army. It was the German intelligence who said that in regard of the chemical attack that he didn't give orders to launch a chemical attack.
He's still in control of the Syrian army, which is by far the best fighting force we have right now against the Wahhabi terrorists in Syria. If the army collapses then we'll see ISIS and its likes invade Syria as easily as they did in Mosul and Anbar. Is this what you want? How can you not see that is beyond me.
And what do you mean by "Saudis don't get a pass from me and Assad won't get a pass from me". What kind of pass are you talking about? And what kind of "pass" I'm giving to Assad then?
And by the way, comparing Saudi Arabia to Assad is not accurate. I don't hate Saudi Arabia because they're (also) a dictatorship, but because they're harbouring and spreading a very dangerous ideology in the region and the world, which is why for me Saudi Arabia are worse and more dangerous than Assad, and dealing with it should actually be the priority.
They are Syrians, who were oppressed by Assad, living in Syria, and are making it clear what the biggest danger for them is, how are they not relevant?! And why does their opinion mean nothing to you? I don't understand this. Weren't people here talking about how the Kurds are the ones oppressed the most by Assad? And how we should sympathise with them and support them? So the moment they make a logical decision that's good for them they suddenly become irrelevant and we just neglect them? What does that say about our real intentions then?
And by the way, even with what you're saying, doesn't that at least prove my point about Assad being somebody with whom you can at least negotiate?
Ruined? Crap? I posted the full text of an important UN resolution (that actually means much more to the conflict than our babbling here), and that "crap" "ruined" the thread?? Not surprised you didn't like it though considering it made fighting terrorism a priority.
No, the Kurds are not divided in this. The Kurds aren't fighting the regime and the leader I quoted isn't pro-Assad. Did you even read what he said? The Kurds weren't even invited to the terrorists conference in Riyadh. And just few pages ago people were talking about how the Kurds were the ones oppressed the most by Assad.
Russia says they have given evidence of Turkey's dealing with IS to France.
Putin is clean nutts but he is right to stand by assad, America and its lapdogs are only destablising the whole region so there middle east regiment (Israel) remain the heavyweight with the countries surrounding it, Assad like Gadaffi might not be the most popluar leader but they brought about stability in there regions, Lbyia is rubble, syria is rubble, Iraq is rubble and Palestine is rubble all due too america and its conspiracies or should i say motives, Israel still currently chipping away at Palestinian land and expanding there terrority in the middle east so where do they stop?
Only my view and are not against any individual and I apologise if I offend anyone with my views, I have american family ect.. its not the people its there leadership
Only my view and are not against any individual and I apologise if I offend anyone with my views, I have american family ect.. its not the people its there leadership
fixed that for you.
Pentagon Rejects Russian Proposal to Share Intelligence on Daesh Positions.
http://sputniknews.com/military/20151226/1032321389/pentagon-russia-intelligence-share.html
http://sputniknews.com/military/20151226/1032321389/pentagon-russia-intelligence-share.html
where am I trying to spread democracy, show me the post? But basically you just agreed that you are doing what you just a few posts ago denied you were doing. Well done
Funny part is no where in that quote do I take any sort of high moral ground. I do not state one side is better than the other. Nice try though, The problem is that you see any critism of certain states and their leadership as meaning we are praising the other side. You fill in words that are not in the posts.
I should point out that early on in the Ukraine crisis I was in favor of Ukraine taking a neutral stance between the west and Russia. I was also against and remain against any US action in Syria. So much for your ignorant belief about me being so pro-US etc. though you will not all understand a word I posted here since you will fill in things I am not saying or meaning.
What are you on about? Are you smoking something? You jumped into a discussion I was having with other people and kept talking about pot and ignorance. Talk about yourself, or if you want to talk "we" then you're subscribing to their opinions as well.
We're all p*ssed right now (hopefully LVG will be sacked soon), but you might want to re-read the whole discussion again later.
Yesterday at the Munich conference:
John McCain, head of the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee, said: “Mr. Putin is not interested in being our partner” but is using the refugee crisis “as a weapon to divide the trans-Atlantic alliance and undermine the European project.”
He was at the security conference - of course it's relevant. Whether you agree or not is another matter.
McCain obviously has it spot on. He's been correct about Putin since the beginning of the Ukraine crisis, just as he was about Russia when he called it a gas station masquerading as a country.
The European project is undermining itself. For starters you have Turkey holding the rest of Europe to ransom by threatening an outpouring of refugees if it doesn't get its way.
I couldn't care less about McCain being head of the US armed services committee. The fact that he aligns himself with terrorists and kidnappers gives him no grounds to make accusations.
I couldn't care less about McCain being head of the US armed services committee. The fact that he aligns himself with terrorists and kidnappers gives him no grounds to make accusations.
McCain is just an old fool, having another senior moment.