Twin bombings in Damascus kill at least 27, almost 100 hurt

Comments (20)
Fromkin wrote:

Syria needs to install video cameras all over. Otherwise defeated terrorists will continue with coward acts of violence.Syria should not underestimate terrorists sponsored by GB, the US, Turkey, South Arabia, Qatar, France,…Koffi Anan is being used to lure syria into complacency. The west is waging war and want only one thing from syria: regime change.

Mar 17, 2012 2:39am EDT  --  Report as abuse
matthewslyman wrote:

In some small degree, the Syrian government is right: Al Qaeda has said that they support the Syrian revolt/revolution, and we all know Al Qaeda’s methods. They have made no commitment to change their methods. They have renounced nothing from Osama bin Laden’s philosophy of conflict. We cannot be the allies of Al Qaeda under any circumstances.

Let’s presume for a moment that the Syrian government is right in blaming terrorists for this bombing. That it’s not a “false flag operation”… Let’s give the Syrian régime the benefit of the doubt on this.

In that case, let’s not give the Syrian régime any room to claim that those who are benignly protesting the excesses of this oppressive and unequally administered régime are somehow all in the same camp as the terrorists. Let’s not entertain their outrageous pretences that blowing women and children to bits in their own homes with artillery is the right way to fight “Al Qaeda”…

Let’s not insult the Syrian people, or the memory of their dead.

Mar 17, 2012 7:43am EDT  --  Report as abuse
chris87654 wrote:

Nothing is as violent as when Muslims kill Muslims. It makes the results of Quran burnings look like grade-school recess. When they stop killing each other on their own land, the world may start seeing it as a “peaceful and tolerant” religion. Main thing is for foreign governments to guard their borders and let the Muslims work it out on their own – it’s been going on for 1400 years (since Muhammad died) and will probably never end.

Mar 17, 2012 7:58am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Khantona wrote:

There are terrorist in Syria funded by Qataries and Saudis Royal families , with the west approval.

UN and it’s partners aware of Al- Qaida presence and acknowledged that; however, they decided to take one side from day one, only because of their sole interest, regardless of any concern to the majority of People of Syria who want peace and stability that they enjoyed.

UN image is becoming bloodier and bloodier, they have no shame.

Mar 17, 2012 8:20am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Life1 wrote:

@chris87654: The biggest killer in the world remains the US army, and the biggest arms seller in the world remains the United States.

And stop using the word ‘world’ to describe your idiotic opinions. I guess the ‘world’ believes Christianity is the most murderous religion to have ever existed after we tally up the deaths attributable to the Crusades, WWI, WWII, and all of America’s wars of the 21st and 20th century.

I also suppose it’s Syrians that kill each other at a rate of 11’000 a year, EVERY YEAR, for at least the last 20 years? Because that’s an accurate figure of how many Americans kill each other EVERY year, so Syria must be worst right?

Anything else left to say, or you think everybody is as stupid as yourself?

Mar 17, 2012 9:32am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Life1 wrote:

Otherwise well done to the West – openly arm and support terrorists that blow up public buildings!


Mar 17, 2012 9:34am EDT  --  Report as abuse
greenspy wrote:

The fall of the Syrian regime is imminent. The writing is on the wall. Assad is becoming a rogue leader and very isolated. The world is slowly turns its back on everyone associated with the leader of a once great nation. Killing and shopping, it seems like another day of orders coming from the presidential palace.

Mar 17, 2012 9:53am EDT  --  Report as abuse
MetalHead8 wrote:

I never understood people saying they “know” the secert dealings of nations. There about as credible as people that say they knew what jesus wants with social issues. to that i say “Yeah, Whatever dude”

@Mattewslyman I was just saying that a few days ago. Al Queda probably is behind some of the attacks, but a vast majority of attacks on Assad Loyalist are by Syrian Rebels.

May Peace come to Syria, the people are most deserving of it.

Mar 17, 2012 11:21am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Fromkin wrote:


Of course the Syria government has been right all along. But you’re making a mistake about AL Qaida, an organization created by the US and Saud Arabia. The methods of Al Qaida have been taught to them by the CIA when they fought the soviet union in Afghanistan. But here is what you seem to ignore. Osama has been killed because he refused to use the “methods” and “philosophy”, as you put it,against his fellow muslims. This is why he was against US bases in saudi Arabia and started attacking these bases. This is the primary reason the CIA went after him to regain control of AL QAida. That’s why Al Qaida is not demonized in western media like before. Now it’s performing the(CIA) missions as intended.

You also say”let’s not give the Syrian régime any room to claim that those who are benignly protesting the excesses of this oppressive and unequally administered régime are somehow all in the same camp as the terrorists” Even if, as your quote shows, you consume a lot of Al Jazeera and CNN propaganda against Syria, I am pleased to see that the more time goes by people like you who believe the fake claim of “peaceful protests” will find out what really is going on in Syria. This is a complicated situation. You have to understand deeply international polics to see the reality. You will not understand it by watching Anderson Cooper.

Bottom line is Obama(the US) is continuing GB’s(the US)policy of regime change against countries that refuse the US hegemonic policies. What the US and it’s allies are doing in Syria they have done it before in many places around the globe usually for the control of natural resources but sometimes for geopolitical positioning. Now they’ve a new trick to their trade:R2P. They protect you by bombing you.Evil.

Mar 17, 2012 11:24am EDT  --  Report as abuse
swanto wrote:

Well, certainly a lot of inside info on this board! Yet, not a word of condolence for the many victims.

Fromkin- how do you explain previous atrocities by Assad SR. that predate Bin Laden? Are the many murderous episodes between Sunni and Shia that precede the USA also to be blamed on “outside agitators”?

Why shouldn’t Syrians, and all people, be free? What is it about Syrians that makes you believe they must be ruled by a tyrant?

Mar 17, 2012 12:43pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
JamVee wrote:

The realities of the Syrian strife, lie somewhere in the middle, between Assad’s version of fighting off foreign inspired “Terrorists”, in rebellion against a lawful government, and the Rebel’s version of a populist movement, fighting for righteous freedom to unseat a corrupt dictatorship. Just as in Libya, both sides are committing atrocities!

Mar 17, 2012 1:00pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
matthewslyman wrote:

@Fromkin: It’s a long time since I read or saw anything from CNN or Al Jazeera. I tend to read Reuters and BBC more, personally; comparing notes with other sources where relevant.

I am not ignorant of the excesses of the West. I grow tired of nationalistic calls to support “our boys” in the military, where it appears those calls are asking us to turn a blind eye to Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib or that massacre near Kandahar last week. I do support them – at least, the good ones who are giving their lives, blood, sweat and tears for the safety and stability of countries around the world. Your generalizations are a bit too much, though, when you look at the many countries that have been greatly benefited by the more benign aspects of UK/US foreign, cultural and commercial policy.

The question is not,
“Is the Syrian régime bad?”, but rather,
“Would the situation there be improved or worsened by Western military intervention?”, and
“How might such intervention affect the Western strategic position – or, our ability to positively influence the world toward peace, stability and equality in the future?”

I tire of the reductionism on both sides of the debate. It’s not a simple question.

Mar 17, 2012 1:15pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
matthewslyman wrote:

…First thing to do is to make sure our troops are trained and supported sufficiently that they won’t flip out and massacre civilians. Second thing to do is to grit our teeth and knuckle down to the job of ridding the world of bloodthirsty tyrants, the best way we know how. UK/US are culpable for many wrongs in the world, but for the most part, have been a very positive influence. The alternatives to the British Empire, and now what you call US hegemony (sounds like you’ve been influenced by Noam Chomsky who likes to take a polar position in this debate); would have been much worse.

Mar 17, 2012 1:18pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Fromkin wrote:

Good and legitimate questions. I am afraid I do not have good answers specially for things that happened when I was a baby. I tend to rely on my own understanding on international affairs. You know history books and news reports are not that much reliable to find out the truth.(At leat we have Wikipedia). But my question to you is why talk about these atrocities now, more than 40 years later? They were not disturbing to you then? Let me try an answer. Back then western colonial powers loved to prop up ethnic minorities against the majority. The former provided protection and in return the latter provide access and commercial favors. As long as this equation remained at equilibrium, western powers looked the other way when atrocities occurred. Maybe that is the reason Assad SR died his quiet death. Now I will say this: I hate tyranny, dictatorship, monarchy, kings, queens, pinces and princesses, inheritaded power, terrorism, militarism,colonialism. All these ugly things are the mathers and fathers of atrocities. Like many before, Syria and syrians are also victim of the above. My point is: this selective memories and double standards are wrong attitudes when It comes to denouncing atrocities. Atrocities are unacceptable anywhere anytime by any country. Even when that country describes itself by silly things like beacon of hope and freedom, remaining sole superpower, it’s not a justification to go around the globe and promote atrocities for commercial reasons. Money is(also) the root of evil.

Mar 17, 2012 2:30pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Life1 wrote:

@matthewslyman: problem is, the US and the UK themselves act like bloodthirsty tyrants. No other countries fight as many senseless wars as these two (apart from Israel) and the fact that they kill people from other countries instead of their own doesn’t make their wars or their policies any ‘cleaner’.

Then you have the issue of the propped up dictators in Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, the UAE, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia that are ignored since they’re ‘allies’. This is very closely followed by the problem of Israel’s free-pass to plunder whoever it wants, with the US always ready to veto, which has dragged US credibility to an all-time low.

Basically, there are no ‘good’ guys in this story. All sides are as bad as each other, and neither the US nor the UK have any moral high-ground left to stand on to tell anybody how they should be conducting their business or how to run their countries.

That ship sailed when they invaded Iraq, and it’s fitting that this huge mistake has led to the financial and moral bankruptcy of both countries. According to defense analysts, it will take at least 30 years for the US to regroup, rearm, and re-man its military to a position where they can fight another Vietnam or Iraq, and without the US, the UK is nothing. Without the US, NATO is nothing.

That marks the end of the Anglo-Saxon hegemony over the world for the foreseeable future, and it’s not very likely that other powers will leave this vacuum empty for very long.

Mar 17, 2012 7:21pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Austell wrote:

“..that state television blamed on “terrorists”…”


Is it even possible to water it down any more reuters???

Do we have to rub your twisted noses in the pools of civillian blood to get you to STOP SUPPORTING THESE FANATICAL ISLAMIC TERRORISTS!!!!!

Jesus, hey here’s an idea.. we’ll just change the definition of what a terrorist is for a couple years so we can support them! Then when we need the “terrorist” boogieman back we’ll change it again later…

Since when does a suicide car bombing that kills dozens of civillians and injures 100 more not make the cut as “terrorism” ????

I sear it isn’t even possible to get any more cynical than this, reuters are now in full blown cover-up mode, avoid admission of supporting terrorism at any cost!!! Even if it means you have to change the very meaning of the word terrorist itself.

Mar 17, 2012 7:26pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Austell wrote:

“No one claimed responsibility for the detonations..”

God it just gets better…. That’s because they were blown to pieces reuters!

Why do you outright REFUSE to tell us it was a twin ‘suicide bombing’??

Why do you refuse to use standard language to characterise it???

‘Gruesome images from the sites showed what appeared to be smoldering bodies in two separate vehicles’, honest to god that has got to be the longest way around the words ‘suicide bombing’ i’ve ever heard…

You’ve got to be a pretty messed up person, or be payed a lot of money by someone to go that far out of your way to hide the truth.

Wake up guys, you’ve been exposed!!!
Everything you say now is on public record!!

You are supporting terrorism, plain and simple, and now you are trying your best to hide it.


How do you expect to hide your affiliations when there are suicide car bombs going off??

Did you honestly not think this would escalate to full blown terrorism when you saw video after video of Islamic militants screaming ALLLAHU AKBAR firing wildly into the air!!!??? After what happened, and what is happening right now in Libya??

Who did you think you were supporting… democrats??? Unbelievable..

Mar 17, 2012 7:45pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
swanto wrote:


I used those examples to dispute your earlier points regarding Bin Lade, et al.

Regardless of what “western” powers did in the past, this article is about what happened TODAY.

While your eyewitness accounts must be given primacy, don’t give in too much to vanity. You CAN rely on books and good scholarship. Its certainly a lot better than Wikipedia.

In the end, Assad cannot escape responsibility for the consequences of his own arrogant brutality.

Don’t live in the past. People can, and do, change- just look at Germany.

I would still like an answer- why shouldn’t Syrians be free?

Mar 18, 2012 1:56am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Fromkin wrote:


I answered but you probably did not get my answer. Answer mine maybe you will understand: Why shouldn’t saudi arabia be free? why shouldn’t qatar be free? Wgy shouldn’t bahrain be free? Why shouldn’t Oman be free? why shouldn’t UEA be free? What shouldn’t Jordan be free? Why egypt is still run by a junta more than a year after so called “arab spring”?, Why shouldn’t 90% of african countries be free? Why do you care about brutality in Syria and not in barain?

Today people who were protesting in new york were arrested. They wrongly taught they were “free” to protest. “Free” is a propaganda jargon. It’s meaningless when applied in politics. Nothing is free.

You will never understand the present if you can’t relate it to the past.

Know that the strugle of Syria predates Assad JR, Obama, Sarkozy, cameron, etc. Know that if the west could get away with it they will kill 1,000,000 syrians to control Syria with or without Assad Jr. know that Syria is a very strategic real estate to the west and Russia/China. know that Assad is doing his duty defending his country against invaders. Know that this is not the first time Syria repels western/Israel attacks.

Why don’t you direct your anger towards someone like Georges Bush who killed million of innocent people if you really are against arrogant brutality. Your sense of outrage is misguided and rings hollow. The media outlets are deceiving you, teaching you to hate a minor league dictator while major league criminals like george Bush are spared the same arsh judgements. And finally know that Bin laden is(still) a CIA asset, worked for America for many years, fought America’s wars so you can be “free”…

Mar 18, 2012 3:14am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Austell wrote:


“Why shouldn’t Syrians be free?”

Are you kidding me?? What kind of a ridiculous question is that??

Who do you think has more laws prohibiting their actions, Americans or Syrians??

Who do you think has a higher percentage of their population in Jail, Americans or Syrians??

Who do you think have more freedom to do whatever they want?

I’ll tell you who, Syrians!!!

All these idiots crap on about ‘freedom’ in the west, but the truth is we have less freedom than ANYONE in the world!

I’ve been to hardcore third world dictatorships before and even they have WAY MORE freedom than us!!

The list of things we are NOT free to do in the west is so long you could bridge the pacific with it.. and don’t crap on about ‘free democracy’ to me because EVERYONE except regime loyalists know that that one box tick every 4 years changes absolutely nothing!!

You people have got NO IDEA what you’re talking about, you just repeat what you hear because you’re regime loyalists…

Mar 18, 2012 4:31am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.