Syrian rebels elect new military commander

Comments (12)
Slammy wrote:

@pendingapproval

It is not Reuters fault Mr. Al Assad, aka The Cowardly Lion, is a weakling. If he would allow Reuters to report in Syria maybe they could get info from other sources. Logistics are not relevant to you, are they?
But you are coming across very soar that your side (which consists of army of 160,000 with over a million reserves) is losing to a few armed gangs. Let me ask you this, do you think the Syrian army stupid or just incompetent? I think stupid but I am leaving open the possibility of ineptness. Either way, they are not very effective, are they?

Questions:

1) Is Syria at peace?
2) Is Syria in a civil war?
3) Do you know the difference between a terrorist and an insurgent? Please provide example if so.

Insurgents! You guys are doing so well you have bloggers attacking Reuters for your successes. Keep it up!

Dec 08, 2012 11:37am EST  --  Report as abuse
Slammy wrote:

Protesters in Kafranbel in the northern Idlib province have two bloodthirsty banner messages from this week’s protest.

One says: “Peace will prevail the moment Assad’s head is crushed. Let you peacekeepers look for peace to keep”.

The other says: “By beheading al-Assad terrorism will become a disgusting folk tale”.

The second message is a little catchy if spoken a few times.

Dec 08, 2012 1:29pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Slammy wrote:

@pendingapproval

Please name any weapons the fsa are using that were made the USA. Or point me to a youtube video showing the rebels using AR-15′s or driving Abram tanks. I have watched many videos and have yet to see any western weaponry in insurgent hands. Maybe, in addition to blaming Reuters for the below average iq Syrian army, you should complain to Russia and China for poor arms control. If those two quit making the guns, bullets and aa missiles the insurgents will be in real trouble. I am sure the regime’s inability to not hold their military bases and their short sightedness in not destroying the Sa-16 and Sa-24 missiles is not helping the Cowardly Lion. Reuters fault too?
I still cannot figure out why the regime would leave and/or not destroy their aa weaponry when they knew their bases were under attack. Do you know why the regime would allow these weapons to fall into insurgents hands? Stupidity? Incompetence? Apathy? O well, you can lead a Camel to water….

Dec 08, 2012 1:41pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Slammy wrote:

There are reports that “Regime forces and rebels are clashing near the Mazzeh military airport in Damascus”

If true, doesn’t that put the fighting ultra close to The Cowardly Lion’s liar?

Dec 08, 2012 3:47pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Doc62 wrote:

Folks, with Assad’s forces defecting daily, the rebels gain tanks, heavy weapons and the know-how to use them. Even the FSA Generals and their Commander Idris used to work for Assad. Their strategic knowledge will end the war sooner. Too bad the base’s 20 tanks were inoperative.

Dec 08, 2012 5:03pm EST  --  Report as abuse
bemore2day wrote:

Wow, it’s like a family reunion for the holidays. We’ve got Slammy and pendingapproval going at it over Syria, and yesterday Fromkin (MIA for many months) actually commented!…ah, the holidays!

Dec 08, 2012 6:07pm EST  --  Report as abuse
BraveNewWrld wrote:

Slammy wrote:

>If he would allow Reuters to report in Syria maybe they could get info from other sources.
Surprise, surprise – he does! Unfortunately, it is reuters’ own choice not to send their reporters to Damascus, unlike for example BBC does, but to only present reports from guys “embedded” with rebels, when possible.

>I think stupid but …
This part I would not challenge. Although it makes me wonder whether you could understand any argument at all… I will try, though – just to see how that works.

>Questions:
>Do you know the difference between a terrorist and an insurgent? >Please provide example if so.
Terrorists use warfare on civilian population – car bombings, hostage taking, attacking objects of civil infrastructure, the worst kind of terorists attack schools, kindergartens, kill and take hostage children. On the other hand, guerilla warfare has long and interesting history. You might be well served by looking “guerilla warfare” on wikipedia, or just googling it up.
Once guerilla-rebel-insurgents resort to terrorism, they become terrorists. Interestingly, most of the successful guerilla-rebel movements did not demean themselves to become terrorists. And conversely, most of those who did resort to terror were unsuccessfull and damned by the history.

Get it? Or you are paid by the word for what you write?

Insurgents! You guys are doing so well you have bloggers attacking Reuters for your successes. Keep it up!

Dec 08, 2012 6:54pm EST  --  Report as abuse
dr.bob wrote:

Ask the Egyptians how the “Brotherhood” is treating them?

Dec 08, 2012 6:56pm EST  --  Report as abuse
BraveNewWrld wrote:

BTW – who is interested in live feed from Syria could just google it up. Out there are several recent live feeds – just to see/have some “hard facts”, as Sherman Stein puts it.

Dec 08, 2012 6:56pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Slammy wrote:

@Bravenewworld
First, you are right, I do have a hard time following some of your comments. Here goes.

Second, post anything you know of regarding Reuters being allowed to report in Syria. I recall in mid 2011 the Regime allowed reporters in but followed them around and, allegedly, attacked civilians who spoke honestly with the reports. Many news groups pulled out around this time. When and where has the regime given unfettered access to Reuters?

“Terrorists use warfare on civilian population – car bombings, hostage taking, attacking objects of civil infrastructure, the worst kind of terorists attack schools, kindergartens, kill and take hostage children. On the other hand, guerilla warfare has long and interesting history. You might be well served by looking “guerilla warfare” on wikipedia, or just googling it up.”

Ok, I googled this a long time ago, which is part of the reason i disagree that the means of a group is the definitive test. Although there is some debate over the minutia, the big difference, is more about the end result. Terrorist are not interested in challenging government forces directly but act to change perceptions as to the legitimacy of the government itself. Car bombings, kidnappings are ways to try and accomplish this by undermining the perception that the government can protect its own people. But these acts can also be done by insurgents as the goal for insurgencies is to challenge a government’s control of all or a portion of government’s territory. Their big aim is to force political concessions in sharing power or to assume political power all together. A major difference is that insurgencies, require a large degree of popular local support. The “terrorist” who flew the planes into the world trade center had little to no local support in the United States. The “insurgents” who blew up the car bomb in central Damascus last week have lots of local support, with the Sunni in Syria, who make up 85% of the population. Without local support, without people in places like Kafranbel making weekly banners asking for the execution of their president, the rebels might just be terrorist.

One of the best sites I found describing the difference between the two http://www.terrorism-research.com/insurgency/, which, yes, i found on google months ago. Which I have included in many of my earlier posts. What you got?

“Get it?”
No really, for the reasons described.

“Or you are paid by the word for what you write?”
I am actually not paid at all, but my stuff is that good huh? Should I try to hit Reuters up for some royalties off their the page view ad revenue? Thanks for taking the time to notice.

I am also a Crimson Tide Fan, so how about: Go Insurgents, Roll Tide Roll!!!

Dec 08, 2012 8:26pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Slammy wrote:

@Bravenewworld
First, you are right, I do have a hard time following some of your comments. Here goes.

Second, post anything you know of regarding Reuters being allowed to report in Syria. I recall in mid 2011 the Regime allowed reporters in but followed them around and, allegedly, attacked civilians who spoke honestly with the reports. Many news groups pulled out around this time. When and where has the regime given unfettered access to Reuters?

“Terrorists use warfare on civilian population – car bombings, hostage taking, attacking objects of civil infrastructure, the worst kind of terorists attack schools, kindergartens, kill and take hostage children. On the other hand, guerilla warfare has long and interesting history. You might be well served by looking “guerilla warfare” on wikipedia, or just googling it up.”

Ok, I googled this a long time ago, which is part of the reason i disagree that the means of a group is the definitive test. Although there is some debate over the minutia, the big difference, is more about the end result. Terrorist are not interested in challenging government forces directly but act to change perceptions as to the legitimacy of the government itself. Car bombings, kidnappings are ways to try and accomplish this by undermining the perception that the government can protect its own people. But these acts can also be done by insurgents as the goal for insurgencies is to challenge a government’s control of all or a portion of government’s territory. Their big aim is to force political concessions in sharing power or to assume political power all together. A major difference is that insurgencies, require a large degree of popular local support. The “terrorist” who flew the planes into the world trade center had little to no local support in the United States. The “insurgents” who blew up the car bomb in central Damascus last week have lots of local support, with the Sunni in Syria, who make up 85% of the population. Without local support, without people in places like Kafranbel making weekly banners asking for the execution of their president, the rebels might just be terrorist.

One of the best sites I found describing the difference between the two http://www.terrorism-research.com/insurgency/, which, yes, i found on google months ago. Which I have included in many of my earlier posts. What you got?

“Get it?”
No really, for the reasons described.

“Or you are paid by the word for what you write?”
I am actually not paid at all, but my stuff is that good huh? Should I try to hit Reuters up for some royalties off their the page view ad revenue? Thanks for taking the time to notice.

I am also a Crimson Tide Fan, so how about: Go Insurgents, Roll Tide Roll!!!

Dec 08, 2012 8:26pm EST  --  Report as abuse
BraveNewWrld wrote:

Slammy wrote:

>First, you are right, I do have a hard time following some of your comments.
Well – what about your own comments? Have you tried reading what you write? You’d have even harder time following that. Like rebels are not terrorists but they are engaged in terrorist activity, etc. Like Kurdish rebels in Turkey are terrorists, but those in Syria are not – according to reuters at least? Perhaps, you could try reading Sherman Stein’s “Survival guide for the outsiders” – perhaps you could learn to analyze and see what a BS is your model of the world. That is, if you are capable of following logical analysis. Such as presented by a retired University Math professor. Trained in logic. And having no political agenda.
Anyway, you seem to have nothing but the agenda. And your agenda is crap. Thousands are already dead as a result of the agenda you advocate. And lives of hundreds of thousands got miserable, reduced to rubble. What “large degree of popular local support” are you talking about? Look at live feeds from Daraya, Hama, other places – everywhere there are rebels there is no local people to “support”. Eveybody left to live somewhere in refugee camps, their homes looted, burnt and destroyed. Everywhere those insurgents come, misery and destruction follows. No wonder kurds fought them off. And will continue doing so.

>post anything you know of regarding Reuters being allowed to report in Syria.
As I said, not being there is reuters’ choice. BBC is not more loyal to the Assad government than reuters, but Jeremy Bowen is in Damascus – look it up at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20637079.
Finally, it is your/their claim that they are not allowed – so post anything you know of regarding Reuters being not allowed to report in Syria, except for the hearsay from reuters itself.

Dec 09, 2012 12:29am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.