Insight: Divided Damascus confronted by all-out war

Comments (5)
BioStudies wrote:

Wow just wow. Since when is kidnapping for ransom part of a civil war? Reuters is really stretching themselves here trying to give the MURDERING TERRORISTS some legitimacy. Why?

Feb 13, 2013 1:15pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Slammy wrote:

“Reuters is really stretching themselves here trying to give the MURDERING TERRORISTS some legitimacy. Why?”

I’ll take a guess at answering your question. For one, maybe Reuters does not know who the kidnappers are? Few conflicts are black and white with everyone on one side or the other. Maybe the kid nappers are just out for money and could care less about either side.

Two, the description of these “terrorists” is much more akin to an insurgency. But even when we have legit nations involved in conflicts innocent people die as collateral damage. Some argue that the United States is a terrorist for the innocent people killed in the drone strikes in Pakistan and other places.

Three, its possible that the opposition might win. When the Taliban overtook Afghanistan, the Taliban was the representative government even though they helped protect those involved in 9/11 and committed many brutal acts on their people. If the opposition overtakes Syria, they will be the government until someone else overthrows them.

Fourth, Reuters has many stories regarding the war crimes, summary executions and other crimes of the insurgents.

What I think is great is that no one seems to deny that the United States has NOT been helping these insurgents militarily. And look how far they have come without such help. The fsa appears to have some pretty good fighters in my book. Shia do not appear as effective as Sunni fighters either.

Go Non-Terrorist Insurgents!

Feb 13, 2013 3:38pm EST  --  Report as abuse
kenradke11 wrote:

I wish one of those close to Assad would just put a bullet through his brain (if he even has one which is unlikely) and then peace will again come to Syria.

Feb 13, 2013 5:54pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Fromkin wrote:

“Shia do not appear as effective as Sunni fighters either.”

Although I avoid falling into the sectarian trap of Sunni/Shia divide and conquer Western strategy I must say that the evidence points to the contrary.

First of all the conflict in Syria is not between Sunnis and Shias because Syria has an army made of conscripts and at least 70% of its army is made of Sunnis. Almost all Syria’s upper military leaders are Sunnis.

Getting back to your ridiculous claim suffice to say that Hezbollah disproves it. It defeated Sunni fighters in Lebanon civil war. Iran/ Irak war also contradicts your claim. It defeated a Sunni army from Irak despite massive military aid by the West. There is a reason why Shia dominated Iran has never been colonized not to mention they also appear to be smarter(and wiser) than other muslim groups easily corrupted(by Bentleys) and manipulated by muslim ennemies.

Again the conflict in Syria is not between Sunnis and Shia. It’s between all Syrians against the West using misguided Syrians and foreign fighters to take over Syria for its selfish interests(oil, gas, Israel).

Feb 13, 2013 6:02pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Khantona wrote:

Some of Al-Qaida terrorrist groups Also Known As Syrian Rebels do;
Washington Post Feb 13, 2013; Syrian rebels loot artifacts to raise money for fight against Assad

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/syrian-rebels-loot-artifacts-to-raise-money-for-fight-against-assad/2013/02/12/ae0cf01e-6ede-11e2-8b8d-e0b59a1b8e2a_story.html

Feb 13, 2013 6:37pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.