You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!

Syria, provided the media report objectively

Constantly we hear about the war in Syria. And how Asada is a villain.
But, on the other side, this is not true.
Most people support Asad, and army.
Criminal are the rebels.
And they are terorist. But no one talks about that.
Is this another war, whera are we on the negative side of the conflict?
The impression I get is that Asad is representative of people who belong to small minority religious groups who predominantly belong to a higher socio-economic class. Not all of the groups are in perfect agreement with his policies, but they feel protected by Asad. Those apposing Asad are the Sunni Muslims, whom the minority groups fear. So if one should speak to someone from a religious minority, you would find them saying good things about Asad, and if it is a Muslim, they would be quite critical of him in the extreme. Ironic that the US is indirectly supporting the Muslims of Syria.

Here is an article that touches on this subject:

This is a breakdown of religious groups in Syria:

Sunni Muslims 74%
Shia 13% (Alawite, Twelvers and Ismailis) (Assad's family is Alawite - Alawite dominate Government and military positions)
Christian 10%
Druze 3%

Christians (2.5 million), a sizable number of which are found among Syria's population of Palestinian refugees, are divided into several groups. Chalcedonian Antiochian Orthodox make up 35,7% of the Christian population; the Catholics (Melkite, Armenian Catholic, Syriac Catholic, Maronite, Chaldean Catholic and Latin) make up 26,2%; the Armenian Apostolic Church 10,9%, the Syrian Orthodox make up 22,4%; Assyrian Church of the East and several smaller Christian denominations account the remainder. Many Christian monasteries also exist. Many Christian Syrians belong to a high socio-economic class.

Source: Wikipedia
Thank you for your answer.
The major problem for Western countries, that support rebels, is that ordinary people do not support rebels . And, in this kind of war is a big problem.
Rebels cann't take some big city, and if they taked, they cannot holded it.

Another problem is that they have in their ranks a lot of radicals.
And they were fragmented in their views of how it should look like Syria after the fall of Asad.
It seems that the Syrian army is advancing and that soon there will be a war over
davorin wrote:
It seems that the Syrian army is advancing and that soon there will be a war over
Which Syrian army are you referring to and in which direction are they advancing? Question
davorin wrote:
It seems that the Syrian army is advancing and that soon there will be a war over
Really? What is your source for that? From where I sit it sounds like complete nonsense.
I am also interested to know what information you have to base the earlier claims on - that most support Assad, for example?

Crimes against humanity and terrorism has been documented by HRW in particular, but also by UN agencies and other aid bodies - and there have indeed been serious crimes on both sides of the conflict.
If you check a bit deeper, however, and drill-down into actual numbers, it seems very clear to me that the great majority of atrocity has come from the Government/Military side rather than the rebel side.
ANY massively out-gunned combatants will, of necessity, use methods and techniques which we could class as terrorism. Check the Russian fightback against Hitler's invading force, or the French resistance - or in fact any of the resistance groups active around the world during WW2. They cannot launch a frontal assault - the name of the game is nibble away and weaken rather than a mighty battle which they will loose very very badly. So calling the rebel side 'terrorists' may be technically sort-of accurate but it isn't really very informative and is simply, therefore, an emotional sidetrack at best and positively misleading at worst.
I think on the legal army which is fighting against the rebels and terrorists.
She managed to survive because it has support of local people, which is very important.
The Syrian army is advancing, and it's really positive news
And yes, I am for the current Syrian government, because it has support of the people
You don't sound the least bit biased Rolling Eyes . I think there is plenty of support on both sides. It is a serious war, with serious problems on both sides. Both are reporting misleading information and half-truths which can only hurt everyone. At the end of the day something needs to change, or more bloodshed can only result. When people are unhappy enough to loose their lives for a cause, than obviously something needs to change.
That war is a terrible thing. But I remember similar wars in Bolivia and Nicaragua, which are driven in the same way by the CIA. So as well as in Syria. Even muđahedini the product CIA. They were armed and equipped in Afghanistan, and now doing nonsense in the world. That there is no popular support, the current government in Syria would have already fallen. Just as he fell and Gaddafi in Libya (he did not have popular support, and it is easily collapsed NATO), in Egypt and Tunisia. But if the rebels win, will return the country to the Middle Ages, and it really does not want this nation. I've been such a war, and I know what would have happened if we had lost.
Related topics
Support Danish
UK designing secret nukes
Left Parties in India - Playing Spoil Sport?
Saudi women open fire and punch virtue police
the supermoon
University of California, LA: Study on media bias.
Justification for War in Iraq
Urban Legends About the Iraq War
More front page news NOT on the front page..
The Middle East Conflict
Federal response to Katrina was faster than Hugo,
Democrats at it again: Caught in another lie
The justification for war
'serious pressure' must be placed on Syria
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Politics

© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.