Syrian Rebel 'Cuts Out Soldier's Heart'

Our government are too busy figuring out new expense scams to care tbh. We need more heart extraction in Westminster, that'll liven them up
 
We should stop calling them rebels and start calling them what they really are - terrorists. Terrorists that, yet again as with Libya, our government and the US government want to give support and weapons to. Great idea, because that won't backfire at all - Libya has turned out nicely since our intervention hasn't it? Oh wait, no, no it hasn't...
 
While symbolically its a nasty gesture I'm more worried about torture, summary executions and mass killings of civilians than the attention being diverted to some leader of a dubious rebel group and what he's done to someone who's already dead...

Having said that, this is the same group that was filmed executing a Syrian soldier a few months back. It isn't great when the side fighting an oppressive regime also has a bunch of extremists on their side too... makes the prospect of arming/supporting the rebels rather less appealing. Then again Saudi and Quatar are seemingly happy to help them... and not because they're into human rights but rather because like this rebel commander they're Sunnis and they dislike the Shia regime...

Whole thing is turning into a proxy campaign for various regimes backing opposing sides along sectarian/ideological lines Hezbollah and Iran on one side and supplies/support from Russia - the gulf states on the other side and logistic/technical support from western countries. + of course occasional intervention from Israel which perhaps isn't so welcome from the perspective of the Gulf states in spite of the common enemy.
 
Last edited:
PhysicsMan94 said:
We should stop calling them rebels and start calling them what they really are - terrorists. Terrorists that, yet again as with Libya, our government and the US government want to give support and weapons to. Great idea, because that won't backfire at all - Libya has turned out nicely since our intervention hasn't it? Oh wait, no, no it hasn't...
Click to expand...

It would have turned out even worse had it not been for our intervention... no country is going to look particularly nice after a civil war tbh....

Yeah terrorists perhaps is appropriate for some of the groups on the side of the rebels... though its both wrong and oversimplifying matters to label the entire lot as such.
 
dowie said:
It would have turned out even worse had it not been for our intervention... no country is going to look particularly nice after a civil war tbh....

Yeah terrorists perhaps is appropriate for some of the groups on the side of the rebels... though its both wrong and oversimplifying matters to label the entire lot as such.
Click to expand...



Libya wouldn't have had a civil war if we hadn't effectively provided the Rebels with an Air Force! Gadaffi would have crushed it in days (As it was, despite the rebels having air support, it was still a close run thing)
 
PhysicsMan94 said:
We should stop calling them rebels and start calling them what they really are - terrorists. Terrorists that, yet again as with Libya, our government and the US government want to give support and weapons to. Great idea, because that won't backfire at all - Libya has turned out nicely since our intervention hasn't it? Oh wait, no, no it hasn't...
Click to expand...
 
dowie said:
While symbolically its a nasty gesture I'm more worried about torture, summary executions and mass killings of civilians than the attention being diverted to some leader of a dubious rebel group and what he's done to someone who's already dead...
Click to expand...
So am I, to make it worse our country is helping these people. ;)
 
So the Syrian government uses chemical weapons against its own people and the West hardly bats an eye-lid, yet this video causes outrage and cries of "war crime"? :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom