ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.
- Thread starter RoboCod
- Start date
a little history lesson
half a million children killed by sanctions before the illegal and immoral invasion. both the sanctions and invasion were backed by the UK all based on lies.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=omnskeu-puE
total deaths from Western interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan since the 1990s - from direct killings and the longer-term impact of war-imposed deprivation - likely constitute around 4 million (2 million in Iraq from 1991-2003, plus 2 million from the “war on terror”), and could be as high as 6-8 million people when accounting for higher avoidable death estimates in Afghanistan.
http://www.middleeasteye.net/column...ave-killed-four-million-muslims-1990-39149394
bush and blair are war criminals and it will be a great day for mankind when they face justice and swing from the gallows....doubt they will face it with the bravery of saddam most likely they will cry and **** their underwear.
Assad another war criminal has killed over 250,000 civilians.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 8,109
- Location
- one nation under sony
fixed
Remind me, who is it who has dropped barrel bombs and chemical weapons on his own people? Assad has killed around 10 times as many people as ISIS have in Syria. Assad is a brutal tyrant of the worst kind. He is a monster willing to slaughter his own people to keep his grip on power.
And if you think this post is somehow a defence of ISIS, learn to think.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 8,109
- Location
- one nation under sony
only in jihadists held areas where they are using the civilians as human shields
The barrel bombs were dropped by the Syrian air force, and are aimed at rebels/ISIS, they aren't just flying around dropping them randomly, as in addition to being stupid from a tactical POV that would be a colossal waste of resources. When your enemy is using human shields there will always be civilian casualties, it's no different for us in Iraq/Afghan/Libya and even Syria.
The only people proven to have used chemical weapons in Syria thus far are the rebels (mainly because they were dumb enough to put it on social media).
When you say Assad you mean loyalist forces, and considering they greatly outnumber both the rebels and ISIS it makes sense they would have the higher kill count due to winning.
He was an eye doctor from London who was forced to return home to lead after his brother died, if he was so evil then why did his party win the last election so well?
The rebels may be Syrian, but they are also an armed group trying to oppose the government and indiscriminately murdering those opposed to them, how do you think that would play out in a first world country? Oh yeah, the army would kill them and the legitimate government would remain in power
look forward to seeing assad get his just deserts when the public get their hands on him, his father was a blood thirsty dictator too who massacred over 20000 civilians in homs in 1982.
of course the sick islamophobes who like to see muslims get massacred will like him. what other reason would they have to support someone who killed over a quarter of a million of his own people.
plenty of nutters out there idolise hitler too.
of course the sick islamophobes who like to see muslims get massacred will like him. what other reason would they have to support someone who killed over a quarter of a million of his own people.
plenty of nutters out there idolise hitler too.
Last edited:
there will be celebrations in the streets - as there was in Turkey when the coup by the army was put down.
Are you saying he is a good man then? Clearly he is not. He is a murderer of innocents, a brutal dictator, a fascist totalitarian leader who does not care for his citizens. The fact that you even try to defend him says a lot about your character. Disgusting to be honest.
The rebels may be Syrian, but they are also an armed group trying to oppose the government and indiscriminately murdering those opposed to them, how do you think that would play out in a first world country? Oh yeah, the army would kill them and the legitimate government would remain in power
Take your roll eyes and hide them where the sun don't shine. When the allies fought Germany in WW2 we were fighting fascism. Syria today is no different. It's not a democratic state it is a brutal dictatorship and anyone who tries to defend it is by definition abhorrent.
Some one has a very short memory - the west likes to install dictators of its own - Iran in the 1960`s with the Shah. look how him and his brutal (to use your phrase) regime worked out.
the savak make ISIS look like a childrens party
the savak make ISIS look like a childrens party
Doesn't matter - you`ve broken it down to `there` dictator rather than `our` dictator
saddam Hussein used to be very close friends with the USA - who turned a blind eye when they used WMD`s on Iran (which didn't respond with there own either)
saddam Hussein used to be very close friends with the USA - who turned a blind eye when they used WMD`s on Iran (which didn't respond with there own either)
Why are you derailing this thread by boringly banging on about Iran. I'm not talking about Iran. This thread is not about Iran. Iran what? Seriously stop trolling kid.
No, leaders of countries rarely are, just that he isn't a dictator/manic as some western media outlets attempt to portray him.
I doubt he has personally killed anyone, if you think he is personally responsible for any civilians killed as collateral damage during the war against the extremists then you should probably look into every war that has ever happened. I am not saying that civilian losses are good, but holding leaders responsible for them when they didn't even start the conflict is silly.
Facist dictators, in general, are not elected.
What? that I don't blindly believe any random nonsense I read in the tabloids?
What do you think the Syrian loyalists are fighting? The extremists want to turn Syria into an Islamic state, revoke women's rights, etc.
Apart from the bit where Syria is secular and treats Jews significantly better (at least in the areas not under rebel/ISIS control), and again dictatorships don't let the people democratically elect their leaders.
It's called blowing your argument out of the water, granted it wasn't a hard task but he did it quite impressively
It's called blowing your argument out of the water, granted it wasn't a hard task but he did it quite impressively
You've brought nothing to the discussion aside from ignorance. It is your argument that is fallacious and easily fact checked to be wrong. It's not my job to educate you, you need to do that for your self. I'd start now if I were you because frankly, what you have posted is highly embarrassing.
Because Syria is not a democracy. As should be completely obvious from the first part of the quoted paragraph: in a democracy, the leader is not replaced by their brother!
Your whole post ignores the fact that Assad started the war by firing on peaceful protestors.