ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.

Dis86 · 19 Dec 2016 at 15:05

ubersonic said:
So basically, the guy in charge of the UN whined that the election should be delayed due to the rebellion (in which case western leaders would have claimed Assad was no longer the legitimate leader due to missing an election).

But the independent monitors who actually went there form a dozen countries to observer the election (including the president of the World Peace Council) found no fault and some even praised the way it had been conducted despite the issues presented by the rebels.

Which part did you fail at reading?

"international delegation led by allies of Assad"? That bit?

ubersonic · 19 Dec 2016 at 15:08

Dis86 said:
Which part did you fail at reading?

"international delegation led by allies of Assad"? That bit?

Brazil and America are not allies of Assad.

Harlequin · 19 Dec 2016 at 15:18

Dis86 said:
No it wasn't. You've completely made that up.

"Attempts to hold an election under the circumstances of an ongoing civil war were criticized by UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon,[21] and it was widely reported that the elections lacked independent election monitoring.[22] However, an international delegation led by allies of Assad[23] from countries including Brazil, Iran, Russia, and Venezuela[24] issued a statement claiming the election was "free, fair and transparent".[25]"

citing wiki as a legit source /facepalm

edit:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/international-observers-in-syria-elections/5385231

Delegations from Russia, Iran, Democratic Korea, Pakistan, Canada and the US, Venezuela, Brazil and Bolivia have been observing the presidential election process at polling stations in various provinces.

and

The delegation members went to Damascus, Lattakia, Tartous, Aleppo and Sweida and Homs.

Harlequin · 19 Dec 2016 at 15:22

Canada , USA brazil and boliva are not Syrian allies

also - don't think Venezuela is either tbh

Dis86 · 19 Dec 2016 at 15:23

ubersonic said:
Brazil and America are not allies of Assad.

"This was a welcome departure from Brazil’s stance in the Security Council, where it abstained on October 4 on a resolution condemning the abuses, enabling Russia and China to veto it. Syria’s UN ambassador claimed diplomatic victory, and the killing accelerated."

They ain't exactly objectors to his policies...

Harlequin · 19 Dec 2016 at 15:25

Dis86 said:
"This was a welcome departure from Brazil’s stance in the Security Council, where it abstained on October 4 on a resolution condemning the abuses, enabling Russia and China to veto it. Syria’s UN ambassador claimed diplomatic victory, and the killing accelerated."

They ain't exactly objectors to his policies...

The resolution was pretty timid. It “strongly condemns the continued grave and systematic human rights violations by the Syrian authorities.” It did not threaten sanctions or military intervention if Syria didn't comply, only that “other options” would be considered. Besides Brazil and India, Lebanon and South Africa also abstained.

ubersonic · 19 Dec 2016 at 15:44

Dis86 said:
They ain't exactly objectors to his policies...

So you consider Ireland and Switzerland to be supporters of Hitler then? Did the USA support him until Pearl Harbor? They were all neutral too.

And like I said, out of the 32 countries the observers came from there were multiple Americans, who shared the view of them being legitimate:

The panelists all concluded that the election had been fairly conducted. Bello said: “Observing the popular support for the Syrian election was a moving experience. The people voted from their hearts. Here in the West … little more than 50 percent of the population votes. The overwhelming response of the people inside and outside of Syria sent a powerful message to the world of loyalty to their country and to the government that is currently safeguarding it.” She observed that representatives of all three major candidates were at every polling place.

Williams contrasted the Syrian election to the ongoing suppression of the voting rights of oppressed and low-income people in the U.S. All described how throughout Syria, the support for President Bashar al-Assad was massive, leaving no doubt that he was the legitimate victor.

Iosbaker declared that his experiences “showed me what these elections represent: a defeat for the U.S., NATO and the Gulf states, and a victory for the Syrian people.”

-----------

To be perfectly blunt, Syria has a population of roughly 23 million people, just because ~125-150k of them are engaged in an armed uprising isn't going to affect the election results all that much. Even if refugees are prohibited from voting in the US and Germany.

Harlequin · 19 Dec 2016 at 16:06

The vote was a hair under 6 years ago as well.... things changed since then!

ubersonic · 19 Dec 2016 at 16:17

Harlequin said:
The vote was a hair under 6 years ago as well.... things changed since then!

Which vote?

The last presidential election was in 2014 (every 7 years) and the last parliamentary election was this year (every 4 years).

Harlequin · 19 Dec 2016 at 16:21

ubersonic said:
Which vote?

The last presidential election was in 2014 (every 7 years) and the last parliamentary election was this year (every 4 years).

the UN vote that Dis86 mentioned

ubersonic · 19 Dec 2016 at 16:27

Harlequin said:
the UN vote that Dis86 mentioned

Ahh I see.

b0redj0rd · 19 Dec 2016 at 17:12

I don't know if its 'ISIS' related or if it deserves its own thread but the Russian ambassador has just been shot dead in Turkey.

hXXp://www.reuters.com/article/us-turkey-russia-diplomacy-idUSKBN1481RE

Mr Jack · 19 Dec 2016 at 17:23

ubersonic said:
Are you being silly or do you actually mean that? Dude their elections were legitimate, even western sources and their enemies (I.E Qatar) found no fault with them. Hell they even made it possible for refugees who had left the country to vote from abroad (NB: This wasn't possible in the USA because they banned Syrians form taking part).

No, they literally made the results up: The figures for votes are derived from the figures for percentages. The percentage vote figures - the official ones released by Syria - are accurate to within a single voter. How likely do you think that is to happen in real elections? The only way it can happen is if they made up the voter totals from the percentages they wanted to release.

There have never been free and fair elections in Syria. It is not a democracy.

Mr Jack · 19 Dec 2016 at 17:24

Harlequin said:
says a german....

I'm curious as to why you think a German would be less capable of commenting on Syrian elections?

Harlequin · 19 Dec 2016 at 17:28

Mr Jack said:
No, they literally made the results up: The figures for votes are derived from the figures for percentages. The percentage vote figures - the official ones released by Syria - are accurate to within a single voter. How likely do you think that is to happen in real elections? The only way it can happen is if they made up the voter totals from the percentages they wanted to release.

There have never been free and fair elections in Syria. It is not a democracy.

i think you had better tell the independent observers then , that you - a keyboard warrior knows more than they did - and they were in country

Dis86 · 19 Dec 2016 at 17:29

Harlequin said:
i think you had better tell the independent observers then , that you - a keyboard warrior knows more than they did - and they were in country

Except as has already been shown they weren't independent. They were lead by Syrias allies.

Don't you have the sense to think that perhaps they were only taken to areas at times when perhaps things were looking good?

Harlequin · 19 Dec 2016 at 17:30

Dis86 said:
Except as has already been shown they weren't independent. They were lead by Syrias allies.

Don't you have the sense to think that perhaps they were only taken to areas at times when perhaps things were looking good?

i have already cited they had USA and Canadian observers - who most certainly are not allies.

you haven't given any support to your claims at all.

Dis86 · 19 Dec 2016 at 17:31

Harlequin said:
i have already cited they had USA and Canadian observers - who most certainly are not allies.

you haven't given any support to your claims at all.

fml...are you unable to read?

LEAD they were LEAD by Syrias allies.

I've also listed a statement from Ban Ki Moon who stated they were crooked. You completely neglected that one though...

ThestigGT999 · 19 Dec 2016 at 17:32

Mr Jack said:
No, they literally made the results up: The figures for votes are derived from the figures for percentages. The percentage vote figures - the official ones released by Syria - are accurate to within a single voter. How likely do you think that is to happen in real elections? The only way it can happen is if they made up the voter totals from the percentages they wanted to release.

There have never been free and fair elections in Syria. It is not a democracy.

did you watch the Syrian Elections Observers Report to UN?

Harlequin · 19 Dec 2016 at 17:35

Dis86 said:
fml...are you unable to read?

LEAD they were LEAD by Syrias allies.

I've also listed a statement from Ban Ki Moon who stated they were crooked. You completely neglected that one though...

did you watch the UN observers report? the UN report counters everything you have said