Forums / Discussion / General

169,399 total conversations in 5,525 threads

+ New Thread


Is Assad good or bad

Last posted Dec 11, 2013 at 03:24PM EST. Added Dec 06, 2013 at 03:40AM EST
26 posts from 11 users

Basically the global public is generally divided, some believe Assad is a tyrant while others believe the rebels are western backed terrorists and there is evidence for both sides on this so I’m confused

So which side is good or bad? (or if Assad is good or bad)

Last edited Dec 06, 2013 at 03:46AM EST
Dec 06, 2013 at 03:40AM EST
Quote

corshy1 wrote:

Basically the global public is generally divided, some believe Assad is a tyrant while others believe the rebels are western backed terrorists and there is evidence for both sides on this so I’m confused

So which side is good or bad? (or if Assad is good or bad)

This is not a black and white, right vs wrong, good vs bad conflict.

It’s a morally grey one where both sides are desperate to paint themselves as the hero and the other as the villain, just like every other war in history.

Dec 06, 2013 at 04:05AM EST
Quote

Lost Cause wrote:

This is not a black and white, right vs wrong, good vs bad conflict.

It’s a morally grey one where both sides are desperate to paint themselves as the hero and the other as the villain, just like every other war in history.

i guess so, maybe we should focus on ending the war in Syria already rather then focusing on who wins or who should win.

Last edited Dec 06, 2013 at 04:29AM EST
Dec 06, 2013 at 04:28AM EST
Quote

There really is no good side to this conflict.

Syria’s rebels and government are detestable in one way or another. On one hand, the government is unstable and militaristic, on the other the rebels have proven to be extreme by targeting christians in their region.

Neither side is also friendly with Israel and like every middle eastern country to exist, they threaten a United States ally and interests.

Dec 06, 2013 at 11:17AM EST
Quote

What I’ve gathered, there are no good or bad guys there. Those who are least bad have mostly fled the country already.

Dec 06, 2013 at 11:18AM EST
Quote

On my opinion, Assad is a asshead. badum tss
But seriously, we need to care less about the war and care more about the civilians.

Dec 06, 2013 at 11:22AM EST
Quote

It’s been established that Good and Evil are quite relative.

Both both sides are being dicks.

And being a dick is mostly inexcusable.

Dec 06, 2013 at 11:43AM EST
Quote

Assad is a bad man. I mean honestly, how can he not be a bad man at this point?
BBC articles if anyone is interested about the Syrian war.

A guide to who the rebel groups are.

I’d hate to say it, but the Kurdish group looks the most legit since I have that feeling they’re just really caught up in the whole problem. Surprised the jihad factions attack them simply because they have women in their group doing roles that women would not usually find themselves in.

Still my opinions are not much to go by since the whole war is really just one complex cluster fuck.

Last edited Dec 06, 2013 at 01:49PM EST
Dec 06, 2013 at 01:22PM EST

It’s a conflict in the middle east. I shall assume both sides are full of shit, until further notice.

Dec 06, 2013 at 04:21PM EST
Quote

Assad is a villain that doesn’t understand how to run a country and apparently cares more about holding power than working in the peoples interest.

This is evident from the fact that he murdered over 100,000 people and counting, just to maintain his rule

Go read this thread

Then read this

Then this

Last edited Dec 06, 2013 at 11:02PM EST
Dec 06, 2013 at 11:01PM EST
Quote

Even if people stop all wars from happening, they will just over populate the earth to an absurd extent that war would be helplessly inevitable. Maybe war is humanities way of self control? As terrible as it would be since there must be thousands of alternatives.

Dec 07, 2013 at 02:04AM EST

Regardless, if someones idea of running a country includes “Permit no political opposition, protest or free speech through an iron fist and brutally shoot, bomb and gas your entire nation into submission no matter what it costs, rather than settle political disputes through reasonable discourse”, that person counts as a tyrant to me and should never run a country.

Any one of us could be a national leader and respond to the disaster more rationally than he did.

It irritates me that this man is permitted to rule a nation after everything he has done to it, all because he buys Russian weapon stock and the Russians keep obfuscating the details of his crimes with irrelevant technicalities such as “is there proof he used chemical weapons?” when it should have been clearly obvious he was not fit for rule when his first response to anti-dictatorship protests was by sending soldiers to gun down the protesters and occupy their villages

Syria is now a devastated secular battleground between various extremist groups and it’s all Assads fault.

Maybe Syria will recover. It has survived being conquered and half-destroyed by countless civilizations over the millennia and this will be no exception. But only after it’s dictatorial/fascist rulers are gone.

Dec 07, 2013 at 03:05AM EST
Quote

what about this source from a Syrian

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130905234733AAtrHiF

Dec 07, 2013 at 04:58AM EST
Quote

Assad being somewhat tyrannous and the rebels being western backed terrorist are not mutually exclusive, although Syria would probably be much worst off if Al-Nusra(and quite a few other rebel factions for that matter) took control.

Dec 07, 2013 at 02:13PM EST
Quote

I feel that I’ve learned a lot about the world from the Syrian conflict.

Last edited Dec 07, 2013 at 05:49PM EST
Dec 07, 2013 at 05:45PM EST

@Corshy1

Skeptical. Yahoo answers isn’t known for being trustworthy. I know two factors to take into consideration:

1. Lies. You go look at the Syrian government website and it looks like nothing is going on at all. People are leading you into believing that one side is the ultimate good and one is evil and I’m wary of that. As already mentioned in this thread, we know that neither side in the conflict is in the right anymore.

2. One Syrian doesn’t speak for all. You are reading the reports from one guy on one side of the conflict.

The Syrian that I know and trust is the one that made those threads more than a year ago when the conflict was fresh and before it became muddled with deceit

Also that page talks about Americans being brainwashed but how about those that get pounded by regime propaganda?


western backed terrorist

I see this statement get thrown around a lot and I find it to be a misunderstanding

People are implying that the US is supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and their intention to turn Syria into a theocracy. A favorite for the “OBAMA EVIL HURR” crowd. Not really.

What the US supported was the Free Syrian Army, which originally formed from ordinary Syrian civilians who fought back against the Assad Regime after they protested against the regimes treatment of the populace and Assad responded by killing them

The terrorist factions did not jump into the fray until later

But when they did, they melded in with the fighting against the regime. As a result, people blurred the lines between the FSA and Al-Qaeda. Making the association that rebels = terrorist

Unfortunately those same people would be correct now. I don’t know if the original FSA exists anymore. Nowadays, after years of fighting; news from the original freedom fighters has vanished and the whole thing seems to really have dwindled down to a religious battle between terrorist factions and the US certainly isn’t supporting anyone

Last edited Dec 07, 2013 at 11:58PM EST
Dec 07, 2013 at 11:44PM EST
Quote

hmm, i think it’s most likely that both sides are now complete shit. like what @Dr Coolface said, I’ll assume both sides are complete shit entell further notice, I just hope this entire war ends.

Dec 08, 2013 at 02:57AM EST
Quote

Also, maybe one last source just to analyse peoples responses to this source (like if it’s completely stupid or not)

Dec 08, 2013 at 03:08AM EST
Quote

We can certainly agree that neither side is a hero

I didn’t like, and still don’t like how the regime responded violently to the first protests. I still feel that Assad could have stopped all this in the beginning, but made the worst possible choices.

However, if the rebels were ever once freedom fighters. It’s clear that they aren’t anymore. The evidence of them committing their own share of atrocities have been mounting since the start and that video above me does put forward some pretty damning evidence against the rebels (though the video’s claim that the US orchestrated the entire conflict is highly questionable and I demand they provide more evidence on that one). Either this is a case of terrorists hijacking the goal of the rebellion to their own end, or the rebels themselves became the monster they fought against or this was how they were are the start.

Who to support now? Well if Syria decided they want their old government back, so be it. I’m not one to say they are wrong.

Though I think Syria could stand for a more competent leader; It seems he is the only option Syria has. If the other options are warmongering terrorist groups that want to turn the nation into a fascist theocracy then it’s no wonder his support from the populace is returning.

Regardless of who started this, it’s probably going to be the regime that ends it and that seems to be all people want now.


In all seriousness guys….

Some of you may have seen me behave very vocally on the Syria issue here whenever it pops up. We’ve had many threads on this over the past two years and I’ve been very charged on all of them

Perhaps I feel so strongly about it mainly due to those first couple threads we had, when it all began, and I had to watch one of my own friends in Syria struggle with it. Narrowly avoid FSA drafting, Narrowly avoid death, leave his home, salvage a new life…

I got to hear him ping me on Steam chat just to ask me why us westerners wouldn’t stop this and why none of us seem to care

And even though I’m on the other side of world, I just wanted to show that I did care and that I wanted to do something, anything to help, even if all I can do is argue about it on the internet

But one of the last things he said to me on the subject was not to worry anymore. He’s moving on with his life. I should too. So after much thought, I’ve decided it’s time to follow his advice.

I’m not going to post on this subject anymore. Not here, not anywhere. Feel free to continue discussing without me.

Last edited Dec 08, 2013 at 06:07AM EST
Dec 08, 2013 at 06:05AM EST
Quote

Has anyone mentioned yet that the vast majority of the rebels aren’t native to Syria?

Dec 08, 2013 at 11:57AM EST
Quote

Luna Rogers wrote:

Has anyone mentioned yet that the vast majority of the rebels aren’t native to Syria?

This is an amazingly good mind-fuck point. Islamic terrorists are actually supporting this around the globe.

Last edited Dec 08, 2013 at 12:00PM EST
Dec 08, 2013 at 11:59AM EST

Sweatie Killer wrote:

Even if people stop all wars from happening, they will just over populate the earth to an absurd extent that war would be helplessly inevitable. Maybe war is humanities way of self control? As terrible as it would be since there must be thousands of alternatives.

War is kind of humanity’s way of bringing a conclusion to a dispute through the most extreme way possible. Thing is, Disease often kills more then wars. Humanity often finds a more unique way of killing ourselves then through any armed conflict.

Dec 08, 2013 at 12:09PM EST
Quote

Chickenhound the Cruel wrote:

War is kind of humanity’s way of bringing a conclusion to a dispute through the most extreme way possible. Thing is, Disease often kills more then wars. Humanity often finds a more unique way of killing ourselves then through any armed conflict.

Well wars really have not been on a large scale like the how American Civil War or like the Romans fought(holy fuck, the Romans were the machine back then). Although the medieval times in history were actually quite peaceful because leaders were quite retarded and didn’t know how to run or supply a large army. Population and medicine should also be a factor in the world as well.

Still none the less, it’s still violence which is bad, but humanity will always be at war is my main point.

Edit: a million edits later.

Last edited Dec 08, 2013 at 12:33PM EST
Dec 08, 2013 at 12:27PM EST

Sweatie Killer wrote:

Well wars really have not been on a large scale like the how American Civil War or like the Romans fought(holy fuck, the Romans were the machine back then). Although the medieval times in history were actually quite peaceful because leaders were quite retarded and didn’t know how to run or supply a large army. Population and medicine should also be a factor in the world as well.

Still none the less, it’s still violence which is bad, but humanity will always be at war is my main point.

Edit: a million edits later.

Meh, believe it or not, medieval european wars were often fought over the territorial disputes with muslims, succession crises, or internal warfare which is not as drastic as roman conquest, european imperial warfare, or the the scale of weaponization used during modern wars which is why european monarchies tend to be peaceful (that and the catholic church hated good christians fighting amongst themselves, unless it was the Holy Roman Empire, which they would make a exception).

War is sadly inevitable, not because we are all secretly dicks but mostly because of historical overlapping hatreds which come to head over time, territorial disputes, resources, and everyone’s favorite. . .the conflict of how one’s nation should be run and how other nations around them should be run.

In a world where every nation believes the only way to live successfully is to expand and control, which is also extremely true, war is inevitable.

Dec 08, 2013 at 01:33PM EST
Quote
Skeletor-sm

This thread is closed to new posts.

Old threads normally auto-close after 30 days of inactivity.

Why don't you start a new thread instead?

'lo! You must login or signup first!