Re: Saudia seeks Pakistani help for Syria War
Pakistan should send special ops to kill Assad.. simple assassination could save another million to die.. i hope the new COAS will listen to the plight of the oppressed humanity in Syria and help get rid of Assad's brutal regime. InshaAllah..
Re: Saudia seeks Pakistani help for Syria War
It is interesting that you refuse to answer the question picoico.if we can understand their motive then that can give an indication of what is to come. However the last part of your post does answer it really. The Saudis are against Assad because he is close to Iran not because they care about the people of Syria.
Stop. I did answer the question the first time it was asked. The last part of your message...we're in agreement. So what? I maintain the question is meaningless. What is important is consequences of intervention.
Re: Saudia seeks Pakistani help for Syria War
Stop. I did answer the question the first time it was asked. The last part of your message...we're in agreement. So what? I maintain the question is meaningless. What is important is consequences of intervention.
What are the consequences of the intervention? From what I have understood from many Muslims and the western media is that the Saudi backed militants have often been enforcing their own laws upon the people of Syria and desecrating holy sites. If they can do this now whilst fighting an enemy what could they possibly do if they gain full control of the country? So how is replacing one oppressive regime with another?
Saudi seem to be very similar to America in Iraq who only wanted to destroy their enemy Saddam and couldn't care less about the people.
Maybe I'm missing something though picoico and you see a different consequence of the intervention.
Re: Saudia seeks Pakistani help for Syria War
What are the consequences of the intervention?
As I mentioned before the last time you asked, I argue the wholesale slaughter of civilian populations as his father had done. So now, with a precedent set by this regime, what arguments do you have that it would be anything different?
[quote]
From what I have understood from many Muslims and the western media is that the Saudi backed militants have often been enforcing their own laws upon the people of Syria and desecrating holy sites.
[/quote]
It was my understanding that these were the Al Qaeda affiliated groups, but in any case as deplorable as that is are you seriously suggesting that those are on par (or worse) than the slaughter of tens of thousands, and displacements of millions?
[quote]
If they can do this now whilst fighting an enemy what could they possibly do if they gain full control of the country? So how is replacing one oppressive regime with another?
[/quote]
A very good question. Aside from a quid pro quo with the current actors, what is the best option for Syria? Certainly not Assad...certainly not a band of merry foreigners from all over the place who have no stake in the nation. My hopes were with native Syrian rebels, notably the Free Syrian Army...a chance was there to apply pressure to have all other groups serve under them...but instead they have been bypassed. It's a mistake. But intervention was required to prevent mass slaughter. History shows that quite clearly.
[quote]
Saudi seem to be very similar to America in Iraq who only wanted to destroy their enemy Saddam and couldn't care less about the people.
[/quote]
True. But the difference is that the Saudi intervention is very timely. LOL, It took the Americans some decades to realize Saddam was a brute...
Tomorrow if Pakistan starts killing Hindus and India attacks Pakistan where will you stand? Do you know where Egypt is?
And Al-Qaeda affliated groups, who armed them? 
Honestly, no offence I don’t know what world do you live in.
Saudi Arabia wants Syria as another Taliban-style Afghanistan and piciciio thinks that’s preferable to Assad’s last 30 years. 
One could argue the ‘‘intervention’’ was what caused this mass slaughter. Had there been no armed gangs running around there would be no war. You cannot pump infinite weapons into a country, weapons that land in very shift and dodgy groups’ hand and then point fingers when the carnage and the shooting starts. The ideal would have been to block off Syria and use sanctions and such. With no oil the dictator would have folded. Would it have worked? Maybe yes maybe not.Would it have caused this disaster right now where one hand government is butchering anyone in sight and you have a gazillion groups beheading anyone who’s not a Sunni. Its gone to absurd levels and ALL parties including Russia and KSA are NOT helping. Atleast admit that.
As a result the ONLY innocent part being ripped apart is the Syrian people. Your ‘‘intervention’’ is just making it worse and is now useless as the FSA is being ignored and admist all the confusing content in your post you make one valid point, the legit group, and I use the word legit very loosely, is the FSA. It is needlessly being sidelined.
Lets take a guess who its being sidelined by.
Re: Saudia seeks Pakistani help for Syria War
To me it seems a bit far fetched to suggest that because Bashars father committed such sins that he would do the same. I think most will agree that the fanatical groups are making things far worse. The "intervention" by Saudi backed fanatical groups has given the FSA some breathing space who would have probably been otherwise overwhelmed by now. The war is just dragging out this stalemate is making things far worse. Maybe the Saudis should send in their own troops rather conspiring like cowards to get British, American and Pakistani soldiers to risk their lives.
Re: Saudia seeks Pakistani help for Syria War
To me it seems a bit far fetched to suggest that because Bashars father committed such sins that he would do the same.
Why? I think quite the opposite. It is by definition a precedence of the very same regime. The body politic may be different but not the nature of the politics, the separation of powers, the dynamic between the various sects. So why is it far fetched? What's different?
[quote]
I think most will agree that the fanatical groups are making things far worse.
[/quote]
Well yes, because "most" tend to equate forcing people to act a certain way, wear certain clothes, etc. with dropping barrel bombs on civilian areas, strafing hospitals, etc. Pardon me if "others" are not impressed by "most". I will agree, though, they're not making things better, but the lack of their presence would have had ominous implications. Again, history teaches us that.
[quote]
The "intervention" by Saudi backed fanatical groups has given the FSA some breathing space who would have probably been otherwise overwhelmed by now. The war is just dragging out this stalemate is making things far worse. Maybe the Saudis should send in their own troops rather conspiring like cowards to get British, American and Pakistani soldiers to risk their lives.
[/QUOTE]
It's funny you exclude Hezbullah, Irani rev. guards and Iraqi irregulars who are bolstering Assad's army...an oversight, sir?
Anyway, I see no way that Syria can return to a status quo under al-Assad.
Re: Saudia seeks Pakistani help for Syria War
Tomorrow if Pakistan starts killing Hindus and India attacks Pakistan where will you stand? Do you know where Egypt is?
If tomorrow, Hindus in India starts a mass exterminations, we're to sit on our hands? That's insane. As for Pakistan killing Hindus, I would expect an Indian response. I certainly wouldn't support Pakistan in mindless slaughter, so what's your angle here? For now you'll kindly address the best way to deal with the very real extermination of civilians by the hand of Assad...you either support it or you don't...I've reduced this question I've asked so many times to a binary.... yes or no? The mantra was that it was improper to interfere in another country. I don't buy it.
[quote]
Saudi Arabia wants Syria as another Taliban-style Afghanistan and piciciio thinks that's preferable to Assad's last 30 years.
[/quote]
LOL...last 30 years. I think what happened in the last few years is a bit of a game changer. LOL...taliban style...ha...didn't know the Free Syrian Army had that as part of their mandate. .
[quote]
One could argue the ''intervention'' was what caused this mass slaughter.
[/quote]
No. One cannot. In-spite of being a force now, foreign militants were not major actors at the onset of the conflict. The FSF, and army defectors were the major actors at the start. Saudi involvement is said to have begun in December of 2012, well after the conflict started. So although the foreign fighters are a presence now, they did not in any way start the fire, so to speak.
Second, the implication is that it's okay for Assad to slaughter civilians as long as there are foreign fighters in the country...I don't quite follow that logic.
[quote]
Had there been no armed gangs running around there would be no war. You cannot pump infinite weapons into a country, weapons that land in very shift and dodgy groups' hand and then point fingers when the carnage and the shooting starts.
[/quote]
Had the rebels not been armed, had their been no resistance in general, the discussion would have been on if there are any mass graves in Aleppo and other such regions.
[quote]
The ideal would have been to block off Syria and use sanctions and such.
[/quote]
Perhaps, but again, this conflict did not start externally. This reminds me of the nonsense people spoke about the Bosnians. Concentration camps, mass graves...no problem. Arm the Bosnians...heavens no! When Serb atrocities were brought up, some git would always point out "yeah, but there was this Bosnian who shot this unarmed Serb...", as if it was in some way the same thing. So then the PC among the media came up with a laughable phrase: "atrocities are being committed on both sides". That's lying by omission.
Now perhaps there's an argument to be made here. There are no concentration camps in Syria. No mass graves found in Syria. Yet history, a recent gas attack, and indiscriminate shelling put Assad up in Serb territory as far as I'm concerned. Tactics are different, the result is the same.
[quote]
Maybe yes maybe not.Would it have caused this disaster right now where one hand government is butchering anyone in sight and you have a gazillion groups beheading anyone who's not a Sunni. Its gone to absurd levels and ALL parties including Russia and KSA are NOT helping. Atleast admit that.
[/quote]
In the long run, yes. They are not. Increasingly so. I do doggedly stick to my stance that an armed opposition (preferably Syrian) is what stands between being dead and alive for a whole whack load of civilians. Hence my repeated refrain: on Syria, Saudi did right in supporting the rebels. My attitude is hardening as of mid to late December, as Syrian rebels are aggressively being sidelined.
But nonetheless, I am unaware of any atrocity the rebels (Syrian or otherwise) have committed that rivals what Assad has done. The "best" people seem to come up with are scattered incidents of abuse and murder...bad as it is, and loathsome as it is, it simply does not compare to a gas attack and shelling of civilian areas. I mean, no comparison. What so ever. The difference is in systemic behavior. Assad is a complete psychopath with a sophisticated army at his disposal.
The rebels have not demonstrated that kind of insanity. I admit, it may well be the lacking of capacity to inflict that kind of harm. Good...let them never have that capacity. But what would he have done without any resistance? Without even a threat of more direct involvement by other nations?
Re: Saudia seeks Pakistani help for Syria War
So you will sit back while India attacks Pakistan? So you’re a supporter of India’s attack in 1971 too? How do you think you will be viewed by the Pakistani public? For me this is all very relevant, if you can’t have a uniform stance all across the board then the whole POV becomes very hypocritical.
Secondly, if there was no intervention then mass graves? So Assad would go plundering his country like a maniac to kill random people when he’s sat quietly for 30 years, why? And chalo, rebellion ho gya hai toh ab konsa bohat peace hai, you have mass graves all over the country ten fold. :smack:
Thirdly, on record, probably the fifth time I am saying it to you Assad for me is a war criminal. However that does not give any nation the right to meddle in any country. And when it come to Saudis they have a bad habit, I don’t see them meddling into Egypt right now where the army is running riot, in fact over there the Saudis are calling the protestors terrorists.
http://www.paklinks.com/gsmedia/thumbs/64143/lol.gif
Fourthly, since you are ‘‘dogged’’ supporter, to quote you, of the armed rebels did you support US too when it invaded Iraq, you know getting rid of the dictator? If no then your whole stance is nothing short of hypocritical, an if yes you must be the only Muslim to express this POV. He after all wiped out massive amounts of people too all over Iraq.
Fifth, you are unaware of any atrocities committed by the rebels? Are you even following the war?
BBC News - Syria rebels executed civilians, says Human Rights Watch
Rebels massacre 190 people
Thousands flee, killed, their villages destroyed
Syria Rebels ‘Committing War Crimes’, Amnesty Urges Caution Over Arming Opposition
‘‘Human rights campaigners have warned that Syrian opposition fighters are conducting summary killings, using child soldiers, sectarian violence and committing war crimes, as well as their pro-government foes, cautioning governments about arming the rebel groups.’’
Rebels involved in atrocities
speak-language-Jesus.html
Rebels killing Christians
Does this count? Or is the amount too low for you to brush it under the carpet? Do you want me to go on and keep giving you links? To make indepth comments about this war yet remain completely oblivious to the well heard news about rebel massacres spread around the globe via words, pictures and videos and you say you’re not aware of them? Its astonishing. You seem to have two answers, one first you deny any crime by the rebels and then begrudignly compare the numbers and say oh but its not like Assad. I wonder which stance you will pick this time. You do know these scumbags commiting crimes aren’t even in power yet, give them more and you’ll have another Assad after this one’s gone. Who knows maybe they’ll turn their rage against Christians in Syria, which they’re doing now. What then? You’ll replace one religious hater with the next bigot. Masla te ohi hai.
What good has removing the regimes in Libya, Iraq or Afghanistan been? Hundreds of thousands wiped out, countries ravaged by civil war,armed groups running amok and entire reigions destablisied.
I am sorry, for me dictatorship is better than the brutal alternative.