Is Syria now about to blow?

[Riadach]

So what's your 'logic'? That some of the most undemocratic regimes on earth should impose regime change on all states where - by your own admission - only a minority are opposed to the government? If your 'logic' were followed, the UNSC would be voting on resolutions like this every other week.

I believe that governments should be held to account when they attack and murder their citizens, be they Syrians, Palestinians or Libyans. Exactly how will depend on that situation. Them having majority support should be no excuse for murdering those who do not support them.

Like I said, the Egyptian revolution is unfinished, but mass people power did get rid of a brutal dictator, even if the transition is by no means complete. Such mass protests simply have not taken place in Syria.

They have, and have been shot off the streets. The Egyptian revolution would not have succeeded without the support of the Army. Assad, however, has created a situation where they majority of the Army sees its fate entwined with his. That creates an obstacle that ensures that no revolution to succeed.

Are you joking? The army was (and is) the regime in Egypt. The regime is/was a military regime.

That doesn't help your point.

it also seems that Assad is facing a heavily armed (mainly by the Saudis and Qatari) opposition.

After eleven months, you are surprised? You expected him to be driven out by placards did you?

I normally like your posts, but this is a complete clanrickardism not worthy of a response.
.

I think it is completely true. If this was a Palestinian city shelled last night, you would be calling for Israeli withdrawal and Palestinian independence, as would I. The fact, however, that the West wants this crime, and others punished, means you automatically take the side of a viciously brutal (to your own admission) regime. One cannot help but notice the disparity.

[Interista]

[QUOTE=Riadach;4903431]

I believe that governments should be held to account when they attack and murder their citizens, be they Syrians, Palestinians or Libyans.

Or Bahrainis?

They have, and have been shot off the streets. The Egyptian revolution would not have succeeded without the support of the Army.

Huh? The army IS the regime in Egypt!

After eleven months, you are surprised? You expected him to be driven out by placards did you?

My point is that there was no genuine mass anti-regime movement in Syria. What we are seeing is a civil war, where foreign powers have taken sides. This is not a popular uprising, and never has been.

I think it is completely true. If this was a Palestinian city shelled last night, you would be calling for Israeli withdrawal and Palestinian independence, as would I

Then you are talking about a foreign state attacking another. Not the same thing at all.

The fact, however, that the West wants this crime, and others punished, means you automatically take the side of a viciously brutal (to your own admission) regime. One cannot help but notice the disparity.

As I've said, I'd love to see the Syrian regime removed, but not to install a Qatari client. Like I said, I'm not going to argue your clanrickardisms. You can believe them if you want.

[Riadach]

Or Bahrainis?

Absolutely. So why not Syrians? Or would you prefer Syrians not to get protection, because Bahrainis didn't? Even so, there is as yet, little comparison between the ferocity in one compared to the other.

Huh? The army IS the regime in Egypt!

And despite widespread popular support, the people did not overthrow it. What does that say about your earlier statement that popular support is enough to overthrow these regimes?

My point is that there was no genuine mass anti-regime movement in Syria. What we are seeing is a civil war, where foreign powers have taken sides. This is not a popular uprising, and never has been.

But there was. The civil war has resulted in a response to how the genuine anti-regime movement was handled in Syria.

Then you are talking about a foreign state attacking another. Not the same thing at all.

I'm really surprised at the amount of people who hold the right of states not to be violated, above the right to life of those citizens who live within. It should make no difference by whom they were killed, we should call for action regardless, reprimanding those responsible by whatever means possible.

As I've said, I'd love to see the Syrian regime removed, but not to install a Qatari client. Like I said, I'm not going to argue your clanrickardisms. You can believe them if you want.

And with that conspiracy theory, you're a condemning a large cohort of Syrians to death.

[Interista]

]Absolutely. So why not Syrians? Or would you prefer Syrians not to get protection, because Bahrainis didn't

No. I'd prefer not to see Syria 'rescued' by the VERY SAME regimes who are responsible for the brutal crackdown in Bahrain.

Even so, there is as yet, little comparison between the ferocity in one compared to the other.

I think what you mean is that there's little comparison to the uncritical and constant coverage given to the oppostion in one country, but not the other.

And despite widespread popular support, the people did not overthrow it. What does that say about your earlier statement that popular support is enough to overthrow these regimes?

It was enough to get rid of Mubarak and Ben Ali. And as I've said, the revolution is not complete but I'm confident that people power in Egypt will effect a complete regime change, however much the VERY SAME countries getting all sanctimonious about Syria are, right at this moment, actively working to prevent it.

But there was. The civil war has resulted in a response to how the genuine anti-regime movement was handled in Syria.

Yes indeed. A genuine but marginal anti-regime movement was hijacked and armed by conservative Arab powers and their western sponsors.

Now, where have we seen that before?

I'm really surprised at the amount of people who hold the right of states not to be violated, above the right to life of those citizens who live within. It should make no difference by whom they were killed, we should call for action regardless, reprimanding those responsible by whatever means possible.

And like I say, if that's the logic you hold, 'we' would be doing nothing else but overthrowing regimes all over the world.

And with that conspiracy theory, you're a condemning a large cohort of Syrians to death.

Sorry, Ms Rice. The emotional blackmail just ain't cutting it today.

[Riadach]

No. I'd prefer not to see Syria 'rescued' by the VERY SAME regimes who are responsible for the brutal crackdown in Bahrain.

So no resolution? Let them die!

I think what you mean is that there's little comparison to the uncritical and constant coverage given to the oppostion in one country, but not the other.

Show me where it is claimed that 5,000+ have been murdered by the state in Bahrain.

It was enough to get rid of Mubarak and Ben Ali. And as I've said, the revolution is not complete but I'm confident that people power in Egypt will effect a complete regime change, however much the VERY SAME countries getting all sanctimonious about Syria are, right at this moment, actively working to prevent it.

But as you said, Mubarak wasn't the regime in Egypt, Mubarak and the army were. The army is still in control, so it seems popular protest were not enough to effect a regime change.

Yes indeed. A genuine but marginal anti-regime movement was hijacked and armed by conservative Arab powers and their western sponsors.

Marginal seems to be a subjective view. One perhaps that suits your own prejudices. Would you have preferred if this anti-regime movement was still shot at and driven from the streets?

And like I say, if that's the logic you hold, 'we' would be doing nothing else but overthrowing regimes all over the world.

Overthrowal isn't in only response. If I recall correctly, the resolutions of the S.C. aren't limited to Syria.

Sorry, Ms Rice. The emotional blackmail just ain't cutting it today.

How about I dress the syrians up as Palestinians, and Assad as Netanyahu, I'm sure you'd change your tune then.

[Interista]

[QUOTE=Riadach;4903555]

So no resolution? Let them die!

Seriously, Ms. Rice, it ain't working.....

Show me where it is claimed that 5,000+ have been murdered by the state in Bahrain.

Oh FFS! There are about 20 times as many people in Syria than in Bahrain, and many of the latter's population are Asian workers.

But as you said, Mubarak wasn't the regime in Egypt, Mubarak and the army were. The army is still in control, so it seems popular protest were not enough to effect a regime change.

Not yet, particularly with those crusaders for freedom, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and America, working very hard to prevent it. But as I say, I'm confident that over time, it will.

Marginal seems to be a subjective view. One perhaps that suits your own prejudices. Would you have preferred if this anti-regime movement was still shot at and driven from the streets?

Another example of what I alluded to on the other thread about how it's so hard to discuss anything with you on this topic. I don't want to see anyone shot, thank you very much. However, this was clearly not a mass popular movement.

Overthrowal isn't in only response. If I recall correctly, the resolutions of the S.C. aren't limited to Syria

No. Iran also gets a look in. But rarely any US allies.Funny that.

How about I dress the syrians up as Palestinians, and Assad as Netanyahu, I'm sure you'd change your tune then.

Or how about you stop creating hysterical strawmen?

[Riadach]

Seriously, Ms. Rice, it ain't working.....

You admit that he is committing brutal massacres, and you don't want a resolution. So, clearly, you're ok with them dying. It's very difficult to square this with your claims of support for Arab rights in Palestine and Iraw.

Oh FFS! There are about 20 times as many people in Syria than in Bahrain, and many of the latter's population are Asian workers.

Still, at least 50 times the casualty numbers from any estimate I have heard.

Not yet, particularly with those crusaders for freedom, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and America, working very hard to prevent it. But as I say, I'm confident that over time, it will.

2-3 years? That's how long it takes for a successful popular revolution? Do I add time or subtract it when a state turns on those protestors? It's only 11 months in Syria after all, are we to endure another 3 years of murder to ascertain whether in fact it was a successful majority mass movement?

Another example of what I alluded to on the other thread about how it's so hard to discuss anything with you on this topic. I don't want to see anyone shot, thank you very much. However, this was clearly not a mass popular movement.

Why wasn't it? Show me how you're assessing this without resorting to your inner connection to the popular opinion of various Arab states, as suits your argument. Are there not protests in every corner of Syria? Is Assad not losing ground even in Damascus. Are you the only barometer of what is lies and truth coming out of Syria?

No. Iran also gets a look in. But rarely any US allies.Funny that.

You're merely criticising a system, that you refuse to criticise now because the parties are different. They call that hypocrisy you know?

Or how about you stop creating hysterical strawmen?

It's the truth. Syrians lives are worth less to you because their persecutor isn't Western backed.

[Interista]

It's the truth. Syrians lives are worth less to you because their persecutor isn't Western backed

OK clanrickard, I give up. You win. There's just no point trying to argue with this sort of playground, emotionalistic tosh.

I'm sorry you and Ms Rice feel you were cheated out of your war tonight but hey, we'll always have Iran......