Russians & Assad Regime deliberately bombed schools and hospitals in Syria

O dear ... this lie of fair and free elections in Syria simply cannot be killed.
It is not a challenge to hold fair, democratic and sensible elections in a civil war country ... it is impossible.

How many millions of Syrians had fled the country?
And before you come and declare that they could vote in Syrian consulates and embassyies ... forget it. This statement is so ridiculous. I know a good dozen Syrians who have found asylum in Germany, hate Assad and everything but are not Islamists.
More than 1/3 of the country was occupied by IS, where for sure nothing and nobody could be elected!
And it is a fact that Assad decided who should run as a candidate and who should not be elected!

And I am absolutely not interested in what any clowns of election observers (who I think Assas bought anyway, if I take a closer look at the people) or alleged secret dossiers about it. For me only facts count and these I named are facts which disproof any claim that this election was more a bad joke!

 

Even if you were correct - and you are not even close - it would not change the fact that the people being armed were Islamist.

Name one city that was taken over by - and being run by "Moderates" - None ? that settled that one quick now didn't it.

And what on earth would "Moderates" be doing fighting for and under the command of Islamist Jihadists - as we all the groups that were "labeled" moderates were doing? The moderates were the people fighting for Assad - like the 50% of his regular army that is Sunni - and the Christian General in Assad's army.

How many Christians were fighting with the rebels ? We know what the "Moderates" were doing to Christians and it wasn't pretty.

Your brain desperately wants to alter reality - I get it - but, it is what it is.

There was a small number of moderate groups in the beginning - when you had a defection from the Syrian Army. These folks never ended up doing much fighting - and within a short period of time there was no sign of any moderates.

Within 1.5 years - the Islamist's had taken over most of Syria. The NY-Times - and a plethora of other news outlets - were reporting that there were no Moderates.

So Joe Biden was lying is what you are saying - and you are completely and demonstrably wrong.

Syrian archbishop pleads for UK to stop backing anti-Assad Islamist groups

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...king-anti-assad-islamist-groups-a6697226.html

How many articles would you like ? 10 - 15 - 30 ? we can do this all day. How about some video Footage an FSA commander giving a congratulatory speech to IS forces after they took over an air base ! Then he talks about his Brothers Al Nusra who fight for the FSA.

 

I'm definitely not defending the US or the West ... because too much evil has been done by them since the end of WW-2, too.

The problem is that all 3 major powers on the planet ... USA, Russia and China (UK and France aside, because only second rank) ... have their spheres of influence. This means that in these areas and states they have their own strategic interests for various reasons ... e.g. economically or militarily, but also other reasons and sub-reasons.

Influence here means that these great powers want to be in charge and decide what happens where and how. It also includes that all 3 support the friendly governments in the countries accordingly, as they protect them against any opposition too ... and all 3 it interests a crap whether these governments are bloody dictators or not.

But this also means that the more hostile these 3 great powers are to one another, the more they try to interfere in the areas of influence of the others ... unfortunately this has always been real politics! So they support the opposition up to insurgents in these countries in the area of interest of the other and here too no one cares about if the opposition / insurgents are not just as evil.

This is exactly what applies to Syria ... where the dictator Assad is protected by Russia because Syria is the area of interest of Russia. And so ... since all 3 have become significantly more hostile to each other ... the United States supports the other side.
Here in Syria it is someone else who interferes far more in Syria with direct support for the FSA and the Islamists than the USA (but with OK from USA of course): Turkey!

 

There is no way to escape the numbers, which don't mean that there weren't Syrians opposed to Assad (vehemently even) who didn't participate, who hated Assad, and who were part of the refugees who had sought asylum in countries that did not allow a vote. Regardless, MOST SYRIANS by far, despite everything (even bullets), some risking their lives, many waiting in long lines in places like Beirut, to vote. And VOTED. 10.3 MILLION of them voted for Assad. Even if every other adult in Syria and outside of Syria voted, and voted against Assad, they still wouldn't match that number of votes. And the vote of the majority who voted for Assad, who have said they prefer Assad to the alternatives before them, count. Their voices count. Even if the countries that plunged Syria into civil war like to ONLY listen to those who (do exist) and who hate Assad.

We actually have the same phenomenon in Iran. There are actually are a few million Iranians who hate the regime with a passion, many who in Iran and many who live outside of Iran. BUT: even though they are a large number, they are still a MINORITY as millions more prefer the devil they know over any of the other devils they don't know and fear more. And some actually (many more than the few million which hate the regime) actually not only tolerate it, not only prefer it over the other devils they don't know, but actually support it. Especially on the issues that make it so hated in the West.

 

Ehm ...
Let us leave aside your claim that the vast majority of Syrians love Assad ... which in my eyes is total nonsense, to say the least polite and gently way.

Syria had here just over 16 million inhabitants according to its own information (info from Assad regime).
Evidently, because it is counted by several and some of them completely independent organizations, there are around 10 to 11 million Syrians (depending on sources) as refugees in various countries outside Syria.

This simple fact of proven numbers disproves your claim that even if every adult Syrian outside Syria had voted against Assad, it would have had no influence.

And then there is another ... indisputable fact that disporves you:
About 1/3 of Syrian territory was under the control of IS at the time of the election. How many of the Syrians living there probably took part in the election, eh?
The answer is simple ... nobody, because nobody could and was allowed by IS to do ... otherwise, even if there was any election office existing (what was not the case) it would have been their death sentence to go to election!

 

Instead of speculating on things, just read the Wikipedia article and, if you need to, follow up with the reports and citations in the footnotes. The answer isn't at all difficult to find out.

Syria's entire population, before the civil war, was 23 million -- many under the age to be able to vote. The eligible voting population would have been less than 16 million. 10.3 million voted for Assad, which would be more than half of the eligible voting age population; hence, even if all had voted and voted against Assad (you never get 100% turnout anywhere and not all those who couldn't vote, would have voted against Assad), they still couldn't get more than 5.5 million votes against Assad.

In terms of rebel held territories, they held mostly land, with most of Syria's population in areas Assad controlled.

I honestly don't think the issue is as relevant anymore. This is not 2016. And the future of Syria will need to be determined based on what people in Syria think in 2020.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Syrian_presidential_election

 

deleted -- I have posted the polls I had in mind below.

 

When I quickly checked public opinion polls conducted in Syria, for reasons not clear to me sitting far away, it seems that such public opinion has begun to shift against Assad.

During the height of the Syrian civil war, this was how things looked in Syria:

If the poll in 2018 by Gallop is correct, there has been a significant shift in attitudes against Iran (and to some extent Assad and Russia) in Syria since then. Iran, for obvious reasons (mainly because everyone else is against it!), suffering the most in the process.

 

My view, in short, is that even if the Syrian election wasn't entirely representative of Syrian sentiments, even western polls showed Assad (and Iran) enjoying more support than any of those fighting him. But, for whatever reason, more recently polls show Syria to be roughly divided equally between the pro and anti Assad camps.

 

Oh, then why was the election in Ukraine accepted as being legitimate when a civil war was raging and the candidates representing the South and East of Ukraine were being thrown in trash cans and threatened not to run? Come on Mandelus answer me that one? Why is one election considered legitimate, and the other one isn't?

Also answer me why Kerry said he would not accept an election in Syria if Assad is running, because he knew that Assad would win? Doesn't this mean that he wanted Washington to choose the candidates and who the people should vote for?

Many fled, mostly to Lebanon, and the embassies wouldn't allow them to vote, so they had to fly back to Syria to vote.

Are you saying that the American delegates who went to overlook the elections for themselves, rather than trust what they were reading in the press, were lying when they said the Syrians were flying into Syria to vote? Are you also telling me that the Syrians I know who said they loved Assad and the secular and all inclusive society he created before it was destroyed by the terrorists and jihadists were lying?

As for the Syrians you know, they are the Sunnis because Merkel wouldn't accept any Syrians other than Sunnis. She wouldn't accept the Christians and other minorities, even though they were being beheaded and enslaved en masse. It was something that was being hidden from the Americans and EU.

This is what I know: The protests in Syria were part of the Muslim Brotherhood's Arab Spring, and it was a revolt against Assad's secular and all inclusive government in preference to Islamic Sharia law. This is why all the jihadists and terrorists were coming in from Qatar and Turkey, since they are the two countries that supported the Arab Spring and Muslim Brotherhood.

This doesn't mean I believe we should impose our own secular laws on Islam or anyone, but by the same token Islam doesn't have a right to impose its own laws on others - which it is doing in all of the Muslim nations with the exception of Assad's Syria.

​

The first principle of the Brotherhood is that Sharia should be the basis for controlling the affairs of state and society - and this Mandelus is why the Sunnis in Syria rejoined Assad's army. They don't want to live under Sharia Law - would you?​

Here are two of the differences between the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that was adopted by the UN in 1948 and the following Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam that was adopted by the Muslims in 1990.

Article 10: "Islam is the religion of unspoiled nature. It is prohibited to exercise any form of compulsion on man or to exploit his poverty or ignorance in order to convert him to another religion or to atheism." Since in Islamic society all reasons for conversion away from Islam are considered to be essentially either compulsion or ignorance, this effectively forbids conversion away from Islam. (It's a capital crime which means the death penalty).

Article 19: There are no other crimes or punishments than those mentioned in the sharia. Sharia allows corporal punishment (whipping, amputation) and capital punishment by stoning or decapitation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cairo_Declaration_on_Human_Rights_in_Islam​

 

If the polls are correct, and we can't be sure that they are, it probably has to do with Washington's support of Turkey and its terrorists to keep the war going on, as well as the Israeli bombings.

Looks like the US might be getting what it wanted in Syria all along, and that's to weaken it by breaking it into religious and ethnic enclaves that would always be at one another's throats.

The best thing is what I said before, and that's for Iran to get out of there so Israel will stop the bombing. Also Washington won't have an excuse to be there and steal Syria's oil.

 

I never told that the elections in Ukraine were OK ... but here, on the other hand we have a clear other situation. Here 2 regions of Ukraine want their autonomy up to independence, or the connection to Russia. In Syria you want to get rid of the bloody bastard Assad, but nobody wants autonomy of his territory from the rest of Syria ... OK, the IS wants that, but even you and I agree here that the IS is just scum (or not?).

Is your question really serious now?
Because it was absolutely clear to every normal-thinking person that the election result had already been fixed and the whole thing was just a propaganda farce, as long as Assad held the reins.

In principle, it is no different than in the Cold War with the elections in Eastern Europe, where it was already certain that 99% of the votes were for the ruling Communists. Make it look democratic but never really be democratic.

Wrong ...everyone knew that this is a crappy propaganda BS of Assad only ... and if being identified as opposition to Assad, it was questionable if they would survive any entrance in a Syrian embassy!

Yes I do ... because this is a fake news fairy tale only.
And funny is that this all what you wrote is told again and again by the righty Americans about Iran under the Shah before the Mullahs took control. Same sort of fake news BS propaganda they tell.

Apart from the horror fairy tales that you tell here again ... because you equate the IS (= all Sunni) with the totality of the Sunni, which is total BS ...

Assad relies on the Shiites and minorities like the Christians and Alevites in his bloody hold on power. He prefers these groups to the rest of the population and many thank him for becoming part of his power system, which suppresses the rest of the population.
Exactly the same thing happened in Iran, but here in reverse with oppression of the Shiites and also in Iraq, also with suppression of the population shortage that are Shiites. It's always the same plan of maintaining power ... why don't you recognize that yourself?

And otherwise thank you for confirming that there is also Sunni vs. Shiiten conflict a main reason.

O Jeannette, please ... come on!
Next thing is that you really wat to tell the Muslim Brotherhood is supported by the USA, eh? Good that there is bif fat proof existing that this is nonsense ... look on Egypt and coup of the military backed (if not ordered) by the USA against the elected President after Mubarak ...

Anyway ... do you agree that the term errorist is meaningless today?
Look, you tell that the FSA is (mostly) a terror organization with Al Nusra and so on ... other deny that. for example Turkey which backs by evidence the FSA including Al Nusra.
Assad is supported and backed by the Hezbollah from Lebanon which in reverse are told to be terrorist by many too.
And then we have the YPG Kurds in northern Syria, whicha re seen more neutral by Assad, Russia and Iran, being allies of the USA in fight against IS until they were betrayed by Trump ... but Turkey says they are all terrorists.

What is now the truth please, eh?

 

Aside fact that Assad has all officila issues of it under its control ... that Assad decided who is candidate and who not and aside fact that these 16 million Syrians left in Syria as Assad tld were a fairy tale, because much lesser Syrians were in Syria left who dd not flee ... and aside fact that 1/3 of Syria was under control of IS = no election did there happen ... aside fact that in most rebel controlled area no election did ever happen ... ehm what is yur point now again please?

 

My real point is that we should try to be objective, rely on some verifiable barometer or ground for our view of public sentiments in even our own countries (much less foreign countries), and not be driven by any partisan account when we spin our tales. Otherwise, I covered the data from the presidential election in Syria and they seem clear. Of course, if Syria had an 'electoral college' system where landmass mattered as much as population, the areas held by ISIS and company would have been substantial enough to prevent 70%+ of Syria's population (counting even its refugees and those living outside of Assad's control) from participating in that election.

If you accept the data, the math is simple: 10.3 million voted for Assad. Since Syria's entire population old enough to vote (even counting refugees) is less than 16 million, if everyone who didn't vote for Assad had voted for someone else, that number would still not reach 10.3 million.

I am more open to arguments that show either a drop in support for Assad since then, or those which suggest that the 10.3 million who voted for him were not really voting for Assad but against those who had plunged their country into civil war. I think both narratives would have some truth to them.

Right now, based on the 2018 gallop poll I posted, with Syria's civil war largely concluded, the divide in Syria seems rather evenly split between the pro Assad and anti-Assad forces in terms of public opinion. I think Assad, in reality, still has a slight edge but, regardless, a truly free election in Syria today (which should allow Assad to compete as anyone else) would not be very easy to predict in terms of its outcome. I personally wouldn't care who the Syrians choose, as long as they choose to resist US/Israeli hegemony in the region and their alliance in that regard with Iran (But I admit Iran's standing among the Syrians has dropped recently).

 

Syria was never a democracy worth to be called democracy. Since Assad Sr., the father of current Assad took power in Syria, the Baath party is the only ruling element and political party with power in Syria. Any oppositon ... real opposition did never exost and was never allowed to exist.
Syria was in this matter not otherwise as the communist states in Eastern Europe during cold war and acted the same way ... even Baath party is not really the communist party as in Eastern Europe was.
I think and hope that you don't think and believe that these communist dictaroships were any sort of democracy, because they made elections too and there were other parties existing too etc.

And are these 10.3 million people reality or only fake like these "97% voted for the national front lead by the commnist party" messages in Eastern Europe? I am pretty sure they are only fake!
Even the again and again mentioned election observers don't convince me at all, because what culd they control please? Nothing! and their statement was paid with USD.
Again ... Assad and Baath party decided who can be candidate to be elected and who not. No independent source could and so he could and dd reject anyone he want. This is also fact. And where in any by FSA controlled areas were election offices please ... aside the IS controlled areas of Syria? So these 10.3 million votes are rubbish and nothing else.

But don't understand me wrong. I said always that Syria is an issue of Russia and maybe Iran to sort out and the West should stay out. Syria is sphere and area of interest of Russia and Syria is ally of Iran ... as the USA and China have theirs.

On the other hand, what I don't like is this eternal BS banter from "the good Assad fights against evil terrorists, many of whom are not Syrians at all".
Yes, a large part of the FSA consists of Islamists and groups like Al Nusra can also be described as terrorists in my opinion, Al Qaeda anyway. And yes, in Syria many Muslims and converts are fighting with these Islamists who are not Syrians ... BUT:

On the side of Assad, Hezbollah is fighting in Syria and, like Al Nusra, they can also be described as Islamist terrorists ... and the fighters of Heubollah are not Syrians, but Lebanese!
But more important ... that IS is just Islamist terror scum, we all agree on that, isn't it?

Only ... why isn't Assad and its allies like Russia and Iran, including Hezbollah, really fighting against IS in Syria, but is dealing almost exclusively with the FSA?
There is no point denying it, because there is a lot of evidence ... just as there is a lot of evidence that Turkey acts in the same way and deals more with the Kurds than with the IS.

 

Please watch this movie. It will give you the Iranian perspective on the Syrian civil war, give you a very good action packed thriller that should keep you entertained, with an exciting story-line that doesn't come in just the black and white colors of typical Hollywood movies. Once you finish watching the movie, you will get a better sense of who Iran saw itself fighting in Syria.


p.s.
https://www.investigaction.net/en/damascus-time-an-iranian-movie-about-isis-in-syria/

Damascus Time : an Iranian Movie about ISIS in Syria

 

Mandelus let me simplify everything for you:

Below is a map of Syria. According to the map ISIS does not control any part of Syria. ISIS was wiped out in the red areas under Assad's control. ISIS was not wiped out in the orange area that is East of the Euphrates. That area is under Washington and the FSA's control. The orange area is the area with the Syrian oil wells.

The US does not want to destroy ISIS in the orange area because if they destroyed ISIS, then Washington would not have an excuse to be there. When the Syrian troops tried to attack ISIS in the orange area, they were attacked by the Americans. The Americans then lied as they usually do, and said that Assad's troops had attacked the FSA.

If Iran leaves Syria, Israel will have to stop its attacks. The US also promised that it would leave Syria if Iran leaves. Of course the US is not trustworthy, but who knows, maybe it will. Taking back its lands East of the Euphrates, is the only way Syria can rebuild its economy. Today its oil is being stolen by the US.

 

After all the pissing, moaning, groaning, weeping of infobabes, and gnashing of teeth over the last decade Assad stands practically invincible.

So cry out to raise a German army to go on expedition and take care of the problem. Only force and death can solve the problem.

We in the USA don't care enough to shed the blood of our young to solve this problem. So Assad remains all powerful in his country.

 

Why would we want something different than Assad - so badly that we would want violate international law - and arm, support and supply an armed insurgency in that nation ? This is a question that is not addressed properly by the media.

Certainly not - although recently things have improved - albeit slightly. Unfortunately - this does not help us much with the above question - unless one figures that lack of a functional democratic process is legitimate justification for attacking a sovereign nation - and I don't think you are arguing this.

In fact none of the complaints levied against Assad by the Media or other State Sponsored Propaganda mouthpieces such as the political and bureaucratic pundits - "Assad is a Bad" guy rhetoric - some of which is true - are not things that are going on in most other ME nations - and many of the things we do ourselves.

The fact of the matter is that Assad's Syria is shining star of freedom among the other ME nations in the Region - so where is the justification for doing what we did ?

 

I thought somebody somewhere would fight a war with Assad to satisfy the infobabes.

 

The Puppeteers need war

1) This keeps money flowing into the Military complex - this is a good source of revenue but also serves to control the US public - and that of other nations.

2) War also helps to keep the public divided - which maintains the status quo - justifies the 130 Billion dollar (includes 50 billion for dark projects) annual spend on our intelligence/disinformation agencies - the objective of which is partly to spy on others - this is important due to (3) - but also to spy on - and more importantly -control the US citizen.

I am not embellishing - not making up stories - this is stated doctrine - the Wolfowitz doctrine under Bush Sr.

The admin was vexed - knowing that the US public would never accept certain restrictions on freedoms - whittling away of rights - at that time.
The plan was to wait for some large external threat to arise - and then use this to implement the doctrine - in keeping with the age old tactic used throughout history - Get the people to trade away liberty for security - over fear of some external threat.

You know -- the trick the founders warned us against Ben F "Those who would trade liberty for temporary security deserve neither"
and remember "give me liberty or death" ... this trick is not some big secret - which is why the founders put safeguards in place.

Stalin knew this trick well - using fear of an external threat to get folks to trade liberty for security. His program "Security for the Motherland"
Hitler - same trick - "Fatherland Security"
Bush Jr. - lacking the creative ability to come up with a new name - "Homeland Security"

and so on - planned and executed to perfection.

3) Keep other would be competitors to the global pie at bay.

Unfortunately this seems to have backfired in the case of Syria - we are losing influence in the ME. On the other hand - competing pipeline interests were prevented from building a energy conduit through Syria .. which is also the case in Afghanistan - perhaps explaining why we have been there 20 years doing who knows what .. Selling Opium ? We certainly did not dent the Taliban much - but I digress and am speculating.

Lets stick to what we know for sure - The reason for war against others is to make you less free.

 

Nice try Jeannette ... but failed!

from when is this map again ... and where are the YPG controlled areas again, eh?

Sorry, lousy map and not showing the real truth!

Then we have the fact that the United States has withdrawn from Syria on Trump's orders ... while betraying and abandoning the YPG.
Then why are the Iranian Revolutionary Guards and Hezbollah in the country anyway? Should then also go according to your presentation ...

And don't try to turn everything around and shift it to the United States. I specifically accused Assad, Russia and Iran, including Hezbollah, of dealing almost exclusively with the FSA, but not with IS. Your execution of because they would have been attacked by the USA etc. is BS. Yes, there were attacks and I know that you quickly developed this BS story out of it, because of which the USA support IS ... which is a foolish assertion.
It's funny that Assad has made local agreements with IS, eh?

And again ... the one who has worked the most against Assad here all the time is Turkey ... but with you it is simply the case that you wish Erdogan dead if he did something wrong in the eyes again ... But as soon as he "cuddles" with Putin, you have Alzheimer's and your criticism of Erdogan has become hypocritical.

And about Israel ... I am for sure no friend of their politics and behaviour, but their attacks within Syria started far befre any Iranian, Hezbollah or Russian was in country to fight with Assad ... because they attacked and destroyed issues which were in danger to fall in hand of FSA and the islamists with them ... or worse in the hands of IS.

And ... as FSA are for you mostly terrorists, Hezbollah is for Israel terrorist.

 

Oh oh oh ... very carefully now please, because you just ran into a big minefield!

#1
I have been saying all the time that Syria is a matter for the Russians (and maybe the Iranians too) because it is their sphere of influence and not that of the United States. And for me as a German, it doesn't matter what happens there.
BUT ... hardly that you totally failed with your great President Obama ... there were refugee flows to Europe and many of them to us. So we Germans were allowed to pay for what Americans do **** in the world again!

# 2
You Americans have the habit of making a lot of crap in the world ... for example before that in Iraq 2003 ... where you send your young soldiers to war with a constant fire of lies, then totally failed after the military victory and countless young soldiers died for it or became a cripple with severed limbs, etc. ... for "War against terror", what is a lie in itself!
And as always, when things get uncomfortable for the United States, the United States withdraws cowardly with a lie of "Mission accomplished" and leaves others to deal with the chaos that the United States has created.
And when the ridiculous chattering of "freedom, democracy" comes, then the world can do better without your values you want to bomb into others, which are just a facade anyway! Yes, Saddam was a bloodthirsty bastard, no question ... but so what? If such a bastard is your ally elsewhere ... and Saddam was in the 1980s ... then you give a damn what a bastard that is!

# 3
It is your current jerk in the White House called President ... who gets the rash when Russia and Iran are in Syria ... and at best Erdogan in Turkey, Israel and Iran-hating Saudis get the same rash because of that. The rest in the world does not really care and makes in reality only a shrug.

I can still remember well that you betrayed the YPG Kurds with your withdrawal after Erdogan threatened you with an "Ottoman slap in the face" if you continued to help the YPG. Funny ... after that you were withdrawn and 9 out of 10 US soldiers in the area were ashamed to be Americans. Either Trump is terribly afraid of Erdogan in Turkey ... or the saying of a caricature applies ...
"A YPG fighter calls the departing Americans" hey, but you are our allies "... a Trump looking out the back hatch calls back" No, not my allies, Obamas ... ".

If that's true ... which I think is more likely than Trump to be afraid of Erdogan ... then it proves again that it is not a good idea to be an ally of the United States ... because it gets fast you will be let down if it is no longer suitable for the political leadership of the USA to be allied with you.

 

"And for me as a German, it doesn't matter what happens there."

I hear you. It's the same for me. I don't care if Assad tortures and kills ten million babies and children and draws and quarters twenty million adults, I don't want any of my family going to war to stop him.

 

Rand Paul has a similar take - here in an interview on CNN's Sunday morning Program "State of the Union"

Sen. Rand Paul: “I’m not willing to send my son into that mess”

http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2...-my-son-into-that-mess-on-the-crisis-in-iraq/

I suggest we stop giving tens of thousands of tons of sophisticated military equipment, to radical Islamist Jihadists - led by Al Qaeda and/or ISIS - to wage proxy war's in foreign nations - of which our beef is not even clear ? What exactly did Assad do that is not being done in most every other Muslim nation in the region ? Arabs fighting Arabs ? .. Sunni vs Shia/Alawite and anything else that does not comply with the twisted and extremist Saudi Ideology.

Why were we there ? Why was this urgent regime change required .. a regime presiding over a Nation with more freedoms - than any other Muslim Nation in the region .. a shining star on the hill in fact .. a direction we would like the others to go.