• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Aleppo Is The 21st-Century Guernica - Where is the anger? [W:20]

There is no real alternative to the Assad government. What does a post Assad Syria look like to you? It's weird that the Assad family rules for years and they were good enough for Angelina Jolie to pal around with. Fact is, civil wars are brutal. The French revolution made this one look pretty tame in many ways. They chopped off 40K+ heads. So many they had to automate it.

In this case, it's made even worse by innumerable outside interests being involved, ensuring maximum suffering. The U.S. in reality doesn't care about that, though. That's merely the excuse used to push our interests in the ongoing war over resources, namely who's pipeline is going to feed Europe.

Do you consider Russian interests in your narrative?
 
Simpleχity;1066437979 said:
Well now lol, Angelina is certainly a unique talisman to exonerate the brutal Assad clan.

How about every President since 1990 including Obama? Hell John Kerry and Assad was buddy buddy til the day he was appointed Sec of State. How about Israel for 35 years before the Civil War?
 
And this is just ignorance. Syria was a "simple superstructure" solution. France went with a super Syria instead of listening to Alawites who wanted to be part of France.

Just because an individually structured experiment does not work, does not disprove the more general fact. It only shows that the experiment was not well structured. The German or American experiments are much better in this respect, when the went for communal federal instead of national multipolar security and built domestic systems of control, checks and balances of power. In the American case there was one break down in the structure that was corrected but costly. In the German case new problems resulted for the international stage but there was never again domestic war.
 
Just because an individually structured experiment does not work, does not disprove the more general fact. It only shows that the experiment was not well structured. The German or American experiments are much better in this respect, when the went for communal federal instead of national multipolar security and built domestic systems of control, checks and balances of power. In the American case there was one break down in the structure that was corrected but costly. In the German case new problems resulted for the international stage but there was never again domestic war.

Except you fail to understand secularism in the Middle East will never happen. German and American "federal" ideas are based on ideas of individualism which includes right to one practicing their own religion as they see fit. Sunnis hate Shia, Shia hate Sunnis, both hate whats left.

American style was set up in Iraq and it's failing. One could say it failed as ISIS ran rough shot through the Iraqi secular Army.
 
Why just single them out ?

If the likes of Blair and Bush can walk away from their much graver crimes what justifies going after anyone else ?

Where has been the responsibility to protect the Palestinians for 50 odd years ?

See the problem is that if laws are not enforced universally they lose any legitimacy.

Now that is disingenuous, isn't it?

Though, you are wrong with Bush and Blair in this context, I do not want to discuss that issue here. If you do want to, let's do it in an appropriate thread.

As to Assad and his regime I was not trying to "single out" them alone. Where war crimes were perpetrated in the civil war they must be appropriately handled. The thing is, though, that that group is obviously responsible for torturing thousands of Syrians, for shooting down demonstrators, for mass murder and other crimes against humanity. The UN changed its norms to an obligation of protecting the human populations from harm, for which the members are also responsible. To let this happen without serious consequences for the perpetrators would delegitimize any mutuality of world order.

This is, what Putin seems to want to the extent of a multipolar system. To let it happen is, however, to accept continuing wars of varying magnitude and severity and a with near certainty a nuclear exchange in this century.
 
How about every President since 1990 including Obama? Hell John Kerry and Assad was buddy buddy til the day he was appointed Sec of State. How about Israel for 35 years before the Civil War?

You are being absolutely silly. Your arguments are at about the level of a beer hall speech only thankfully shorter.
 
Except you fail to understand secularism in the Middle East will never happen. German and American "federal" ideas are based on ideas of individualism which includes right to one practicing their own religion as they see fit. Sunnis hate Shia, Shia hate Sunnis, both hate whats left.

American style was set up in Iraq and it's failing. One could say it failed as ISIS ran rough shot through the Iraqi secular Army.

Was Bismarck's Germany secular? I do not think it was that simple. But that is not really the issue. You see, I was not really proposing a "Western" approach and certainly not an American one. You must read, what one say, before criticizing. Then your critic will be more interesting.
 
You are being absolutely silly. Your arguments are at about the level of a beer hall speech only thankfully shorter.

Okay.. can you name one secular nation in the middle east outside of Israel? And if I was giving a beer hall speech.. I would include the fact it was Western Democracy ideals set up Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Kuwait, UAE, and Qatar. None of them are Democracies in the American or German sense. Lebanon is puppet state of Iran if you really think about it.
 
Was Bismarck's Germany secular? I do not think it was that simple. But that is not really the issue. You see, I was not really proposing a "Western" approach and certainly not an American one. You must read, what one say, before criticizing. Then your critic will be more interesting.

No, Bismarck was not secular. He had a harsh line early in his rule, but relaxed to the point all laws passed were repealed less then 2 decades later because his positions were backfiring and he was risking an all out civil war in the newly created Germany. Kulturkampf failed, and it's sill a failure 145 year later. Bavaria are worlds apart from Northern Germany, Protestant, to this day.
 
Okay.. can you name one secular nation in the middle east outside of Israel? And if I was giving a beer hall speech.. I would include the fact it was Western Democracy ideals set up Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Kuwait, UAE, and Qatar. None of them are Democracies in the American or German sense. Lebanon is puppet state of Iran if you really think about it.

Secularism is not in itself a requirement of a supranational system of security and R2P. Personally, I prefer a secular system, but have lived quite nicely in only partially secular states like Germany, while my cousin and his family loved living in the Emirates.
 
No, Bismarck was not secular. He had a harsh line early in his rule, but relaxed to the point all laws passed were repealed less then 2 decades later because his positions were backfiring and he was risking an all out civil war in the newly created Germany. Kulturkampf failed, and it's sill a failure 145 year later. Bavaria are worlds apart from Northern Germany, Protestant, to this day.

And even they managed to produce a system of domestic security based on mutuality.
 
UN human rights chief warns of war crimes in Aleppo

Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein said armed opposition groups are firing mortars into neighborhoods of western Aleppo, but "indiscriminate airstrikes across the eastern part of the city by government forces and their allies are responsible for the overwhelming majority of civilian casualties." He said these violations constitute "war crimes," and "if knowingly committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against civilians, they constitute crimes against humanity."
The forces of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, backed by Russian warplanes, have been pummeling eastern Aleppo as they seek to wrest it from rebel control....


CEKI8fhUMAAY-dX-e1430761974377.jpg
 
Do you consider Russian interests in your narrative?

Of course. Syria is a Russian ally, which we should have considered before getting involved. As their ally, Russia was about the only country that had any legitimacy being involved there. That's not even taking into consideration that our involvement is what made the situation as bad as what it is today.
 
Now that is disingenuous, isn't it?

Though, you are wrong with Bush and Blair in this context, I do not want to discuss that issue here. If you do want to, let's do it in an appropriate thread.

As to Assad and his regime I was not trying to "single out" them alone. Where war crimes were perpetrated in the civil war they must be appropriately handled. The thing is, though, that that group is obviously responsible for torturing thousands of Syrians, for shooting down demonstrators, for mass murder and other crimes against humanity. The UN changed its norms to an obligation of protecting the human populations from harm, for which the members are also responsible. To let this happen without serious consequences for the perpetrators would delegitimize any mutuality of world order.

This is, what Putin seems to want to the extent of a multipolar system. To let it happen is, however, to accept continuing wars of varying magnitude and severity and a with near certainty a nuclear exchange in this century.

No it wasn't " disingenuous " at all. Blair and Bush are war criminals. War criminals that will never see the inside of the Hague and , as I said , that completely undermines the laws themselves.

In your post you only referred to Assads people facing charges. At least you have had to rethink this and include any that have committed crimes. That would include the jihadists the US , UK ,UAE, Qatar ,Saudis support, right ?

The UN is just an instrument to make sure the powerful get away with their crimes while the weak don't . If Saddams Iraq had of been a permanent member of the UNSC he wouldn't have been in violation of any UN resolutions because he could have used his veto , like the US , Russia , China , UK and France have done when they have committed their crimes against other , weaker ,nations

I think you need to stop seeing things strictly through the filters of your own propaganda system and see it from a more balanced perspective.

Do you think laws should be universally applied to be seen a legitimate or not ?
 
Simpleχity;1066451312 said:
UN human rights chief warns of war crimes in Aleppo

Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein said armed opposition groups are firing mortars into neighborhoods of western Aleppo, but "indiscriminate airstrikes across the eastern part of the city by government forces and their allies are responsible for the overwhelming majority of civilian casualties." He said these violations constitute "war crimes," and "if knowingly committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against civilians, they constitute crimes against humanity."
The forces of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, backed by Russian warplanes, have been pummeling eastern Aleppo as they seek to wrest it from rebel control....

There is obviously something radically wrong with you to want to spam sickening images of injured kids/people that you don't really care about .
 
No it wasn't " disingenuous " at all. Blair and Bush are war criminals. War criminals that will never see the inside of the Hague and , as I said , that completely undermines the laws themselves.

In your post you only referred to Assads people facing charges. At least you have had to rethink this and include any that have committed crimes. That would include the jihadists the US , UK ,UAE, Qatar ,Saudis support, right ?

The UN is just an instrument to make sure the powerful get away with their crimes while the weak don't . If Saddams Iraq had of been a permanent member of the UNSC he wouldn't have been in violation of any UN resolutions because he could have used his veto , like the US , Russia , China , UK and France have done when they have committed their crimes against other , weaker ,nations

I think you need to stop seeing things strictly through the filters of your own propaganda system and see it from a more balanced perspective.

Do you think laws should be universally applied to be seen a legitimate or not ?

Don't let the Putinicks mislead you with those simplistic arguments. It is important, because one looks such a dupe, when one falls for it.
 
Don't let the Putinicks mislead you with those simplistic arguments. It is important, because one looks such a dupe, when one falls for it.

Wishing that all of those that have cashed in on Syrian misery face some consequences for their actions is " being mislead by the Putiniks " ? Really ?

Your support for your own war criminals makes you look stupid imho and is more or less the thing you are accusing me of............. quit with the projection and answer the questions

Do you think laws should be universally applied to be seen a legitimate or not ?
 
In Aleppo, Echoes of Guernica and Global Disorder


The Russian and Syrian government assault on anti-regime rebels in Syria’s second-largest city goes far beyond any reasonable military action. This is not the measured use of “little green men” that characterized Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014, but is rather akin to its brutal military bulldozing of Chechen Grozny in 2000....


gettyimages-5776087222.jpg

A Syrian man carries a child who was retrieved under the rubble of a collapsed building in Aleppo 9 July 2016
 
There is obviously something radically wrong with you to want to spam sickening images of injured kids/people that you don't really care about .
Versus people who would rather kick such war crimes under the proverbial rug.


Why So Many Children Are Being Killed in Aleppo


aleppo-syria-girl-rescue-white-helmets.jpg

A man crying over the body of his child after she was pulled from the rubble of a building following government airstrikes in Aleppo
 
Simpleχity;1066460999 said:
Versus people who would rather kick such war crimes under the proverbial rug.

You can talk about events without having to spam giant size pictures of blood soaked people ad nauseam. After all you might just be exploiting their misery and pain without caring about their plight
 
Back
Top Bottom