Assad Pulls Ahead in Syrian War. Puti...

Assad Pulls Ahead in Syrian War. Putin, Khamenei Are Co-Victors

There are 174 comments on the Debka story from Feb 25, 2013, titled Assad Pulls Ahead in Syrian War. Putin, Khamenei Are Co-Victors. In it, Debka reports that:

March 5 has been set as the date for peace talks to open in Moscow between the Syrian opposition and the Assad regime, reveals here exclusively.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Debka.

Chris

Toronto, Canada

#145 Mar 18, 2013
George wrote:
<quoted text>
That is because Assad would not allow any name on there that he did not approve of and that person had to be a member of the Baath party.
Would you expect Conservatives in Canada, to put the liberal on the ballot? Every country has rules, and Multi Party does not necessarily provide for more diverse choices than One Party; that depends on other nuances of the system. And you are stuck to the formula in your country. Thatís fine, if you leave other people to develop their formula. But you, just as the Western Club, want to force your system on others; even with fermenting conflicts, bombs, occupations, and invasions.
Syrian

New London, CT

#146 Mar 18, 2013
George wrote:
<quoted text>
Then explain why the huge protests over 2 years ago?
Because foreigners were encouraging and inciting the entire insurgency! Without major foreign support, this "rebellion" would have been over in a month, with thousands of innocent Syrian lives spared.
George

Red Deer, Canada

#147 Mar 18, 2013
Chris wrote:
<quoted text>
Would you expect Conservatives in Canada, to put the liberal on the ballot? Every country has rules, and Multi Party does not necessarily provide for more diverse choices than One Party; that depends on other nuances of the system. And you are stuck to the formula in your country. Thatís fine, if you leave other people to develop their formula. But you, just as the Western Club, want to force your system on others; even with fermenting conflicts, bombs, occupations, and invasions.
Absolutely, how do you suppose we have opposition elected each time?

As far as forcing opinions, I believe that belongs to you, as I am saying Syrian citizens should be allowed to vote for who they want and not be forced to keep Assad, see the difference?
Think Hard

United States

#148 Mar 18, 2013
Syrian wrote:
<quoted text> Because foreigners were encouraging and inciting the entire insurgency! Without major foreign support, this "rebellion" would have been over in a month, with thousands of innocent Syrian lives spared.
You must be referring to the Russians and Iranians supporting Assad.
Surely you believe in "fair play" when it comes to supporters? Assad has his and the rebel's have their's. Works for me and the rest of the civilized world.
George

Red Deer, Canada

#149 Mar 18, 2013
Think Hard wrote:
<quoted text>
You must be referring to the Russians and Iranians supporting Assad.
Surely you believe in "fair play" when it comes to supporters? Assad has his and the rebel's have their's. Works for me and the rest of the civilized world.
I am not for war, not at all, however had Nato been used to stop the civil war, I believe at least 60,000 lives would have been saved and Syria would be on the way to recovery by now and a whole lot of buildings would still be standing.
check it out

Brisbane, Australia

#150 Mar 18, 2013
George wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not for war, not at all, however had Nato been used to stop the civil war, I believe at least 60,000 lives would have been saved and Syria would be on the way to recovery by now and a whole lot of buildings would still be standing.
We know some of the blogists here have the same attitude as Assad. That is, keep power no matter what. No matter what. Assad would casually, maybe even gleefully, kill another 100 000 fellow Syrians (as long as it's not himself) to stay in power. His lust for power has no cost for him.
Chris

Toronto, Canada

#151 Mar 18, 2013
George wrote:
<quoted text>
Absolutely, how do you suppose we have opposition elected each time?
As far as forcing opinions, I believe that belongs to you, as I am saying Syrian citizens should be allowed to vote for who they want and not be forced to keep Assad, see the difference?
First, one party does not put all others on the ballot; but each party puts its candidates on the ballot.

Second, Syrian citizens should come up with their government using any method they invent. They do not need to vote if they do not want to; just because in your country the government is organized by voting. There is direct democracy, where there is no voting, because each person directly participates in Governing.

See where the force is. You want every country to use your method to form the government.
Chris

Toronto, Canada

#152 Mar 18, 2013
check it out wrote:
<quoted text>
We know some of the blogists here have the same attitude as Assad. That is, keep power no matter what. No matter what. Assad would casually, maybe even gleefully, kill another 100 000 fellow Syrians (as long as it's not himself) to stay in power. His lust for power has no cost for him.
Assad never wanted power. Even his opposition admits that he was very hesitant to take the role of the leader, and that the party really put pressure on him. Man has his characteristics: he is not power person, but he is conscientious person. Now when he is a leader, and his country is attacked, because he is a man of integrity, he sticks to his duty, and defends his country.
check it out

Brisbane, Australia

#153 Mar 18, 2013
Chris wrote:
<quoted text>
First, one party does not put all others on the ballot; but each party puts its candidates on the ballot.
Second, Syrian citizens should come up with their government using any method they invent. They do not need to vote if they do not want to; just because in your country the government is organized by voting. There is direct democracy, where there is no voting, because each person directly participates in Governing.
See where the force is. You want every country to use your method to form the government.
Who decided Assad was going to be in power? When was it decided? Maybe when Assad's brother was accidently killed. Dad probably propsed then, that another son take over the family business of ruling Syria. After 40 years, maybe the people have had enough of cronyism and corruption held together by fear. The secret police afterall cannot keep all citizens in check, all the time.
Syrian

New London, CT

#154 Mar 19, 2013
Think Hard wrote:
<quoted text>
You must be referring to the Russians and Iranians supporting Assad.
Surely you believe in "fair play" when it comes to supporters? Assad has his and the rebel's have their's. Works for me and the rest of the civilized world.
Terrorism doesn't work for anyone. These rebels sealed their own doom when they linked up with AlQaeda!
George

Red Deer, Canada

#155 Mar 19, 2013
Chris wrote:
<quoted text>
First, one party does not put all others on the ballot; but each party puts its candidates on the ballot.
Second, Syrian citizens should come up with their government using any method they invent. They do not need to vote if they do not want to; just because in your country the government is organized by voting. There is direct democracy, where there is no voting, because each person directly participates in Governing.
See where the force is. You want every country to use your method to form the government.
No. You talk about listening and learning and more education but yet you are so naÔve about Libya and Syria. Both countries have expresses a want for regime change, a change for expressing their wants and needs and yet you say they are happy with 1 party 1 leader and no one should interfere, I think it is you that should do some learning.
Chris

Toronto, Canada

#156 Mar 19, 2013
George wrote:
<quoted text>
No. You talk about listening and learning and more education but yet you are so naÔve about Libya and Syria. Both countries have expresses a want for regime change, a change for expressing their wants and needs and yet you say they are happy with 1 party 1 leader and no one should interfere, I think it is you that should do some learning.
These countries were colonies; they need the time to stabilize. In these countries, based on traditions, and coming from practically the same genetic pool; often being organized by tribal connections, like Libya; one party, and one leader, is not the same as one party and one leader on North American continent, where people are unrelated, and scooped from all over the world. In old world countries, particularly those, who were being colonized, there are families with traditions of heroism, to which people trust. And after being freed from colonizing, people are ready to put destiny of the county in their hands. But the West does not allow these countries to stabilize, and to have leadership in the hands of Nationalists trusted by people, but want to force impersonal system, with the clowns circulating on the top, while the resources are being put into private hands, often of foreigners. It is a new way of colonizing. Colonizers are being creative, as always!!!
George

Red Deer, Canada

#157 Mar 19, 2013
Chris wrote:
<quoted text>
These countries were colonies; they need the time to stabilize. In these countries, based on traditions, and coming from practically the same genetic pool; often being organized by tribal connections, like Libya; one party, and one leader, is not the same as one party and one leader on North American continent, where people are unrelated, and scooped from all over the world. In old world countries, particularly those, who were being colonized, there are families with traditions of heroism, to which people trust. And after being freed from colonizing, people are ready to put destiny of the county in their hands. But the West does not allow these countries to stabilize, and to have leadership in the hands of Nationalists trusted by people, but want to force impersonal system, with the clowns circulating on the top, while the resources are being put into private hands, often of foreigners. It is a new way of colonizing. Colonizers are being creative, as always!!!
That is a bunch of crap. For 40 years Libya and Syria were controlled by tyrants and you say the people chose these people because of their heroism? not true, Assad did nothing and his father took over by coupe and same with Ghadaffi so how did they become the hero. How possibly could they stabilize when their leaders are raping young girls for entertainment such as Ghadaffi and sons, and Assad stealing the money from the people so he can make his friends rich, is this the heroism you preach about?? This is the reason for the civil wars!!!! It is time there are booted out to allow fair representation selected by the people not some birth right.

What do these countries need to stabilize from, they had 40 years with the butcher babysitting and pillaging, just what do you call stabilizing and what books did you learn this from?

France, Germany,Spain the UK and on and on were colonizers and have agreed with countries to have their own rule, look at Canada, the US, most of South America, Africa, Australia and on and on so which countries are you talking about, are you saying that 40 years was not enough time to stabilize??? You can never stabilize a country with a tyrant dictator, nothing is fair and no freedoms will be given to the people.
Avenger

Kitchener, Canada

#158 Mar 19, 2013
George wrote:
<quoted text>
That is a bunch of crap. For 40 years Libya and Syria were controlled by tyrants and you say the people chose these people because of their heroism? not true, Assad did nothing and his father took over by coupe and same with Ghadaffi so how did they become the hero. How possibly could they stabilize when their leaders are raping young girls for entertainment such as Ghadaffi and sons, and Assad stealing the money from the people so he can make his friends rich, is this the heroism you preach about?? This is the reason for the civil wars!!!! It is time there are booted out to allow fair representation selected by the people not some birth right.
What do these countries need to stabilize from, they had 40 years with the butcher babysitting and pillaging, just what do you call stabilizing and what books did you learn this from?
France, Germany,Spain the UK and on and on were colonizers and have agreed with countries to have their own rule, look at Canada, the US, most of South America, Africa, Australia and on and on so which countries are you talking about, are you saying that 40 years was not enough time to stabilize??? You can never stabilize a country with a tyrant dictator, nothing is fair and no freedoms will be given to the people.
Chrisy from the jungle is a commie conspiracy theorist who loves his dictators might as well talk to a brick wall.
The uneducated bonehead foreigner would try to force all private businesses to close totally clueless fool.
George

Red Deer, Canada

#159 Mar 19, 2013
Chris wrote:
<quoted text>
First, one party does not put all others on the ballot; but each party puts its candidates on the ballot.
Second, Syrian citizens should come up with their government using any method they invent. They do not need to vote if they do not want to; just because in your country the government is organized by voting. There is direct democracy, where there is no voting, because each person directly participates in Governing.
See where the force is. You want every country to use your method to form the government.
Who ever said Syria must follow any protocol, the opposition is designing a new constitution now with election procedures, not the US, nor UK nor France and not even Russia or Iran but Syrian Opposition with the intent of using it once Assad is removed.

I do not understand what you are trying to say about the one party ballot

In Canada we have a multiparty system, with MP's being elected in their electoral community, for each party then the winners of each party are put on a ballot and citizens decide who they want to represent them with a majority rule. So we have a few hundred elected MP's and the majority make up the government, if the majority of MP's are Conservative then yes they will be the government.

I think the same can apply to Syria but they are welcome again to majority rule and do what ever it is that Syria wants not Assad.
George

Red Deer, Canada

#160 Mar 19, 2013
Chris wrote:
<quoted text>
Assad never wanted power. Even his opposition admits that he was very hesitant to take the role of the leader, and that the party really put pressure on him. Man has his characteristics: he is not power person, but he is conscientious person. Now when he is a leader, and his country is attacked, because he is a man of integrity, he sticks to his duty, and defends his country.
He has no CONSCIENCE, a good leader would not kill his own citizens just to make a point or decline listening to an opinion. He as always been a selfish jerk.
George

Red Deer, Canada

#161 Mar 19, 2013
Syrian wrote:
<quoted text> Terrorism doesn't work for anyone. These rebels sealed their own doom when they linked up with AlQaeda!
Assad thinks it works for him
George

Red Deer, Canada

#162 Mar 19, 2013
Avenger wrote:
<quoted text>
Chrisy from the jungle is a commie conspiracy theorist who loves his dictators might as well talk to a brick wall.
The uneducated bonehead foreigner would try to force all private businesses to close totally clueless fool.
I thought it was funny that a Canadian almost became the new interim President of Syria. He is mouthing off right now that Canada does not give enough or do enough and that Syria will remember that in the future. He is from your neck of the woods, lol
Chris

Toronto, Canada

#163 Mar 19, 2013
Avenger wrote:
<quoted text>
Chrisy from the jungle is a commie conspiracy theorist who loves his dictators might as well talk to a brick wall.
The uneducated bonehead foreigner would try to force all private businesses to close totally clueless fool.
You propagandists went into frenzy.

Actually, all of the countries where the West made Regime Changes, went through peoplesí revolutions, and deposed of their Monarchs, and of Monarchiesí establishments. Yugoslavia took down Serbian king; Libya king Idris; Iraq also deposed of Monarch; so did Afghanistan. Monarchists went to the West, and lived there, and together with the CIA, staged the conflicts to return back, and to assume back their privileges. Basically the West and the Diaspora of these countries are returning history back, not because the leaders of these countries were tyrants, but because they were nationalists, and independent. A handful of traitors within these countries worked with the West, because that was the only way to get power, as they could not do it by themselves, because they did not have enough of support among the people.

Only idiots can believe that Libyan Bedouin, or Syrian nomad, or Afghanistanís villager raising sheepís, cares to have clowns circulating in the government positions every four years, i.e. Western Style Democracy. What these people want is the stability, so that they can live in piece, and raise their families. Freedom for them means to have enough of public space for their sheep to graze, so that they can feed their families; and to have enough of public land to move around, and erect their tents, to place their families there. The Western drumming, that these people want their kind of democracy, and the voting rights every four years, is a joke. It would just be a burden for these people. It is useful for Western colonizers, and the puppets they impose for the Governments.
Avenger

Kitchener, Canada

#164 Mar 19, 2013
George wrote:
<quoted text>
I thought it was funny that a Canadian almost became the new interim President of Syria. He is mouthing off right now that Canada does not give enough or do enough and that Syria will remember that in the future. He is from your neck of the woods, lol
Lol
Adios George good luck.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

US Military Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Senator says fighter program has been scandal a... 4 hr SNAFU 2
News Kerry recalls Vietnam War's influence on his ca... 12 hr FancyButtPirate 13
News A Washington ritual: Pentagon, Congress at odds... Wed FUBAR 1
News US sends F-22 fighters to reassure NATO allies ... Wed STUPID RUSSONAZIS 2
News US sends F-22 fighters to reassure NATO allies ... Wed Stupid Pols 1
News UPDATE 1-U.S. sends F-22 fighters to reassure N... Wed Stupid Pols 1
News Military investments in Alaska should help us w... Wed Go Blue Forever 1
More from around the web