Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Are Shia who support Assad party to his crimes?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member
53 minutes ago, DigitalUmmah said:

COMPLETELY innocent.

And which one of the rulers of the world today are completely innocent that you support? You should also include the ones underneath him that your support for him includes as well directly and/or indirectly.

Second question, do you pay tax in the UK? Because if you do, then you are by extension supporting everyone that the UK supports, what will you then have to stand answer for on the day of judgement?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Things have happened and we are in a situation that on one side there are terrorists supported by zionists and funded by Saudi & Qatar and on the other hand there is bashar al-Assad who has done zulm on his own citizens.

Two Situations:

1. Do not support bashar al-Assad and let the daesh capture the whole of syria, destroy shrines, supply oil to the world and let the income flow in the pockets of daesh, America, Saudi yahudi,etc, installing zionist/wahabi puppet. Thereby daesh becoming more and more powerful everyday and eyeing the neighbouring territory as well (Iraq, lebanon, Iran isn't any far).

2. Support bashar al-Assad in fight against daesh and get security of holy shrines, better lives for Syrians as compared to that under ISIS.

We have to choose less worse option similar to choosing between Trump and Hillary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, IbnSina said:

And which one of the rulers of the world today are completely innocent that you support? You should also include the ones underneath him that your support for him includes as well directly and/or indirectly.

I don't support any. have you ever seen me show any sort of support to any leaders? in my opinion everyone at that level is corrupt, but to different levels. some more, some less. and yes that includes if the leader wears a turban or not. calling yourself a naib of the imam/ master of the affairs of the worlds muslims/ guardian of the worlds muslims/ claiming some form of legitimacy through a supposed association with the awaited imam is quite clearly corruption. 

32 minutes ago, IbnSina said:

Second question, do you pay tax in the UK? Because if you do, then you are by extension supporting everyone that the UK supports, what will you then have to stand answer for on the day of judgement?

I do pay tax - because I have to. not because I choose to. where could I live where I dont pay any tax, or pay to a completely aadil, corruption free government? go ahead take your time I will wait. 

out of all the countries on earth, I believe that the UK is the safest for me as a shia. there is literally no other country I can think of where I can live as safely or as comfortably as I do here.

there is a difference between me paying my tax as I am required by law, and me actually physically, financially and logistically supporting an opressor. can you see a line between these two situations?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Yeah, the same way Imam Ali (a) was responsible for the dead Muslims in Jamal, Seffin and Nahrawan. It's always easier to blame people on this side.

Pay tax to taghut system and blame people of wilaya based on the misinformation of taghut media.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DigitalUmmah said:

Salam, Ya Ali (as) Madad, Lanat upon the enemies of the Ahlulbayt (as)

If I support a zaalim in his zulm, then I am responsible in part and answerable for my role on qiyamat. 

Bashar al assad, while currently the better option when compared with da'esh, is undoubtedly a zaalim. he is responsible for barrel bombing entire towns/ villages, and killing only Allah knows how many innocent children/ non combatants. 

yes, I know all the counter arguments:

(1) he is the only supporter of Iran in that region
(2) many of his atrocities are over exaggerated/ actually done by da'esh and blamed on him
(3) he is the only option of stability in the country if power is to be transferred to another 

here are my counters to your counters

(1) does that mean support him no matter what in his zulm?
(2) that doesn't mean he is COMPLETELY innocent. there's 100s (1000s?) of videos of Syrian army helicopters dropping barrel bombs on apartment complexes in residential areas. 
(3) this situation would not even be here if he hadn't gone 0 to 100 real quick as soon as the largely peaceful protests happened. 

secondly, what responsibility does sayed khamenei/ the shia leadership in support of him have with relation to his zulm? will sayed khamenei be answerable for the innocent lives lost because of his support of bashar al assad?

bashar is a baathist - saddamned (LA) was a baathist
bashar uses violent oppression to maintain power - saddamned (LA) used violent oppression to maintain power
bashar is only in power due to dodgy reasons - saddamned (LA) was only in power due to dodgy reasons

but shia support bashar, and yet curse saddamned?

thirdly, all this hot gas that shia have been talking about "unity" with the non shia has been finally exposed as complete rubbish sprouted by the higher ups to keep the gullible minded proletarian shias in line. when it comes to the crunch, unity with non shia didnt mean anything. shia/non shia relations are at the worst that they have ever been in my entire life, completely because of the syria situation. 

In conclusion, I believe that anyone who supports bashar al assad, whether from a government/ arms level right down to supporting him in their hearts, is supporting a zaalim and answerable for their support on the day of judgement. the issue of defending the holy shrines in syria cannot be used as an excuse for supporting him, as the shrines could have been defended with his support or without. 

@Abbas.

 

HMMM IF YOU ARE RIGHT THEN YES I AGREE, I DONT WANT ANY PART IN THE ZAALIM ACTIVITY OF THIS MAN,HARMING CIVILIANS, WHERE IN THE QURAN DOES IT SAY HARM CIVILIANS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
45 minutes ago, DigitalUmmah said:

I don't support any. have you ever seen me show any sort of support to any leaders? in my opinion everyone at that level is corrupt, but to different levels. some more, some less. and yes that includes if the leader wears a turban or not. calling yourself a naib of the imam/ master of the affairs of the worlds muslims/ guardian of the worlds muslims/ claiming some form of legitimacy through a supposed association with the awaited imam is quite clearly corruption. 

I do pay tax - because I have to. not because I choose to. where could I live where I dont pay any tax, or pay to a completely aadil, corruption free government? go ahead take your time I will wait. 

out of all the countries on earth, I believe that the UK is the safest for me as a shia. there is literally no other country I can think of where I can live as safely or as comfortably as I do here.

there is a difference between me paying my tax as I am required by law, and me actually physically, financially and logistically supporting an opressor. can you see a line between these two situations?

 

Well you do have a marja and you do pay khums when applicable and you do empower them by following their fatwas dont you?

I dont think everyone who has power is corrupt. The more religious they are, ideally, the less corrupt they will be, because ideally the more they will fear Allah(SWT).

Or you are saying that Ayatollah Khamenei and Ayatollah Sistani, they are all corrupt? That is a big claim. If you follow them, then you are following a corrupt leader and if not then you are not following any marja and you are required to follow a marja unless you are a marja yourself.

 

Yes, I recognized that you have to pay tax but not that you have to live in the UK.

Just like you yourself say "some more, some less". Do you believe the UK government with all the blood on its hand both now and before are on the "less"? And if not, why are you not in one of the "less evil" countries? Of course there is no such thing as a 100% corruption free government until the return of our Imam(ajf).

The UK might be safe and comfortable for YOU to live in, but what about the other that dont and get negatively affected by the tax money you pay to the UK government? There is no less bad solution? There are no less sinister governments?

Yes, I recognize the difference between actively helping and inactively helping but I also see that there is a choice between living and not living there and so not only would you not actively help them but also drastically lower the amount of inactive help/support. So if you are concerned about supporting zalims, this is the first question you should ask yourself in my opinion, what can I change about myself and my actions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest silasun

By this logic, Ayatollah Sistani is also a massive oppressor since he has praised and thanked elements of the Iraqi government and army on many an occasion, and as we know, elements of the Iraqi government is responsible for all sorts of oppression on the people (economic, putting down protests). I am not saying all or even most elements of the Iraqi government and army are like this, for the record.

However, we won't hear anybody saying that Ayatollah Sistani is an oppressor. Nor will we hear anybody criticise the other marjas who firmly side with Hezbollah (like Ayatollah Basheer Najafi or Ayatollah Safi Golpaygani).

Instead we like to take our asabiyah -our prejudice- as our Catechism and behave awfully unfairly towards Ayatollah Khamenei and the global Islamic movement.

What did the Qur'an tell us about those who take their forefathers as their Lords?

Edited by silasun
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mesbah said:

Yeah, the same way Imam Ali (a) was responsible for the dead Muslims in Jamal, Seffin and Nahrawan. It's always easier to blame people on this side.

lol wut

in jamal, siffeen and nahrahan, the enemies of Ali (as) were on an open battle field against him, personally. 

this is a little different to iran supporting its strategic ally as the violently persecute their own people (most of whom are innocent) dont you think? 

or do you liken bashar al assad to Imam Ali (as)?

1 hour ago, mesbah said:

Pay tax to taghut system and blame people of wilaya based on the misinformation of taghut media.

oh, so you don't pay any tax at all, do you?

49 minutes ago, notme said:

There are no good guys in the struggle for Syria. If not choosing the "lesser evil", what do you propose should be done? 

(1) Do nothing - its what Imam Ali (as) said to do in times of conflict, to act like a pregnant camel and remain in our houses so we cannot be used for either side.

(2) protect the shrines.

(3) stand with the oppressed. 

there were plenty of options open to bashar al assad which did not involve him carpet bombing sleeping babies. when he started doing that, the shia should have stood like hussain, not sided with yazeed because the turbans told us to. 

but, as usual, shia are all talk and have betrayed their fellow muslims. I have always been anti unity, I find it ironic to the point of farce that it is someone like me who is having to remind shia that killing innocent sunni is not cool. 

32 minutes ago, IbnSina said:

Well you do have a marja and you do pay khums when applicable and you do empower them by following their fatwas dont you?

i assure you I do not pay any khums to sayed khamenei

33 minutes ago, IbnSina said:

Or you are saying that Ayatollah Khamenei and Ayatollah Sistani, they are all corrupt? That is a big claim. If you follow them, then you are following a corrupt leader and if not then you are not following any marja and you are required to follow a marja unless you are a marja yourself.

sayed sistani? no.

I 100% believe he is a man of god, and beyond politics like this. he has never claimed to be master of the affairs of the worlds muslims, he has never claimed to be a naib of Imam Mahdi (as). he is not the iraqi political leader. 

38 minutes ago, IbnSina said:

Just like you yourself say "some more, some less". Do you believe the UK government with all the blood on its hand both now and before are on the "less"? And if not, why are you not in one of the "less evil" countries? Of course there is no such thing as a 100% corruption free government until the return of our Imam(ajf).

The UK might be safe and comfortable for YOU to live in, but what about the other that dont and get negatively affected by the tax money you pay to the UK government? There is no less bad solution? There are no less sinister governments?

I dont think you understood what I said. 

I never said the UK government is good, aadil, just, or anything. I do not support the UK governments foreign policy in my heart. I do not accept the royal family in my heart. 

however, this country is the best place on earth for me to live, as a shia. 

I would never live in Iran, I would never live in Iraq. I would never live in pakistan. you tell me, what other options do i have? come on, tell me. 

41 minutes ago, IbnSina said:

So if you are concerned about supporting zalims, this is the first question you should ask yourself in my opinion, what can I change about myself and my actions?

in situations like this where I am completely powerless, I reject zaalims like bashar al assad in my heart. and reject those who support him too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, silasun said:

By this logic, Ayatollah Sistani is also a massive oppressor since he has praised and thanked elements of the Iraqi government and army on many an occasion, and as we know, elements of the Iraqi government is responsible for all sorts of oppression on the people (economic, putting down protests). I am not saying all or even most elements of the Iraqi government and army are like this, for the record.

Apples and oranges - Sayed sistani has remained largely apolitical, and it is a well known fact to all iraqi that sayed sistani has refused to meet any government official for the past 2 years despite many requests.

sayed sistanis anger at 13 years of government theft of iraqi wealth is hardly a similar situation to iranian support of assad. 

29 minutes ago, silasun said:

What did the Qur'an tell us about those who take their forefathers as their Lords?

lol wut

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Basic Members

I have some questions please answer me  

 have you ever been in Syria? 

did you see assad is killing children? 

If your answer is no, how can you say assad is zaalim? 
or if assad is zaalim how could he select by Syrians again? 
may be you say: the election was rigged because in the news you heard something about that or may be you saw some videos against assad, but  can you believe all news or videos? 

Anyone knows  that USA and UK don't like assad to stay as a president because he is the only president in Arabic countries that supports Palestinians against Israel. 
And anyone knows that USA and UK are the biggest Israel's supporters so it's really natural that thay propagate against assad and make videos and say in the news anything that want about him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Bismehe Ta3ala,

Assalam Alikum Brother DU,

Do you know the Shia villages in Syria what are their names without looking it up?  Who will protect them?

Brother you don't need a lesson on what D3ish has done to the Shias and what they plan to do to Syria once they TRY to get rid of Bashar. 

Please your proposal on who is to protect the shrines in Damascus and other companion grave sites.

Please provide us with another plan of what should the Rajal Allah do instead of fighting in Syria?

During the July War of 2006 the whole world was against us except Bashar & Iran.  They provided the Resistance with weapons, cash, and a temporary place to stay (syria) while we were being bombed.  Britain didn't help us, Britain was with and always will be with Zionism. 

It's so easy to talk and look at what is happening from a far.  But I live right next door to the battle, and we have Rajal Allah protecting us from the infiltration of Da3ish by going to Syria instead of fighting them on our land.  What's wrong with that?  Do we wait for D3ish to come and destroy us?  Or do we fight and protect ourselves?

Yes, I agree with you Bashar is a dhalam, and we wait for our Imam to come and relieve us from all the oppressors.  Starting in your country and the rest of the taghoots all around the world.

God bless you.

M3 Salamah, FE AMIN Allah

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

There is a vital difference between supporting and preferring him to the alternatives. There's no denying that he is a brutal dictator, but if we've learnt anything from past regime changes, the alternative always ends up being worse. The world isn't perfect, we have to make decisions that support the lesser evil even if that lesser evil is really bad. Had he stepped down early on maybe there would've been a chance to have a different president who would've protected minorities but Syria soon became a hotbed for terrorism, that's when Iran and Hezbollah stepped in, they recognized what would happen if Assad fell.

Edited by Mohamed1993
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Interesting topic thank you! I don't know, it's a damned if we do and damned if we don't situation. Do we just sit by and watch  isis murder/rape ? While trying to destroy the fabric of Islam and humanity ?

Or do we get up and fight back while Isis uses human shields and hides amongst the population ?

May Allah Hasten the return of our Imam (as ) and Isa (as) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Blind following. Never blindly follow. Always question. A person is not inherently good because he says he is Shia, there are plenty of evil "Shia" in the world. It was only because of the Syrian government's oppressive policies that daesh was able to gain support of a portion of the population. 

I support neither daesh (obviously) nor Assad (also should be obvious), but what is the correct thing to do for the innocent people who are losing their homes, their limbs, their lives? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Often the Salafis that i unfortunately have the pleasure of knowing, post on their facebook things such as, "would Imam Ali support a tyrant like Bashar al Assad so why do the Shia support him if they are supposed to be the followers of Ali."

This war in Syria is really horrific in every sense of the word. Whilst i understand the crucial aspect of winning the war in the long run, it is extremely ugly and Bashars behaviour does not make us look good in any way at all. This is something that deeply troubles me as well DigitalUmmah.

Though simply defending the shrines alone, wouldn't be successful militarily.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Forum Administrators

Who is this Hassan Nasrallah?

He should learn some lessons from Digital Ummah about Islamic ethics and the realities of middle eastern politics. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Development Team
16 minutes ago, ShiaBwoy said:

This war in Syria is really horrific in every sense of the word. Whilst i understand the crucial aspect of winning the war in the long run, it is extremely ugly and Bashars behaviour does not make us look good in any way at all. This is something that deeply troubles me as well DigitalUmmah.

Same here, I am deeply troubled by this as well, the Iraqi Ba'athists under Saddam (la) were zealous in hatred and unrelentingly and unusually cruel to the Shia in Iraq. Syrian Baathist are still Baathist and I think it is hypocrisy for Shia  to continue supporting Assad and his government. 

Edited by Gaius I. Caesar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
11 minutes ago, Gaius I. Caesar said:

Same here, I am deeply troubled by this as well, the Iraqi Ba'athists under Saddam (la) were zealous in hatred and unrelentingly and unusually cruel to the Shia in Iraq. Syrian Baathist are still Baathist and I think it is hypocrisy for Shia  to continue supporting Assad and his government. 

Brother, if there was no daesh in Syria and Assad was doing zulm on the innocents then I assume Iran and Hezbullah would not have supported him. But understand the situation, if Assad is not supported then Daesh will overcome him and do you think they will spare a moment before attacking holy shrines. Neither you nor I nor any Shia supports bashar for his oppression but only to minimize the damage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
9 hours ago, DigitalUmmah said:

Salam, Ya Ali (as) Madad, Lanat upon the enemies of the Ahlulbayt (as)

If I support a zaalim in his zulm, then I am responsible in part and answerable for my role on qiyamat. 

Bashar al assad, while currently the better option when compared with da'esh, is undoubtedly a zaalim. he is responsible for barrel bombing entire towns/ villages, and killing only Allah knows how many innocent children/ non combatants. 

yes, I know all the counter arguments:

(1) he is the only supporter of Iran in that region
(2) many of his atrocities are over exaggerated/ actually done by da'esh and blamed on him
(3) he is the only option of stability in the country if power is to be transferred to another 

here are my counters to your counters

(1) does that mean support him no matter what in his zulm?
(2) that doesn't mean he is COMPLETELY innocent. there's 100s (1000s?) of videos of Syrian army helicopters dropping barrel bombs on apartment complexes in residential areas. 
(3) this situation would not even be here if he hadn't gone 0 to 100 real quick as soon as the largely peaceful protests happened. 

secondly, what responsibility does sayed khamenei/ the shia leadership in support of him have with relation to his zulm? will sayed khamenei be answerable for the innocent lives lost because of his support of bashar al assad?

bashar is a baathist - saddamned (LA) was a baathist
bashar uses violent oppression to maintain power - saddamned (LA) used violent oppression to maintain power
bashar is only in power due to dodgy reasons - saddamned (LA) was only in power due to dodgy reasons

but shia support bashar, and yet curse saddamned?

thirdly, all this hot gas that shia have been talking about "unity" with the non shia has been finally exposed as complete rubbish sprouted by the higher ups to keep the gullible minded proletarian shias in line. when it comes to the crunch, unity with non shia didnt mean anything. shia/non shia relations are at the worst that they have ever been in my entire life, completely because of the syria situation. 

In conclusion, I believe that anyone who supports bashar al assad, whether from a government/ arms level right down to supporting him in their hearts, is supporting a zaalim and answerable for their support on the day of judgement. the issue of defending the holy shrines in syria cannot be used as an excuse for supporting him, as the shrines could have been defended with his support or without. 

@Abbas.

My respect t for you has increased a 1000 fold. 

Ya Muhammad madad! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
1 minute ago, iCambrian said:

I'll dare to make this statement.

perhaps the best solution is to support the good Muslims in Syria who oppose both Assad and Isis. 

Surely they exist.

Yes, of course. But my previous question remains unanswered: how?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

So, the western mindset, good and bad terrorist. moderate terrorists, what a humanistic solution!

So far, western governments have been very successful in helping the "moderate opposition" we are seeing the results. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Lol if you don't support Assad than what other option do you have? Please tell me. Should the Syrians sit in there homes while they wait for ISIS and Western backed terrorist rebels to kill and steal there land, so they can turn Syria into a Saudi Arabia #2 ? Are you that naive to say Imam khamenei is corrupt by logically supporting the right side of the Syrian conflict? Hezbollah/Syrian army and other shias are risking there lives in the battlefield to protect the shrines and rid the terrorists away, yet you are here ranting and saying they are killing innocent people just like the western media tells everyone. Stop looking at the small things and start looking at the bigger picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
21 minutes ago, Sayed Hassan Y. said:

yet you are here ranting and saying they are killing innocent people just like the western media tells everyone. Stop looking at the small things and start looking at the bigger picture.

Are you saying that Assad and his forces have not killed one noncombatant? If even one noncombatant is killed, that is murder. That's what Islam teaches. The industrialization of war and dehumanization of humanity is a modern and evil invention. Whoever kills one innocent person, it is as if he kills all of humanity. 

21 minutes ago, Sayed Hassan Y. said:

if you don't support Assad than what other option do you have?

This, however, is a valid question. When tyrants are killing innocents from both sides, how do you side with right? Is it right to choose the so-called lesser evil? Is it right to do nothing while innocents are being killed? Is there another choice that doesn't involve willfully choosing evil?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
7 minutes ago, notme said:

Are you saying that Assad and his forces have not killed one noncombatant? If even one noncombatant is killed, that is murder. That's what Islam teaches. The industrialization of war and dehumanization of humanity is a modern and evil invention. Whoever kills one innocent person, it is as if he kills all of humanity. 

Assad and his army may have yes, that is why no one is saying they are perfect. But has Hezbollah and other Shia militias killed noncombatants? I don't think so. Maybe very few cases where it was unintentional. We Shias know our limits and the teachings of Islam, hence why we only engage out of self defence. You have realise that when there is a war, there will always be civilian casualties no matter how much you try to avoid it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
1 hour ago, iCambrian said:

Anyone ever heard the phrase " too many chefs in the kitchen"? That's Syria.

More like two Kitchens fighting for one restaurant. One kitchen there is complete chaos and inner fighting and the other is in complete harmony with one another and all on the same page hence why they survived six years and why they are winning.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...