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
Sign in to follow this  
islam25

Is Iran also involved in killing of innocent Syria

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Assad not only wants to get rid of ISIS. He also wants to take advatage of the support he has from Russia to exterminate the Syrian opposition. There is no limit for the cost, counted in human lives, that is to high for Assad. That Khameney still support Assad is remarkable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, andres said:

That Khameney still support Assad is remarkable.

There is no evidence that he supports Assad , he is supporting by gov for resistance against anti shia parties .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Abu Nur said:

So Sayeda Zainab's (as) shrine protecting means support the government of Assad and his war, or it can't just be protect the shrine only and that's all? 

If someone's teeth is hurting, they can either take pain killers to temporarily relieve the pain, but the pain will keep coming back, or they can fix the root of the problem by going to the dentist and getting their teeth fixed, so the pain never comes back. Although both ways relieve the pain, going to the dentist is the smarter method. Now apply this concept with Hezbollah in Syria. If Hezbollah went into Syria to just protect the shrine, the terrorists would not stop coming to destroy it. However, instead, Hezbollah tackled the root of the problem which is by cooperating with Assad and his army in order to kill the terrorists all over Syria, this way the terrorists do not come back and threaten the shrine or the Shi'a. Iran and Hezbollah know what they are doing, they are a lot smarter than all of us and have full knowledge of the situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Abu Nur said:

The same way how Iraqis handled the civilians in battle of Mosul. They really did care of their own people.

The scales were completely different. Syria was bearing the brunt of the Western powers; Iraq to a much lesser extent.

No defense for Assad but at the same time, let's condemn all the western and Arab governments that added constant fuel to the fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, islam25 said:

You check 500 hundred innocent were killed by bombing. 

I donot say killing of ISIS is wrong. But how can you defend killing of hundreds of women and children. 

Everything is not propaganda. 

What do you suggest? Isis and their types have taken over an area. In every country in the world, when Isis strikes, they send the army in. When it's Syria, they have a truce?? Next time there is a terror attack in France or USA, I'm going to ask for a truce before they send the army in. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought Assad was an Alevi. From my knowledge they are not considered believers. So, how is supporting Assad equivalent to supporting Shias?

Please correct me if I’m wrong. I’ll be the first to admit I have limited knowledge in the Middle East conflicts.

Edited by 786:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, 786:) said:

I thought Assad was an Alevi. From my knowledge they are not considered believers. So, how is supporting Assad equivalent to supporting Shias?

Please correct me if I’m wrong. I’ll be the first to admit I have limited knowledge in the Middle East conflicts.

Salam they ar not unbelievers ,Alevi is a subject of Shia Islam so they are more near to Shias but they are weak in shia Islam belief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm anti-foreign intervention and I oppose the "rebels" too, however, that in no way should be mistaken to mean I support the Assad government in all that it has done. The use of indiscriminate tactics that kill civilians cannot be justified. In a perfect world, we need a third option, not Assad and not the rebels/ISIS but an option that can guarantee that Syria remains a pluralistic state without the corrupt Baathist government and vicious security apparatus. The Assad government may have widespread support among Syrians for now, but if there is ever an alternative to him that isn't part of the Baathist state but also not jihadi militants wanting to destroy minorities, then he will probably not have much of the support. It is true the uprising was hijacked very early on by western powers and their regional allies, even foreigners came in through Turkey to fight in a country they had no business being in. But let's not forget, repression also leads people to become more radical too. The Baathist government has regularly used means like torture, executions to silence its opposition. Let's not forget that Assad cooperated with the US on its rendition program in the war on terror, by torturing his own citizens at the command of the US government, and many of these citizens were completely innocent. They were regular Syrians living abroad. That's not something an anti-imperialist leader would do. So yea, there is a propaganda campaign and claims are exaggerated a lot, but let this not fool you to think that the Assad government hasn't committed atrocities, it has. In a war, civilians die, true, but that doesn't mean you should use this excuse to say well, no matter how many die, it's fine because it's war. That's being callous. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Mohamed1993 said:

I'm anti-foreign intervention and I oppose the "rebels" too, however, that in no way should be mistaken to mean I support the Assad government in all that it has done. The use of indiscriminate tactics that kill civilians cannot be justified. In a perfect world, we need a third option, not Assad and not the rebels/ISIS but an option that can guarantee that Syria remains a pluralistic state without the corrupt Baathist government and vicious security apparatus. The Assad government may have widespread support among Syrians for now, but if there is ever an alternative to him that isn't part of the Baathist state but also not jihadi militants wanting to destroy minorities, then he will probably not have much of the support. It is true the uprising was hijacked very early on by western powers and their regional allies, even foreigners came in through Turkey to fight in a country they had no business being in. But let's not forget, repression also leads people to become more radical too. The Baathist government has regularly used means like torture, executions to silence its opposition. Let's not forget that Assad cooperated with the US on its rendition program in the war on terror, by torturing his own citizens at the command of the US government, and many of these citizens were completely innocent. They were regular Syrians living abroad. That's not something an anti-imperialist leader would do. So yea, there is a propaganda campaign and claims are exaggerated a lot, but let this not fool you to think that the Assad government hasn't committed atrocities, it has. In a war, civilians die, true, but that doesn't mean you should use this excuse to say well, no matter how many die, it's fine because it's war. That's being callous. 

Spot on. And back to what I said. They are all dictators - if we like them, they are "king" , otherwise a dictator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, King said:

Oh a SC miracle.  We actually have shia's condemning Assad for a change.  Usually it is just blind apologists.

Akhi , we had an Admin, several other Admins, and many moderators, and a total of 50+ of them and users condemning Assad in 2013:

Liked by over 50 SC members. 

Defences of Assad tend to come from people responding to mainstream media exaggerations and lies about him. That isn't to say he isn't responsible for war crimes. The most common phrase i hear from Shias pertaining to Assad is that is is a lesser evil, and the alternative is just not even worth thinking about. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 786:) said:

I thought Assad was an Alevi. From my knowledge they are not considered believers. So, how is supporting Assad equivalent to supporting Shias?

Please correct me if I’m wrong. I’ll be the first to admit I have limited knowledge in the Middle East conflicts.

It's more complex because they aren't all the same.

However we don't care what creed they follow, but what is right and wrong imho. In Syria, it had nothing to do with Assad, given his wife is a Sunni, many major members of his cabinet are Sunnis, and it is pretty open and evident he isn't fussed. He's more secular than anything.  What we're bothered about is America and Gulf-states using Syria as a geopolitical chess-piece for their own goals. Radical groups founded by Al-Qaeda such as Jabhat al-Nusra, and Ahrar As-Sham forming a Shairah-Shurah extreme-Salafi Caliphate, and a much greater evil and blood-bath that will ensue in the ME if that were to be allowed to occur. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mohamed1993 said:

Baathist state but also not jihadi militants wanting to destroy minorities, then he will probably not have much of the support

 

1 hour ago, shiaman14 said:

Spot on. And back to what I said. They are all dictators - if we like them, they are "king" , otherwise a dictator.

Dont know if either of you are from that region (Iraq, Syria) but these people are not ready for a democratic system just take it with a grain of salt that in order for these countries to function they need someone with a iron fist or else you end up with Iraq or Libya, a terrorist breeding ground, corrupt, sectarian battle ground and criminal filled failed states so like I said with a grain of salt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

Akhi , we had an Admin, several other Admins, and many moderators, and a total of 50+ of them and users condemning Assad in 2013:

Liked by over 50 SC members. 

Defences of Assad tend to come from people responding to mainstream media exaggerations and lies about him. That isn't to say he isn't responsible for war crimes. The most common phrase i hear from Shias pertaining to Assad is that is is a lesser evil, and the alternative is just not even worth thinking about. 

If I had a dollar for every time you posted that topic I'd be a millionaire. Al-Mufeed says not to idolize or praise Assad, and every Shi'a can agree with that. The issue is people like yourself, who go beyond to accuse him of crimes without any evidence. You portray him as some evil dictator [just like the west and the terrorists] and call his government 'regime' [just like the west] and believe many lies people tell about him. You certainly weren't like this a year ago brother, I don't know who has been brainwashing you to turn you into an anti-Assad.

Edited by Hassan-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Hassan- said:

If I had a dollar for every time you posted that topic I'd be a millionaire. Al-Mufeed says not to idolize or praise Assad, and every Shi'a can agree with that. The issue is people like yourself, who go beyond to accuse him of crimes without any evidence. You portray him as some evil dictator [just like the west and the terrorists] and call his government 'regime' [just like the west] and believe many lies people tell about him. You certainly weren't like this a year ago brother, I don't know who has been brainwashing you to turn you into an anti-Assad.

Mr.There is no confusion that assad suppressed the Syrians demand of political reform by force killing innocents. But latter the Saudi Arabia and western power hijacked it. 

So both Assad and Saudia and West are involved in death of syrian. Even if it seems logical that Iranian support to Assad against ISIS and Alnusra. But at same time Iran should have condemned assads brutal use of force against its own people. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Hassan- said:

If someone's teeth is hurting, they can either take pain killers to temporarily relieve the pain, but the pain will keep coming back, or they can fix the root of the problem by going to the dentist and getting their teeth fixed, so the pain never comes back. Although both ways relieve the pain, going to the dentist is the smarter method. Now apply this concept with Hezbollah in Syria. If Hezbollah went into Syria to just protect the shrine, the terrorists would not stop coming to destroy it. However, instead, Hezbollah tackled the root of the problem which is by cooperating with Assad and his army in order to kill the terrorists all over Syria, this way the terrorists do not come back and threaten the shrine or the Shi'a. Iran and Hezbollah know what they are doing, they are a lot smarter than all of us and have full knowledge of the situation.

I think Hisbullah and Iran have more to do in Syrian than just protecting a Shrine or for sake of shrine, every of them have their own interest. And it is not necessary that they interest is even favor for general Shias, rather it can cause other Shias trouble. This is why for example Iraq actually do not want to join with them. 

Edited by Abu Nur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Abu Nur said:

And then he notices that he joined in very large mess just for protecting a shrine.

Not just protecting the shrine, but protecting the Shi'as of Syria, Lebanon and Iraq. If Syria was controlled by ISIS and Nusra, Lebanon would be next on the list, and they even said it themselves. If they enter Lebanon they would start slaughtering the Shi'as everywhere. If they get control of Lebanon and Syria, they will have gained so much power that if they target Iraq next, Iraq would be finished.

Hezbollah wants to exterminate the terrorists before they grow and become stronger, because if they become larger and gain control of more land, it will be a lot harder to defend ourselves if they attack us. 

And even if they joined this large mess just for protecting the shrine, would it not be worth it to protect the grave of Sayeda Zaynab (as)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

If they enter Lebanon they would start slaughtering the Shi'as everywhere. If they get control of Lebanon and Syria, they will have gained so much power that if they target Iraq next, Iraq would be finished.

We can go so far to just protect our own land and our shrines, I agree with this. Let Assad handle his own country. But this is my point, and why I complain. I believe some of Shias take it very far to cheer up Assad and his action just because Iran or Hisbullah is with side of Assad. Whenever someone show how Assad attack with airstrike and how it also just killed a lot civilians, some of the Shias are in protective mode trying to protect this injustice act by saying either propaganda or you read western media.

 

Edited by Abu Nur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Abu Nur said:

I think Hisbullah and Iran have more to do in Syrian than just protecting a Shrine or for sake of shrine, every of them have their own interest. And it is not necessary that they interest is even favor for general Shias, rather it can cause other Shias trouble. This is why for example Iraq actually do not want to join with them. 

As I said in my other post, they aren't in Syria to just protect the shrine. Protecting the shrine is only one of the reasons why they are involved. One reason why Hezbollah and Iran want control of Syria is for political reasons, and there is nothing wrong with that because the Shi'a gaining control of Syria will only benefit us more and benefit the Shi'a in Iraq, and make the Shi'a people even stronger and safer. If Hezbollah and Iran only cared about their own interest, then Iraq would be under control of ISIS right now. It was the Iraqi people with the help of Iran and Hezbollah that helped Iraq become free. 

2 minutes ago, Abu Nur said:

We can go so far to just protect our own land and our shrines, I agree with this. Let Assad handle his own country. But this is my point, and why I complain. I believe some of Shias take it very far to cheer up Assad and his action just because Iran or Hisbullah is with side of Assad. Whenever someone show how Assad just killed civilians, some of the Shias are in protective mode trying to protect this injustice act by saying either propaganda or you read western media.

Every Shi'a admits Assad has killed innocent civilians, but that doesn't mean we should be against him. It's either we choose him or the terrorists, there is no neutral side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Syria and Russia: 'US Lies About Use of Chemical Weapons'

http://www.iran-daily.com/News/208719.html

Syria and Russia on Wednesday accused the United States of lying about chemical weapons attacks in the Syrian conflict as a way of derailing efforts to bring an end to the fighting.

Syria’s state-run SANA news agency carried comments from a Foreign Ministry source condemning what it called “lies and allegations” by U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian.

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told the Interfax news agency that whenever peace efforts advance, the United States promotes “rigged, unverified reports” of chemical weapons attacks in Syria.

Those comments came a day after the United States joined its NATO allies in launching a pressure campaign against the use of chemical weapons in Syria, while singling out Russia for protecting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s government.

https://inserbia.info/today/2018/01/russia-syria-accuse-us-of-lying-about-chemical-weapons-attacks/

Syria denies 'lies' on chemical weapons use

https://www.geo.tv/latest/178527-syria-denies-lies-on-chemical-weapons-use

Syria dismisses US 'lies' on chemical weapons use

http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2018/02/03/551163/Syria-US-chemical-weapons-lies

Syria blasts US accusations on chemical weapons use as 'lies'

http://www.straitstimes.com/world/middle-east/syria-blasts-us-accusations-on-chemical-weapons-use-as-lies


Russia and U.S. Clash at UN Over Syria Chemical Weapons Inquiry

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-02-05/russia-and-u-s-clash-at-un-over-syria-chemical-weapons-inquiry

image.jpeg.f142b8a26269f549bc2b6bc86b085aff.jpegImage result for Syria, Russia Accuse US of Lying About Chemical Weapons Attacks Image result for Syria, Russia Accuse US of Lying About Chemical Weapons AttacksRelated imageRelated image

Edited by Ashvazdanghe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, SIAR14 said:

FB_IMG_1519626961219.jpg

Brother that picture you put of the mother as Syria made me legit sad because the soldiers are so tired out but still keep going to make their nation as great as it once was despite the odds against them they keep going :(. What great will God has blessed them with, united despite different religions to stomp out the cancer that harms their motherland.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, islam25 said:

Even though you are right. But not fully. In begging it clearly Syrians demand of political reform that assad denied. Yes latter Saudi Arabia and West hijacked the Syrians demand by sending infiltrators. 

It obvious there good chance of civilan getting killed while fighting against terrorists. 

But death around 400 civilian and many kids clearly indicates that indiscriminate use of weapons against civilan .If even minimum restrain and cautious one would  be this much innocent lives won't loose. 

You are right but not fully, too.

Sahyuni Arabia and the West had anticipated it, long time before the beginning of the uprising, with massive donations of money and weapons to big sunni clans in Syria.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, islam25 said:

Mr.There is no confusion that assad suppressed the Syrians demand of political reform by force killing innocents. But latter the Saudi Arabia and western power hijacked it. 

So both Assad and Saudia and West are involved in death of syrian. Even if it seems logical that Iranian support to Assad against ISIS and Alnusra. But at same time Iran should have condemned assads brutal use of force against its own people. 

 

4 minutes ago, realizm said:

You are right but not fully, too.

Sahyuni Arabia and the West had anticipated it, long time before the beginning of the uprising, with massive donations of money and weapons to big sunni clans in Syria.

Its pretty know even in CIA files that they planned the overthrow of the Assad government since the early 80's so this overthrow was intended they were just waiting for the moment and it came and they acted, but they dont know that Allah is the best of planners and this destruction will not go unacted.

"They want to put out the light of God with their mouths but God will perfect his light even though the unbelievers may be averse." 61:8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

There is no evidence that he supports Assad , he is supporting by gov for resistance against anti shia parties .

Is there no other way to support the Shia parties than massacring the opposition?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, andres said:

Is there no other way to support the Shia parties than massacring the opposition?  

it is refuted by Russia & Syria & Imam Khamenei always mentioning supporting of oppressed people  not their Regims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, islam25 said:

Mr.Do you think Iran and particularly maraja should comeforward and condemn the recent killing of innocent kids and women. 

Bro I like the way you are trying to get the truth. For you Aleppo war could be a good case study. When these Zionist regimes got defeated badly in Aleppo they did the same propaganda against Iran. White helmet, Middle eastern and European channels played a vital role for spreading such rumors. Just wait and watch Iran will react to this situation wisely and smartly. Reacting to such rumors is not as easy as we think. Even sincere person can get into trap of these news, they make you emotionally.  

Edited by SIAR14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

it is refuted by Russia & Syria & Imam Khamenei always mentioning supporting of oppressed people  not their Regims.

How is Russias,  Syrias and Irans reputation when it comes to supporting the rights of opposition and opression? No better or worse than many other nations. 

Democrasies have the advantage of  a free press, but when it comes to foreign affairs all nations are basically selfish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, shiaman14 said:

With all due respect, I think it is a stretch. I will say that Iran is working on a shia Crescent which is why the Shia are politically stronger today than at any time in history.

I dont think it is a stretch, as you know the ultimate decisions with regards to Iran foreign policy is in ayatollah Khameneis hands and it is no stretch to believe that he would work in order to serve Islam and base decision with regards to that goal.

 

16 hours ago, Abu Nur said:

What an irrelevant statement.

It is not irrelevant, maybe you misunderstood my example, so let me rephrase it in another way:

You either do something that is not ideal but by doing so you will prevent something 100 times worse to happen.

Yes, it would be great if assad was a saint and he would have full moral and physical support, but he is not, yet he is much better than what the west has in mind. 

This is the reality of the situation and your options on how to act is limited and every decision you take or not take will have its own consequence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly guys, you need to respect our scholars, if anyone would bring moral condemnation of the situation with full insight it would be them.

Their insight into the political and religious matter of the situation is far greater than yours or mine, so if they have not said what you are saying, then perhaps your saying are based on western media which is not biased while theirs are based on the fear of Allahسُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى and the intelligence services at their hands.

Your information is based on what exactly? The news you read/watch after work for 10 minutes when you get home? These scholars will put the B is basira, so please show them the respect they deserve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think some people live in a world where they think they have a choice between good and evil. In this case, our choice is evil and more evil so we chose evil.

To say if we had an alternative...we don't. We have Assad who is protecting our interests (albeit for selfish reasons) and the other side which won't protect our interests.

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...