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

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Salam everyone,

I don't know why this just came across my mind, but I want to know your views on Bashar al Assad, I know some Shias praise him because he supports them but some of them are against him because he's a violent criminal but I don't know whose right and whose wrong, even my dad used to say he was a good politician yet when I search up about him, majority would say he's a criminal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Propaganda_of_the_Deed said:

I fail to see the contradiction here.

Whenever I'd ask my dad, he would tell me that he's a good politician and whatever they say about him in the media is false, however I was confused because whenever I'd research abiyt him, majority of the sources would be against him

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like him and his family and I also think he is one of the most responsible of the actual chaos in Syria and I also don't like the ideology of his government (secular pan Arab government). However those in front of him are even worst and could be even dangerous for Shia Muslims so by default I support him without loving him at all in reality. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

Whenever I'd ask my dad, he would tell me that he's a good politician and whatever they say about him in the media is false, however I was confused because whenever I'd research abiyt him, majority of the sources would be against him

axJmn.gif

Someone who is adept at being a politician and surviving usually gets there by ethically/morally questionable means.

Politics is a dirty game, which is why only an infallible could be a true leader.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We should look at who he is a student of in terms of his religion, he is a follower of Ibn Nusayr a propagator of Ghulat ideals and his rule has led Syrians to killing one another whilst saying he will liberate Julan and Al-Quds whilst using his missiles, military might, and chemical weapons on Aleppo. He has sold his country and the wounds of this war will never heal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let’s not forget that the ulama of Najaf forbid the Iraqi militias to involve themselves in Syrian conflict. Those that went there, are following Ayatollah Khamenei. Others refused to fight on behalf of Assad. Assad is a Baathist secular ruler married to a Sunni woman, he couldn’t care less not only for Islam but even his own Alawite faith. Let’s not also forget that, despite Wahhabi propaganda, hundreds of thousands of Sunnis died and still fight for Assad’s Ba’ath Syria. That includes not only Syrian Sunnis, but also Sunni Pan-Arabists from all over the Arab world. The fight in Syria is not a sectarian war, it’s all about geopolitics. Americans want him out because Syria is a corridor for Iran to deliver weapons to Hezbollah in Lebanon. Also, Syria and Israel are de facto in the state of war (peace agreement was never signed), so it’s also all about getting him out for Israel that occupies Syrian Golan Heights..

Edited by OrthodoxTruth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

Whenever I'd ask my dad, he would tell me that he's a good politician and whatever they say about him in the media is false, however I was confused because whenever I'd research abiyt him, majority of the sources would be against him

Salam , Majority Of Media are hating true politicians & good people like as Imam Khomeini (رضي الله عنه) & Imam Khamenei but until Imam Khamenei supports Bashar Al Asad I support him althought he made many mistakes but in conclusion survived Syria & it's people from hands of Radicals & Israel also most of hate from him is because of his father actions in past that he was a brutal dictator & did many crimes to take power but in opposition of other Arab Dictators helped Iran when other Arab dicators were helping Saddam (la) & syrian army inherited it's brutal policy from him that Bashar Asad just could control a little  the violence of Syrian Army  but sometimes he couldn't control it during war because it wasn't suppose to that he be the next leader but after mysterious dying of his elder brother that was a Twelver Shia he had to accept this position so always he has hole in his power but tries to show himslef stronger than his reality that sometimes leads to harsh actions in war anyway in Allama Kurani that is an expert in Mahdawiat said based on prohecies by hadiths that Iran & Shias will lost Syria but we will take back Yemen few years before Imam Mahdi (aj) reappearance that sufyaini (la) will conquer Damascus & most of land of Syria that in process current syrian regime will fall but we still support it that in time of Sufyani (la) raid to Syria ,Shias will have a better condition  but he will bring again greater disaster to Iraqi Shias than ISIS & Daesh that it said in narrations that Shia men in Iraq must hide themselves but women & children won't face problem until coalition army of Iranians & Yemenis reach to Iraq but in narrations about Syria just talked about great war of Qirqisia that Shias most avoid to participate in this war.

Edited by Ashvazdanghe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is all about geopolitical situation. Iran has to be smarter to face Israel and the US.  Do not make enemies with countries that are within Iran's neighborhood.   The US and Israel will use that country as platform for proxy war or covert actions.

When the 3rd Khalifah was attacked, Imam Ali sent his sons to protect.

Please see the bigger picture.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, layman said:

When the 3rd Khalifah was attacked, Imam Ali sent his sons to protect.

Quote

“Some historians have claimed that Imam al-Hasan defended Uthman on the Day of the House (youm al-daar)according to his father’s order, and that he showed extreme courage in this respect, to the extent that he was stained with his blood. Without doubt this is among the things fabricated by the Umayyads. That is because Imam al-Hasan ((عليه السلام)) and the rest of the righteous Muhajireen and of the Ansar isolated themselves from Uthman; rather they were among those who harbored malice against him. None was present to defend him except the Umayyads and some opportunists. If Uthman had had any popular base in the society, the revolutionists would not have been able to kill him.

All the companions of the Prophet deserted him. None of them hurried to help and support him; rather they glorified the revolt against him and urged the revolutionists. According to these attitudes, how was it possible for Imam al-Hasan to violate the unanimous resolution and go to defend Uthman?

Anyway al-Amini, a researcher, has falsified such a report and regarded it as among the fabricated ones.”

Source: THE LIFE OF Imam AL-Hasan AL-MUJTABA, Baqir Shareef al-Qurashi, [حياة الإمام الحسن بن علي عليهما السلام دراسة وتحليل –  باقر شريف القرشي , Page 279-280

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He is a dictator and oppressor. However he is better than a western puppet or a wahabi head chopper.

Many Muslims make this make of saying, I don’t support Assad because of x y and z. Ok, but what is the alternative? someone worse? 

We have to be pragmatic and say, we need a safe and organised Syria, therefore we can pick the best available leader.  Most in the Syria conflict were tricked into thinking there is this magical perfect leader just waiting to come into power. Of course there is isnt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is nothing to like about him and that's all. No need to compare him to other evils and say he is better evil. Evil is evil, hated and cursed by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) expect if they repent their ways. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Syria truth

I think as Shias of Amir-ul-Mumineen, we need to be intelligent and take nuanced positions, neither supporting a Zaalim, nor being brainwashed by those who spread falsities, such as the mainstream media. I personally have spent hundreds upon hundreds of hours researching, debating and going deep into the Syrian conflict. Never has a modern day conflict created (in my view) such enormous sectarian propaganda and schisms, and in and of itself fought over by a plethora of countries in and out of the region in pursuit of their own geopolitical goals.

Now, when it comes to Assad, because of his stance against Israel, US hegemony in the region, as well as support for the Palestinians, he made many enemies. This has in addition, made him an enemy of many. Syria had the disputed Golan heights, it was seen as a network between Iran and Hezbollah, and it was regarded to support Palestinian groups in Gaza. Now, before I give the other side to Assad, I want to make it very clear I am more than aware of who he was up against.

Let me summarise the key players for you here:

1. The US, Western governments (Britain, who are the miniature poodle of the US), Israel and co sought to deal with Assad because of his support for Iran, the Palestinians, and Hezbollah. They saw him as an important link between Iran and the Lebanese group, and an important supporter of the so-called 'Shiite crescent'. Bringing down Assad they felt, would weaken Iran's influence in the region, as well as Hezbollah's , for the good of Israel and their own control in the region. 

2. Saudi-Arabia, a US ally, is predominately composed of Hanbalis and the official state religion is Salafi Islam. They are ideologically strongly opposed to Shiites and see the very existence of an independent Shiite state, whatever it does, as something they would be against. Anything that can bolster what they regard to be deviant Islam, blasphemous Islam must be opposed at all costs. The Iranian government is also seen as a geopolitical thorn for Saudi-Arabia, and its own influence in the region, namely its alleged support for the Houthis to cite a recent example. Iran also represents people rising up against oppressive regimes, and perhaps it symbolically represents an ideological threat to the Saudi regime. You can also lump in many of the other Gulf states under this bracket, even if they are against Saudi as well, such as Qatar (who were arch financiers of the terrorist group, Ahrar-Asham in Syria).

3. Turkey, who shares its borders with Syria doesn't itself want to be seen allied against a so-called Sunni uprising, even if it knows many of those groups are terrorists and even supported them knowing that. Turkey also worries about the YPG/Kurds, a group it views as a threat to its own existence. 

4. Russia. The Russians view Syria as an important geopolitical chess-piece. Syria in the hands of US/Western backed terrorist groups would greatly reduce its own influence in the region, the influence of allies who are also against the US (I.e Iran), and thus weaken its allies and its influence, not to mention the other geopolitical consequences. 

5. Radical extremist groups. Daesh(ISIS), Jabhat al-Nusra,Ahrar Asham, et have either supported, worked with, or are themselves linked to Alqaeda, terrorism and a viciously sectarian extreme Salafi ideology. They view Syria as their Jihad, and many of them have varying motivations. Some may lust for war and blood, others perhaps viewing it as a holy war against the 'evil Rawafidh'.  Many are (were) directly or inadvertently backed by the US, Gulf States, Turkey and others. 

So when you hear criticism of Assad, it's not because of the bad things he has done or is doing. They in essence are all opportunistic and have their own ulterior motives.

While Assad is certainly a lesser evil, and while many of the ulema in Iran have needed to publicly ally with him and praise the resistance he has had against al-Aqaeda and ISIS, as well as western backed destruction of Syria, keep in mind this is a tactical, political public statement. They do not want Syria to be run by a shariah-Shurah government oppressing the majority and led by groups run by al-Qaeda or worked with them, and funded by Gulf states which will cause far greater evil and bloodshed in the long term. If they publicly criticise him as he deserves, it would seek to make a fragile situation with all of these outside and inside groups more evil than he is jump at the chance and things would descend into chaos.

Assad is an alawite, with a Sunni wife and a large part of his parliament and army are actually composed of Sunnis. Many orthodox Sunnis as well as secular ones aren't on the side of extreme Salafi and Al-Qaeda supporting groups like Jabhat al-Nusra, Ahrar Asham, Jaysh al Islam etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Syria truth

Just look at this extremist-Salafi (there are moderate ones and extreme ones) Bilal Abdul Kareem, interviewing a terrorist commander from Jabhat al-Nusra. Bilal Abdul Kareem by the way, was dubbed as the go-to western journalist, whose twitter was used regularly in corporate media, and whose claims were regarded as fact. We aren't making up the fact terrorist groups by far formed the most powerful forces in Syria.

https://youtu.be/0RIsR9LXiWU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Syria truth

I also recommend going through this thread to get a flavour of just how many powerful terrorist groups were in Syria:

https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235034427-list-of-bad-groups-in-Syria/

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Abu Nur said:

There is nothing to like about him and that's all. No need to compare him to other evils and say he is better evil. Evil is evil, hated and cursed by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) expect if they repent their ways. 

I disagree.

We need to not cause our own destruction. If we let the isis take over, or a western puppet, then we could either be massacred or be in a dungeon.

Hence why the Imams AS made deals with people like muawiya etc, not because they thought they were great, but the alternative would be worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Zain el-Abidine said:

We should look at who he is a student of in terms of his religion, he is a follower of Ibn Nusayr a propagator of Ghulat ideals and his rule has led Syrians to killing one another whilst saying he will liberate Julan and Al-Quds whilst using his missiles, military might, and chemical weapons on Aleppo. He has sold his country and the wounds of this war will never heal.

:salam:

I sincerely doubt him being a student of Ibn Nusayr while graduating medicine abroad and marrying a Sunni woman.

On the other hand I see in your avatar the son and student of a great man, who after using chaos as a career booster  is now ready to sell his country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, iraqi_shia said:

I disagree.

We need to not cause our own destruction. If we let the isis take over, or a western puppet, then we could either be massacred or be in a dungeon.

Hence why the Imams AS made deals with people like muawiya etc, not because they thought they were great, but the alternative would be worse.

That have nothing to do with what I posted. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who said he was Shi’ite? Here he is praying with his hands folded.

The erstwhile/late king of Saudi Arabia, once said, as reported by an Iraqi politician:

“We shall not let a Shi'ite rule Damascus, the land of the Omayyad family.”

In his genealogy/family tree, it’s said that his grandfather, Solomon the ‘Lion,’ was a Jew from Isfahan that traveled to the coastal town of Cardaha in the 18th century, and ‘disguised’ as an Ala’w'I - and that in origin, his name was not the ‘lion,’ nor was it the ‘wild beast,’ - rather it was, the ‘mule.’

Although, it’s theoretical and probably made-up by his opponents, it could’ve been true.

 

In sum, it’s all political interests. If you were Shi’ite, and you opposed him, he’d probably kill you. His ‘Pan-Arabist’ ideology doesn't differ from any other traditional/classical Arabian dictator’s actions - Except, he’s allied with a supposed ‘Shi’ite power,’ and that’s why you see everyone flocking in masses, inside of his country - to supposedlyfight the ‘danger of the Shi’ite power,’ while nor is he Shi’ite, neither are they fighting us on the ground. His army is mainly consisted of Sunni people, with an Ala’wi minority, and not the opposite as the West pictures it.

 

I’d prefer him over the supposed ‘caliphate,’ though. At least, he isn’t sectarian.

Edited by Simon the Canaanite

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.


×
×
  • Create New...