ROC Declares War Against ISIS A 'Holy Battle'

[buzuxi02]

You stated that there was evidence that the sarin gas didn't come from the Syrian governments stash to start with, something the evidence fails to support. In fact what it shows is that Syria had stock piles it failed to report.
The issue isn't whether the rebels have ever used sarin gas, the issue is whether or not the Syrian government used sarin gas against non-combatants. And the evidence is pretty clear that they did. If the rebels used it, they wouldn't have used it in predominantly Sunni areas which is where most of the casualties are. They didn't gas themselves.

I can give you a source but you will say its a biased site or a biased media outlet. But I would think since the UN is heavily leaning towards rebel responsibility then it has merit.

Gas missiles 'were not sold to Syria' | Comment | Voices | The Independent

Yes, it is an umbrella organization rather like the PLO. But it does not include the Islamist factions contrary to your claim that all the rebels are Islamist terrorists.

Todays moderates are tomorrows terrorists. If the FSA is an umbrella group of differing militias and different goals then its safe to say they will turn on each other like they have been doing, switching sides, pledging alliances and allegiances with extreme elements. Assad is the only moderate. Here is one faction of the FSA, real name "DIVISION 30" that handed over their CIA issued weapons to Al Quaeda three weeks ago immediately upon entering Syria:
US-trained Division 30 rebels 'betray US and hand weapons over to al-Qaeda's affiliate in Syria' - Telegraph

 

[buzuxi02]

Anyhow back to my original assertion. That the reason why ISIS has not been defeated is because the 'coalition' never intended to defeat them. That the coalitions demonic goal of regime change and destabliziation has bit them in the behind and is the reason why a surge of refugees in the past 6 months has inundated the coalitions wonderful continent of Europe.

This rant from an article sums it all up about how the Syrian capital of ISIS Raqqa was untouched by the 'Coalition' but after just 72 hours of bombing they have now canceled all Mosque services out of fear:

Too Scared to Pray? ISIL Cancels Prayers for Fear of Russian Airstrikes [source]
“Friday prayers postponed!” The ISIS terrorists in Raqqa, their “capital,” are so afraid of Russian airstrikes, that they cancelled the Friday prayers. All the mosques are closed, until further notice. ISIS “has started to implement a plan to turn off electricity in a number of areas of the city when planes are overhead.”
According to the Russian Ministry of Defense Facebook page,
Islamic State fighters are in a state of “panic” and more than 600 have deserted [source]
People are asking some questions:
First, the Su-34 fighter jets use satellite intelligence, why bother the population with turning off the lights?
Second, who provides ISIS with electricity? The US “coalition”?
Third, why would “jihadists” cry and panic, when they see bombs dropping from the sky?
Isn’t it strange that, during the years of US “airstrikes,” they did none of this and generally moved around with impunity?

 

[Dalibor]

I find it mind boggling that so many Western Orthodox/Christians support anti-Asad stance whereas all Christians from Syria are saying Islamists are real evil. I don’t think there is a single Christian from Syria who wants Syrian government to be overthrown by ‘moderate’ rebels as West is calling them.
It goes to show how nationalistic pride of one’s country clouds people’s judgment over what is right and wrong. They would rather want Christianity be erased from Syria than admit West got it wrong all along.
You are right buzuxi02 Western coalition was bombing empty desert for the whole year. They want Syrian government to be overthrown by Islamists after which they will come to the rescue, defeat ISIL and install puppet regime in Syria. But the gig is up. Russians took matters in their own hands.

 

[smaneck]

I can give you a source but you will say its a biased site or a biased media outlet.

Actually, the media outlet seems to be doing a fairly responsible job, pointing out that the information comes entirely from unsubstantiated Russia sources.

But I would think since the UN is heavily leaning towards rebel responsibility then it has merit.

Except this article admits they can't substantiate that either, saying "these international employees cannot be identified."

Todays moderates are tomorrows terrorists.

As is Assad. You see, that's what happens when you have terrorist regime in power for decades. It is all people know.

If the FSA is an umbrella group of differing militias and different goals then its safe to say they will turn on each other like they have been doing, switching sides, pledging alliances and allegiances with extreme elements.

I don't doubt that. There is a reason the US has been reluctant to provide adequate support to the rebels to overthrow Assad.

Assad is the only moderate.

Assad is not and never has been a moderate. There is nothing 'moderate' about a dictatorship which terrorizes the majority in order to keep them subdued.

 

[buzuxi02]

Actually, the media outlet seems to be doing a fairly responsible job, pointing out that the information comes entirely from unsubstantiated Russia sources.

Information that the Russian government was confident enough to hand over to UN investigators

Assad is not and never has been a moderate. There is nothing 'moderate' about a dictatorship which terrorizes the majority in order to keep them subdued.

So what is the alternative? The house of Saud? Its not as if the Sunni's have a track record of benevolence, whether they be arabic or turkish. In actuality the Sunni's seem to be quite the crybabies. When they are not in power they complain and kill, when they are in power they believe they are a master race.

 

[GregConstantine]

"Information that the Russian government was confident enough to hand over to UN investigators"

Oh no! the UN?! Like the UN is so powerful and can actually do something, lol.

Look, ALL nation States play the game, Russia is no exception. Not to insult anyone, but it is the height of naiveté that anyone would think any nation state's motives are pure and holy. If Russia was really that concerned about truth and justice, it would have done something about ISIS a long time ago.

Russia has a history of turning down just about every UN resolution just because it is being proposed by the West. Russia has sat in a self imposed isolationism for many years, and is now just starting to get involved? come on. No one here is saying the West's motivations are pure, but let's not swing the pendulum to the other side and say something just as foolish about Russia.

 

[jckstraw72]

Today is President Putin's birthday. Today would be a great day for us all to finally admit the immaculate nature of Holy Russia.

 

[GregConstantine]

http://www.iep.utm.edu/polreal/

"that morality ought not to be applied to international affairs: what ought to be does not always follow from what is. A strong form of descriptive political realism maintains that nations are necessarily self-seeking, that they can only form foreign policy in terms of what the nation can gain, and cannot, by their very nature, cast aside their own interests. However, if descriptive realism is held, it is as a closed theory, which means that it can refute all counter-factual evidence on its own terms (for example, evidence of a nation offering support to a neighbour as an ostensible act of altruism, is refuted by pointing to some self-serving motive the giving nation presumably has--it would increase trade, it would gain an important ally, it would feel guilty if it didn't, and so on), then any attempt to introduce morality into international affairs would prove futile. Examining the soundness of descriptive political realism depends on the possibility of knowing political motives, which in turn means knowing the motives of the various officers of the state and diplomats."

 

[jckstraw72]

 

[Wgw]

I myself dont think it matters what Putin's motive is, I just hope he smashes the Islamic terrorists with a certain panache. There is a need for a certain element of psychological warfare, to suggest to the Islamic world a hopeless sense of subjugation by Christendom, which lamentably the US can no longer credibiy present.

 

[dzheremi]

"Can no longer credibly present" is an understatement. "Is loathe to suggest out of its hatred of Christianity and love of everything not Christian simply because of its non-Christian status" is more like it. But you're right. And those countries of other majority religions that have had problems with their Muslim populations committing terrorism in the name of Islam (e.g., India, Thailand) need to present the same message, because the only way that the threat of Islamic terrorism has ever been stopped anywhere in the world is by forcing the Muslims to see themselves as a small constituent part of a larger society that they have no chance of ever ruling over. Their children and our children should be taught of those heroes and events appropriate to emphasizing Islam's defeat when it tried to assert itself over others by force, e.g., Skanderbeg's halting of the Ottoman advance, or the defeat by the combined Ethiopian-Portuguese force led by Emperor Galawdewos of the Somali forces of the Adal sultanate in Ethiopia at the Battle of Wayna Daga. They need to get the message in a generational way that it is absolutely not their destiny to take over the world, no matter what their religion or its prophet say.

 

[Wgw]

"Can no longer credibly present" is an understatement. "Is loathe to suggest out of its hatred of Christianity and love of everything not Christian simply because of its non-Christian status" is more like it. But you're right. And those countries of other majority religions that have had problems with their Muslim populations committing terrorism in the name of Islam (e.g., India, Thailand) need to present the same message, because the only way that the threat of Islamic terrorism has ever been stopped anywhere in the world is by forcing the Muslims to see themselves as a small constituent part of a larger society that they have no chance of ever ruling over. Their children and our children should be taught of those heroes and events appropriate to emphasizing Islam's defeat when it tried to assert itself over others by force, e.g., Skanderbeg's halting of the Ottoman advance, or the defeat by the combined Ethiopian-Portuguese force led by Emperor Galawdewos of the Somali forces of the Adal sultanate in Ethiopia at the Battle of Wayna Daga. They need to get the message in a generational way that it is absolutely not their destiny to take over the world, no matter what their religion or its prophet say.

Indeed. By the way, one hopeful aspect in terms of the Christian scenario in Syria from an OO perspective is the relatively good relations between Russia and Armenia. There is an urgent need for the vile Azerbaijani regime to be driven out of all historically Christian regions of the Caucasus.

What I think we must ultimately hope for is a scenario in which the Shia interlopers are ultimately outmaneuvered leading to the formation of a Christian state spanning the entire region, wit nuclear capabilities.

 

[dzheremi]

Yes. Russia and Armenia are together on important issues affecting the balance of power in the region.

As to the Christian state thing...ehh...I dunno. Maybe that's a solution for the Syriac Orthodox in particular, but I don't see it as being very likely. Perhaps the return of certain villages and properties is a better goal (and there are many they could rightfully claim, if only someone would listen), though even then I don't know how that would happen. The sense I get from talking to Copts is that they are absolutely against the formation of any such "Christian state", because Egypt itself is their country. Therefore they emphatically refuse to be content with one piece of it, even if such an offer were made. So I think this is something that probably has different solutions based on what place and people you're talking about. But everyone is in agreement that the Islamicization, Arabization/Turkification/Kurdification, and terrorism must stop.

 

[Wgw]

When it comes to Egypt my own preference would be a Christian state with the Islamic population deprived of civil rights and subjected to pervasive electronic surveillance, Arabic outlawed and Bohairic Coptic made the official language. Alas given the 10:1 numerical advantage in favor of the Islamic population, it is admittedly wishful thinking.

 

[dzheremi]

Well yeah, if we're just going to throw up whatever thing we would like, I want Thursday to be Free Ice Cream Day throughout the world, but it's not going to happen. Haha.

But seriously, I don't know every Coptic person in the world, but I haven't ever met one who would be interested in that at all. Even the ones who are nationalists would rather not be so at the expense of others' freedoms. Their nationalism comes from their recognition that they are the indigenous Egyptians, and that the Arabization and Islamicization of their country has robbed them of what is rightfully theirs, and distorted the image of the society in the minds of the majority. The proudest I have ever seen anyone was the monk and priest in the Coptic monastery in New York who told me that they occasionally received serious Muslim Egyptian students who came to them to learn Coptic, because these people -- despite having accepted the religion of Muhammad -- understood something of their history and their true identities. So somewhere in NY and Egypt there are Muslims with long beards or full veils who are repeating the Trinitarian "Bismillah" in Coptic (Khen efran Emefyot, etc.), while crossing themselves, because now you can only learn Coptic by learning Christianity. I think that's what most Copts seem to want: To be recognized as the heart of Egypt and the living link to its true history and indigenous culture, rather than having their religion, culture, language, music, etc. all relegated to the church, where most Muslims won't go (hence keeping the Copts in a ghetto its effectively illegal to try to escape from except by converting to Islam; gross). In fact, HG Bishop Thomas said so during his widely-criticized (by the MB and others) speech at the Hudson Institute a few years ago.

So Egypt would be free for everyone in this scenario by virtue of being open and having its true history and indigenous people celebrated, not necessarily by being majority Christian, and certainly not by treating Muslims as they have treated Copts. Respectfully and with humility, our religion and people are better than that, and hence better than the dominant religion that recognizes no such equality or openness. Let us strive not to become what we hate.

 

[GregConstantine]

I was writing in terms of the rush to support Putin and get behind whatever Russia is doing just because you disagree with your own country's policies, not to the specific actions Russia is taking against ISIS. Anyone who tries to destroy ISIS has my support. But, we have to be careful because we have to ask ourselves what will remain after this is all over with? I don't think it is prudent to assume that any nation state has the 100% best interests of the Syrians in mind, America, Europe, Or Russia.

I'm worried that someone is going to accidently shoot someone else's plane or whatever down, and all hell is going to break loose on a much wider scale.

 

[Trying_to_be_Orthodox]

@jckstraw72

Todays salute in honor of bithday mr.Putin:

 

[Trying_to_be_Orthodox]

@GregConstantine
n state has the 100% best interests of the Syrians in mind - exactly. Any side has reasons of a kind "follow the money".

ll hell is going to break - exactly. check prophecy of Elder Paisious about war with Turks ( Dont they tire to resell isis oil? )

 

[smaneck]

Information that the Russian government was confident enough to hand over to UN investigators

That's not at all clear.

So what is the alternative? The house of Saud?

I don't know of any Syrian, Sunni or Shi'ite that wants anything to do with the House of Saud. The alternative is a negotiated settlement. And sadly, that might mean partition.

Its not as if the Sunni's have a track record of benevolence, whether they be arabic or turkish.

And neither do the Alawites.

In actuality the Sunni's seem to be quite the crybabies. When they are not in power they complain and kill, when they are in power they believe they are a master race.

Unlike you guys, they don't think in racial terms. But they do know when they are being oppressed by a minority.

 

[dzheremi]

"They don't think in racial terms"? Yeahhh...that must be why Saudis, Emiratis, etc. are so famous for treating their Indian, Filipino, and East African guest workers (slaves) with such kindness...