Is he really murdering civilians like everyone in the West says he is? I don't know who's propaganda to believe. I know that Putin and him are actually fighting terrorists, while we are supplying terrorists through the rebels. But I'm still not sure we're justified in doings so or not, and if we are being lied to about him.
A redpill would be much appreciated. Thanks in advance.
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtube.com
anonhq.com
bbc.com
twitter.com
breakingdownthnews.blogspot.ro
veteranstoday.com
21stcenturywire.com
mintpressnews.com
liveleak.com
counterpunch.org
theduran.com
zerohedge.com
theantimedia.org
en.hunternews.ru
usatwentyfour.com
twitter.com
>Is he really murdering civilians like everyone in the West says he is?
Who cares? If there's a good reason to depose him, he will be deposed. If not, Trump will put a stop to it.
of course he is, everyone in that shithole with any power is extremely ruthless who doesnt give a shit about other people, but at least he's not trying to fuck with the west and trying to kill the people who are
Probably. But why is that my problem? Theyd be flooding refugees into my homeland either way
The redpill is the following:
>The west is probably supplying terrorists. Enemy of my enemy is my friend.
>assad let the terrorists grow in strength and left them alone initially until they became stronger than the moderate rebels... creating a "it is either me or ISIS" scenario.
>Russians are subhuman scum that will do anything to advance their interest regardless of the cost of human lives. You can basically blame the migrant crisis on them. Without them interfering, the rebels would have won.
There are no good guys. Only might makes right.
It s Assad or jihadist ! I prefer the first i thought americans were after terrorists
>Is he really murdering civilians like everyone in the West says he is?
Who cares? Is he killing white people? No. He's killing sand monkeys. Why should we give a fuck?
There's no such thing as civilian with a gun.
But then refugees that are escaping from jihadist would come anyway . There no rebels , if you the groups fighting , they are salafists , al nusra, ahram al sham and al-zinki
only if you live a cuckstate
retard.txt
>Only might makes right.
Hello Illuminati.
what does that make us faggot
>Is he really murdering civilians like everyone in the West says he is?
nigga how many civilians has the US killed? if that were a legitimate reason to remove someone from power, our past 12 presidents should have been ousted.
'murdering civilians' is just the emotional justification to placate the normies into being complicit in yet another middle eastern war. the real reason we're in that region has to do with oil and israel.
Where's the media when Erdoshit killed innocent people? Nowhere, if the media says he's killing innocents he probably isnt.
I think the EU deserves a lot of the blame for letting the migrants in in the first place, but what's in this for Russia again?
I know Italybro. I am a confused burger right now.
yes his regime is objectively killing civilians with their bombs and artillery but it's not so simple.
I'll give you a tl;dr
terrorists embed themselves within civilian populations. (this is a war crime)
these terrorists are attempting to take over your country in civil war.
your two options are to fight back, which will incur civilian death, or to not fight back and just allow the terrorists to butcher as they please and install Sharia.
Assad chose to fight back. I support this decision
>2011, Assad losing, nobody mentioning civilians
>2012, Assad losing , nobody mentioning civilians
>2013, Assad losing, nobody mentioning civilians
>2014, Assad almost lost, nobody mentioning civilians
>2015, Russia joins
>RUSSIA BOMBING HOSPITALS AND INNOCENT CIVILIANS
>2016, Assad winning
>ASSAD MURDERING CIVILIAN BABIES, STOP HIM
>The west is probably supplying terrorists.
DELETE "probably"
No this is a lie created by the CIA and pushed in a coordinated effort by the western Media just like Russia hacking the election they are creating a narrative of us Vs them when it's the CIA and their Saudi Funded Terrorists vs Russia and Assad.
They are pushing to gain American approval to be pushed into WWIII
To put it bluntly
>Terrorists in east A Leppo shells goverment positions where civilians live, causing civilian casualties
>Goverment retaliates by bombing the places where such shellings came from.
>UPS terrorists hide underground, resulting that such airstrikes kills civilians held against their own will.
>The terrorist hold civilians as a human shield and thus using them to promote media propaganda to push "Ceasefire" wich only helps terrorists to suply since they held all humanitarian international aid for themselves.
Wikileaks has a email about Rothschilds bragging about Syria being their land
Stratfor leaks talk about Hillary bragging about removing Assad 1-2 yrs before anything happened
Kerry and Hillary tried to frame Assad by shipping in chemical weapons which were used to attack civies
>independents caught the play and the "crossed the red line (in the sand)" -narrative vanished overnight
Hillary pushed the Libya invasion even though Ghadaffi offered up neutral/peaceful options which destabilized the region
>>>BENGHAZI
Soros/Rothschilds are funding hundreds of millions into NGOs which not only fostered the migration crisis but there's evidence they directly organized the many movements
Putin has repeteadly denounced terrorists, ISIS and actively fights them while the US "accidentally" loses fleets of Toyotas, Stinger Missiles, tanks, small arms which end up in the hands of ISIS, >with UN funding groups like "white hats" which are just militants that do photo ops when they rescue their wounded
>try to nominate them for nobel prize
>put hospital sign on weapons depot and shoot fake footage
>muh war crimes
if u can't see its US/UN/ISIS//SOROS vs Russia/Syria/Iran u are a retard that has subjected themselves to too much brainwashing
Inb4
>>>"Assad bla blah dictator"
>>>"bla bla authoritarion"
>>>(((human rights)))
>>>"bla bla evil Russia"
The CIA provided training to rebels in Jordan before the Libyan civil war. Clinton's state department also supplies them armaments using Qatar as a proxy to circumvent international law.
Al-Nusra claims to still be directly supported by the CIA. You always hear about Assad gassing his own civilian population for no apparent reason but you never hear about the oil pipeline that Assad opposed going through Syria.
I call bullshit. CIA propaganda designed to make the "moderate rebels" appear to be the good guys.
how would supplying terrorists be justified?
With sources on that info, it would be a great redpill bomb
Of course he is
I talked about the attempted overthrow of Syria a decade ago.
They don't have a central (((bank))). That's all it is. That's why they are being attacked. And that's hard for me to say, because I actually like the Conservative muslims better, like e Sunnis. But the truth is the truth.
So basically, dont believe the lying ass media.
Ok, but what I've hearing all day long is now that Aleppo has "fallen", that Assad's regime is now murdering innocent civilians for no apparent reason. There was a Syrian male hiding behind a building doing a selfie video saying he was going to be shot when he was found and that we should "remember him" whatever whatever. THIS is what I want to know is true or not. Because every cuck, lib or con, will bring this up and I need to be able to say "Yes, BUT" or "No, listen..."
what proofs is there that the regime is rounding up innocent civilians to shoot them? this is the first I've heard of this accusation. I've only ever heard "muh bombs"
news.vice.com/story/complete-meltdown-of-humanity-in-aleppo-assads-forces-are-reportedly-killing-civilians-in-their-homes
Frankly some people are shiting themselves, that the gas pipeline may fail to materialize. So cost them their jobs and money. So will say anything. In the hope Assad can be stopped.
>us faggot
In a conflict, there is no civilian with a gun
Does it really matter? In war, there are always civilian casualties. It's not like anyone's going to stop him.
Anonymous but reliable sources, goy, don't question the narrative.
>U.N. human rights spokesman Rupert >Colville said there was reliable information to >suggest 82 civilians had been killed in four >districts of eastern Aleppo, with government >forces entering homes and allegedly killing >those who tried to flee.
""Reliable"", """"suggest""""
There is NO proof
>reportedly
You realize there are no independent observers there right? The only people in rebel-held Aleppo are pro-rebel journalists, some civies, and the rebels themselves. "Reports" are not to be trusted when they are coming from an active war zone with tight control over each area. Same goes for government held territory, although the track record of media there has been better so far.
the source for Vice's claim is
a) the so-called "Syrian Observatory for Human Rights." you may not be able to tell by the name, but this "organization" is literally one man who lives in the UK. literal garbage source
b) tweets and secondhand accounts from people who claim to be in the area. the UN report specifically acknowledged that these claims were impossible to verify
and yet Vice reports this as if it is incontrovertible fact. 100% fake news, total shit
if these home-to-home massacres are happening (it would be the first time in the five year long Civil War), then eventually real evidence will emerge, not just the claims of random pro-terrorist Twitter accounts, and this evidence will appear soon.
as of yet there's no reason to believe it's true
tl;dr, these proofs prove nothing
inb4 someone calls me Russian psyops for stating facts
it's simple, US is funding rebels/terrorists that go parading around cities like Aleppo then when Assad removes kebab the US can play coy and scream muh rossiya
Everything you've been told is a lie
youtube.com
Syria is irrelevant to the US, it should never spend a single dollar in there even if Assad was literally Hitler.
Fucking nu/pol/, stop being good goyim.
kill yourself we're all trying to play hearts and minds and russia is clearly winning and the US propaganda is skrong to report the opposite
He is the terrorist.
He is the coase the whole mess started in syria.
Vodka niggers hold to this pos on because they loose all credebilety.
As if they had any in the first place.
>america
>playing hearts and minds
>by running black ops in an unstable region and destabilizing countries to run arms through them and then overthrowing one last regime so that you can build a pipeline so kikebert can get cheaper gas from camelfucking saudis and qatarians who just bought 10 more childbrides thanks to US "donations"
You stated no facts at all. Just claims with no provs.
You cant verrify or denie sayed information.
How about providing a link to daid un investigation?
never said it was good hearts and minds
US a shit when it comes to that now after the vietnam blunder
How are you today, Julian?
He pointed out that the proof of the articles was bullshit. Twitter posts are not fucking proof. If I post a link to some bogus article claiming to prove that the Earth is flat, would you defend me because it's impossible to 100% verify that the information I provided is false?
the fuck are you talking about Kraut?
anonhq.com
so-called "SOHR" is literally one man who supposedly talks to people in Syria on his phone and computer but has literally zero transparency or corroborating evidence for his claims whatsoever
and as for the UN report all it did was "relay" claims from people, you can read the article about it right here:
bbc.com
even in this article, Colville is quoted as saying that he can't verify any of the claims.
how the fuck are you accusing me of not stating facts?
>Is he really murdering civilians like everyone in the West says he is?
Obviously civilians will die in any conflict both the west and Assad/Russia have killed hudreds of civilians most of them probably without any intention.
The problem is that the west desperately wants to remove Assad, him winning the civil war will mean that Russia breaks free from the NATO encirclement or atleast gains a little ground on the world stage.
All concerned parties have there own interests and only by looking at them it is possible to understand the conflict.
As I said, the west is primarily concerned with Russia gaining power, while Russia is for the most part concerned with gaining Power themselves.
Now think about what Assad wants. His primary goal is to retake his country, with the help of Russia and bring Stability to his country.
It is not in his Interests to kill civilians and it is not in any way helpfull to his cause to genocide his population because it will inevitably strengthen the Rebels and IS.
If you are looking at the press both from the West and Russia you will see that they differ to huge amounts.
This is no surprise as both are on different sides of the conflict.
Neither one should be accepted as truth as non of them is unbiased or has any interest in being unbiased.
So you saying the un articel is wrong?
Yet again only claims no links. Said reports or tweets are more credibel then your flat eart bogus.
I would rather provide provs that earth is round with links and pictures and not pull a vodka nigger deniel campain.
>Is he really murdering civilians like everyone in the West says he is?
Just like any dictator who wants to retain his power and keys to power (generals, investors, public support, etc)
But nothing out of ordinary, so the while the bashing is somewhat just, the media goes overboard in demonizing him. Moreover if you try to remove him or any solid basis of power in that region all hell will go lose as the separated groupes (generals, terrorist, religious fanatics, foreign insurgents, etc) will cause an all out "civil" war, dividing the region and making any investments and political negotiations impossible.
This is exactly what Russia wants to stop.
See for yourself
kikebert?
this is 100% about a pipeline? why does assad reject the pipeline?
>Is he really murdering civilians like everyone in the West says he is?
He's killing people who are technically civilians, but that technicality has to do with the fact that ISIS and other rebels aren't members pof an established military.
Now you provide links.
>Syrian pro-government forces in eastern Aleppo have been killing people, including women and children, on the spot in their homes and on the street, the United Nations says.
>The UN's human rights office said streets were full of bodies.
>Meanwhile, the UN children's agency cited a doctor as saying a building housing as many as 100 unaccompanied children was under heavy attack.
Rebels, who have held east Aleppo for four years, are on the brink of defeat
So they are murdering civilians and the un veryfies it.
>Is he really murdering civilians like everyone in the West says he is?
I'm waiting on the evidence.
I don't see any.
I'd find it hard to believe he's NOT.
I mean, terrorists are civilians, are they not?
Your last point is murky.
Without western interference, Assad would have crushed the the Jihadists in weeks and it would have been all over before it begun.
Without Russian interference, millions of Syrians would be dead or displaced by the West and Gulf States. So it's not like it would have made a difference either way.
It's started in the last 24 hours.
All the celebrities and journalists retweeting it are citing the U.S. ambassador to the U.N.'s speech stating it.
There is no evidence. There never was.
I'm not even saying it's NOT happening, as there is no way in hell a civil war features a city being cleared out with revenge attacks and god knows what other atrocities.
But on the scale they're suggesting? Nope.
I'm not sure what the end game is here in the next few weeks - This isn't like Serbia/Kosovo. If they strike Assad, they strike Russia. That's going to lead god knows what.
War is comming ether way. Better we have the best postion to strike then the vodka niggers.
Comence kosovo 2.
nigger did you read the entire article or will you only include the cherrypicked editorializing performed by the BBC? read beyond the headline and check the fucking source
>The UN's human rights office said streets were full of bodies.
>Syrian pro-government forces in eastern Aleppo have been killing people, including women and children, on the spot in their homes and on the street, the United Nations says.
But what is the source for these claims?
"Yesterday evening, we received further deeply disturbing reports that numerous bodies were lying on the streets," Mr Colville added, while admitting it was hard to verify the reports.
so the source of these claims are sources that the UN representative himself acknowledges cannot be verified
>Meanwhile, the UN children's agency cited a doctor as saying a building housing as many as 100 unaccompanied children was under heavy attack.
so the source is "a doctor."
the article's headline was a lie in the first place. what it refers to as a "UN report" is NOT the product of an investigation performed by the UN, but rather a collection of unverified and dubious reports being relayed TO the UN, by Colville.
these accusations DO NOT carry the authority of the UN, despite the pathetic attempt by the BBC to make it sound as if they do.
now I can't prove that pro-Assad forces AREN'T performing massacres. for all I know they very well could be.
But this is not proof. this is the tiniest, scarcest scrap of evidence conceivable, there is literally no evidence whatsoever other than some random unnamed people on the street saying that this is happening with no documentation or corroborating evidence whatsoever.
again. this does not prove that there is no massacre. but there's also basically zero reason to believe that there is a massacre. this is how the concept of "burden of proof" works, you 3rd grade reading level untermensch
Of course civilians are dying. That's what happens in war. But there is not a solitary piece of evidence to say that Assad has directed his army to target civilians.
Just like with the bullshit chemical weapons fairy tale, Assad has no need to go after civilians at this at this stage in the war.
The blood is on the hands of the US who have colluded in unleashing Islamists across the middle east, destablizing whole regions, whilst backing the worst fucking scumbags of them all, Israel and the Saudis.
I hope Assad and Russia slaughter every last US asset.
CIA asset, I should have said.
>who's whose their they're it's its
>millennial orthography consistently worse than chance.
Why can't fucking millennial burgers into English any more? Degenerate and sad.
Where's the media when the Saudis and Yemenis are killing civilians in Yemen?
Or when Bahrain brutally cracked down on their Arab Spring protesters?
Oh wait, those are the brutal dictatorships that the CIA and State Department like.
>US asset
You mean globalist.
He's Russia's ally. Not the united States
>be poor innocent civilian in a Leppo
>of very nothing to eat for 5 years in a sieges city
>we dindu nothing
>assad wins against the rebels and you assad really finally free to go
>decide to move to another rebel controlled part of the country instead of just staying in a Leppo like you did all the other years before but now with no bombing and actual returning infrastructure
Fucking civilians eh? And the media just gobbles it up without thinking about it just once.
>complete-meltdown-of-humanity-in-aleppo
Nice tagline for WW3.
Are these synchronised soundbites which all go out at the same time a relatively new development or have I just had my head in the sand for years?
I only really began to see it constantly in the last couple of years. I can't bear to watch or read anything put out by the traditional press these days.
Seems like the British are gearing up.
I don't think there's much doubt that he's killing civilians. The question is do we want a dictator or a bunch of terrorists (as from what I've read there are basically no nonradical terrorists)?
Also, there's oil pipeline politics involved.
*Pic related* ISIS execution
This is a bit more normal - They're all quoting the U.S. Ambassador To The U.N.
It's similar, but not as bad as, when they're all utilizing the same talking points from memo's that have been dispersed by P.R. firms or "think thanks".
You saw a lot of that in the election.
non-radical rebels*
>82 dead civilians
>"rumored"
>In the clearing of a terrorists infested stronghold
I mean, alright, even if it's true...82? ISIS wiped out 82 guys in one video.
How many civilians were lost when the allies seized Berlin?
How many civilians were killed in the U.S. civil war when states were retaken?
I mean, I know I'm a Sup Forumsack, but I have zero interest, none, in going to war over a hundred or a thousand dead Sunni extremists in Aleppo.
We heard this same shit before Iraq and every other war, going back to WW1 with Belgium.
I just want the globalist stooges to fuck off. I don't even want them to allow humanitarian safe passage to the West. I'm sick of these third world scum bags ruining. everything. and us being an expensive safety valve for them.
Why should Australia have ANY Involvement in this?
We have plenty of Christian/Shiite/Alywhatever Lebanese and Syrians here. Great. Do we have them turn into terrorists now?
What a joke.
And the fsb likes asshead.
Seems about right. Usa and russia ate almost identical.
No vodka nigger you wont have your base in syria. You get btfo and gtfo out of the middel east.
damn youre dumb
fewer refugees
Consider this:
Both sides are evil, both sides suck, both news are propaganda yet based on truth.
The "moderate" rebels are jihadists armed by U.S, Turkey, Gulf oil countries etc. They use human shields and don't let civilians out of Aleppo.
While Assad is a dictator and used very brutal tactics from the very beginning of the crisis to suppress the opposition. Even before the civil war Syria was notorious for people "disappearing" if they anger the security services.
Russia is lying about everything they do, as usual. They keep telling they fight ISIS while in fact they fight the ((moderate)) opposition and bomb Turkmen just to piss off Turkey. I wouldn't be surprised they pulled out of Palmyra and left weaponry behind on purpose just to empower ISIS for some 7D underwater othello move against U.S or Turkey.
So all sides of the conflict lie and cheat, now how could we ever trust any source.
I'm Australian.
We don't even get to have our own bases in our own countries.
They belong to the U.S.
Dude, did you read past the first sentence?
>"moderates" are jihadists
>Russia is bombing moderate opposition
Pick one.
>Both sides are evil
Assad is less evil than the side he opposes.
>Both sides suck
Well, yeah, but we're not allowed to say that because it's intolerant.
>both news are propaganda yet based on truth
We don't see much of the propaganda from the Assad/Russian side. We see tons of it from the Sunni side. I have seen the Assad/Russian side from Lebanese friends, and yes, it's equally fucking ridiculous.
>"moderates" are Jihadis
>Assad is a brutal dictator
Par for the course in that corner of the world.
>Russia is lying about everything they do as usual
Sort of
>They keep telling they fight ISIS while in fact they fight the ((moderate)) opposition
Russia drove ISIS out of Palmyra. The U.S. just said they cleared Mosul of ISIS. The U.S. gave ISIS safe passage back to Palmyra. Both sides lie about who they are fighting.
>So all sides of the conflict lie and cheat, now how could we ever trust any source.
Here's the way I guess I see it;
>Putin wants to crush the Sunni extremists and keep his base in Syria
>Hillary wants to give Syria to Sunni extremists
>Trump doesn't give a fuck what happens to them
So, I'm with Trump. I don't give a shit about Arab psychopaths killing each other. I just want them to keep it in their neck of the woods.
Why everyone wants to repeat Iraq again so soon is beyond me.
Yes?
>Is he really murdering civilians like everyone in the West says he is?
He isn't murdering anyone. In fact, I doubt he has any power left remaining after these five years - he is most likely just a figurehead at this point with limited ability to influence the situation.
>Is he really murdering civilians like everyone in the West says he is?
Yes, but so is everyone else in Syria.
PRESIDENT ASSAD IS NOT A EVIL DICTATOR AND HE CERTAINLY ISN'T A WESTERN PUPPET
breakingdownthnews.blogspot.ro
Breaking: US Trying to Rescue Intelligence Officers from Eastern Aleppo City
veteranstoday.com
VICTORY: Aleppo’s Old City Now Fully Liberated by Syrian Army, Remaining Terrorists in Retreat
21stcenturywire.com
>leaf
>red pill
No, thanks.
Good to know because you went off on that sentence but ignored the emphasis on the main question "do we want a dictator or terrorists?"
Russia Destroys Most ISIS Heavy Weaponry, U.S. Promptly Airdrops 50-Tons Of Weapons Into Syria
mintpressnews.com
Graphic: Syrian Army Soldiers Tortured and Executed By USSaudi Backed Moderate Terrorists
liveleak.com
Assad’s Death Warrant
counterpunch.org
MUST SEE VIDEO: US Peace Council returns from Syria, a country fighting “invasion by the most powerful country in the world”
theduran.com
US-Trained Special Ops Fighter Is The Islamic State's New Top Commander In Iraq
zerohedge.com
Hillary Clinton: Pulitzer prize winning journalist says presidential candidate approved sending sarin gas to Syrian rebels
hillary-clinton-pulitzer-prize-winning-journalist-says-presidential-candidate-approved-sending-sarin-gas-to-syrian-rebels
The "modern rebels" are not civilians. Thats something the media could never understand.
Don't care if he fucking shoves his fist up infants ass and turns them inside out. The alternative is a completely destabilized shit hole producing terrorists out the ass.
>be 28 y.o Ahmed Abdulhadi from Iraque with extremist views
>move to Aleppo to fight the bad baby killing dictator Assad
>with great pleasure I thank Allah and Mr. Burgerking for sending me those nice TOW missile launchers in endless quantity
>I enslave my women on the street as the Koran tells me to
>2012, might have gone a little bit too far with the gas attack propaganda
>I am now a """moderate"""" rebel
>life is good, still lots of traumatized pussy left in the streets
>2015, my other moderate rebel "friends" get bombed in air raids thanks to russians
> run out of missiles, shoot gas canisters instead
>ooops there goes the last hospital, of course bombed by barrel bombs
>2016, time is bad, no food, have to starve and steal from other people to survive
>I hide in my bunker, as one day a government force finds me by the smell of my designated shitting hole
>get shot as a peaceful 17year old civilian
>should have gone to Germany
wait. so tldr is the U.S. is arming the rebels because Assad - a Russian ally - won't let the U.S. interests build an oil pipeline through his country?
Am I missing something why would he?
Stop believing the West
Theres already a russian-chinese oil pipeline, if the west gains Syria then that line is as good as cut.
Ofc he is. Well the rebels are rebels as long as they are alive, as soon as they die, they are demoted to civilian status.
10 Facts the Mainstream Media Won’t Tell You About the War in Syria
theantimedia.org
URGENT: Syrian army and militias are fighting ISIS terrorists on the streets of Palmyra
en.hunternews.ru
“I’m Back From Syria. The Media Is Lying To You!”
usatwentyfour.com
probably a few isolated incidents
been a few reports of rebels gunning down those civvies who try to flee to government areas