Syrian Civil War: News

If you go to any Islamic discussion board and tell people that you don't support Syrian "fighters", you'll be labelled as either a covert Jew or a covert Shia.

Claim that everyone can abandon Islam without being punished by their ex co-believers

Claim that Muslims have no right to force their wicked superstitions upon other people, even if they constitute the vast majority of the country's population.

Claim that Israel is just a normal country, neither better, nor worse than Islamic countries, and it has the same right to exist as they do.

IF you told Saudi authorities that you don't support the rebellion in Syria, they would declare you a kaafir (unbeliever). Even western Muslims are far from tolerant (at least some of them). One Somali man was called an undercover Shia for criticizing Syrian rebels, even though he firmly stated that he is a Shafi'i Sunni Muslim.

And remember that Islam - as opposed to Christianity - lacks a central authority. Everyone can declare that his version of Islam is the purest one and they can spread it as they wish, even with a sword. And due to lack of central authority, other, more moderate Muslims would have no strength to oppose it and if they do, they'll be slaughtered, like other "enemies of Islam" 

And remember that Islam - as opposed to Christianity - lacks a central authority.

undefined wrote:

Hachimoto wrote:holy crap i see that in eastern countries a total non-sense about what islam is.

FTW

Sorry, I think You are right that we are generally not very well educated when it comes to Islam. Hell I don't know much about my religion either.Most of Eastern europeans don't know much about Islam except how it was presented in Chechnya. Moderates rarely win wars.ali.a.r

Also, Regular. Sharia is Islamic law. All Islamic countries follow it. Its just the degree to which it is implemented that differs. Of course, I assume you meant the strict, radical version when you said "1000 times better than Sharia law". But please note that not every Muslim country is as strict, as say, Sudan where Sharia law is implemented in full. For example, Sharia law states that the punishment for theft is amputation of the left hand. But in my country, which is what most people would call a moderate Islamic country, even if a person is convicted of theft, and proven guilt beyond any reasonable doubt, his sentence is still commuted to a prison term. Likewise, the punishment for adultery is stoning to death, but again, the sentence is changed to a prison term.

Just thought I would try to clear things up.

Sorry and thanks for information. You misunderstood me I've had particularly Syria in my mind and how it was implemented by rebels in Alepo and preached by Al Nusra. 

The Obama administration is considering resettling thousands of refugees who left Syria during the country's ongoing civil war to multiple towns and cities across the United States, the L.A. Times reports.

A resettlement plan under discussion in Washington and other capitals is aimed at relieving pressure on Middle Eastern countries straining to support 1.6 million refugees, as well as assisting hard-hit Syrian families.
The State Department is "ready to consider the idea," an official from the department said, if the administration receives a formal request from the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees, which is the usual procedure.
The United States usually accepts about half the refugees that the U.N. agency proposes for resettlement. California has historically taken the largest share, but Illinois, Florida, Pennsylvania, Maryland and Virginia are also popular destinations.
U.N. refugee officials, along with diplomats and non-governmental relief groups, are scheduled to meet in Geneva this week to discuss potential resettlement plans. Germany has already agreed to take 5,000 refugees.
"It was probably inevitable that in this crisis, with these overwhelming numbers, governments would start moving in this direction," Lavinia Limon, chief executive officer of the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants, a Virginia-based advocacy and service group, told the L.A. Times. Limon added, "But there will be resistance."
Congress is unlikely to warm up to the idea of agreeing to resettle thousands of Syrian refugees into the U.S. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle who are currently pushing immigration reform bills, particularly aimed at Latinos who are in the country illegally, will need to explain why they may favor or oppose resettling thousands of Syrian refugees.
It should be noted that Congress resisted accepting Iraqi refugees in 2003 following the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. Between 1983 and 2009, the U.S. resettled a total of 76,205 Iraqis. Meanwhile, seventy percent of total refugees in the U.S. were on food stamps in 2009. Within that number, 95 percent of Iraqi refugees were food stamp recipients. Additionally, the report shows an unemployment rate of 46 percent in 2009 among Iraqi refugees. A total of 219 Syrian refugees were resettled in the U.S. between 1983 and 2009.

Viktor wrote:.....and because of that Obama/Cameron/Hollande want to carry out no-fly zone. Meaning the same thing like in Libya.

Viktor wrote:US accused Syria of using chemical weapons............

Viktor wrote:US accused Syria of using chemical weapons

Viktor wrote:dont we have some serious logic flaw in defining things

nemrod wrote:Russia won't allow a no-fly zone.

nemrod wrote:Everybody here remembers the show of Collin Powell in U.N saying that Saddam Hussain is threatening the world by its weapon mass destruction

nemrod wrote:Syria is in its right to use whatever is necessary to exterminate this low life rats gangs terrorists, and to secure its terroritory.

ali.a.r wrote:

Since Im not the preachy-teachy type I dont know loads of scholars, but I know one, Dr. Zakir Naik, and this is what he has to say about that "
The Muslims ruled India for about a thousand years. If they wanted, they had the power of converting each and every non-Muslim of India to Islam. Today more than 80% of the population of India are non- Muslims. All these non-Muslim Indians are bearing witness today that Islam was not spread by the sword. "

But you are quoting somebody who is a preachy type. Indian history for last 800 years is full of wars, most of these were between Muslims rulers and Non-Muslims. Non Muslim Indians are Non Muslims because some fought Muslims, some payed "jizya" tax, some communities resorted to Bribes/Hook/Crook, some made alliances with Muslim rulers etc. Research Indian history for last 1000 years , please.

I am not against Muslims. I understand the difference between Muslims and Muslim Rulers.

Sorry for OT

Corrosion wrote:
But you are quoting somebody who is a preachy type. Indian history for last 800 years is full of wars, most of these were between Muslims rulers and Non-Muslims. Non Muslim Indians are Non Muslims because some fought Muslims, some payed "jizya" tax, some communities resorted to Bribes/Hook/Crook, some made alliances with Muslim rulers etc. Research Indian history for last 1000 years , please.

I am not against Muslims. I understand the difference between Muslims and Muslim Rulers.

BTW: USA & allies want to supply rebels with about 200 9K33 Osa SAM's, in order to create a rebel "no-fly zone". I guess they won't last for long, knowing almost legendary level of Arab technical culture and how they care for their equipment..

guarav wrote:I wiant to know from where the rebels are getting Konkurs and metis ATGM..
who is supplying them with these. weapons..
How did Saudis got the supply russian made weapons.. ?

What are the routes on which these ATGM are supplied to Syria rebels..

Zivo wrote:Seems far fetched. Who would operate them? CIA agents?

The FSA can barely keep their stolen T-55's running for long.

NickM wrote:

Corrosion wrote:
But you are quoting somebody who is a preachy type. Indian history for last 800 years is full of wars, most of these were between Muslims rulers and Non-Muslims. Non Muslim Indians are Non Muslims because some fought Muslims, some payed "jizya" tax, some communities resorted to Bribes/Hook/Crook, some made alliances with Muslim rulers etc. Research Indian history for last 1000 years , please.

I am not against Muslims. I understand the difference between Muslims and Muslim Rulers.

The only Indians who makes these comments like your's are those who failed to get a visa to the US , UK or any of the other Anglo/Saxon states . Indians have historically been trouble makers and that's the reason why it was partitioned to save Muslims from Hindoos & Sikhs who were killing them en mass . Two of the states that were divided had the dubious distinction of creating the maximum number of terrorists who killed Britishers in large numbers.

The only way for India to make progress is if it is broken down into a number of smaller countries along various faultlines.