Moderate Syrian Rebel Agendas and Histories

Topics other than the magazine column.

Moderators: mvs_staff, forum_admin, Marilyn

Moderate Syrian Rebel Agendas and Histories

Postby raydpratt » Thu Sep 25, 2014 10:43 pm

I started thinking about the known facts that actually distinguish a “moderate Syrian rebel” from a terrorist. After some thought, I realized that there was a deficit in what I know about the identities and histories of the rebel groups in Syria. I found a wikipedia article * that surprised me with the sheer number of rebel groups and their huge range of narrowly focused goals that are either largely incompatible with each other or are united only by opposing visions of a utopian Islamic fascist state, which, in any version, would actually be worse than the current militaristic government. On April 21, 2011, the current government, under President Bashar al-Assad, had lifted the 'emergency law,' essentially martial law, that had been in place since a 1963 coup d'état. The current government also allowed the formation of opposing political parties, and thus the government was well on its way to allowing peaceful democratic reforms. However, the lack of political success by these new opposition parties led to grassroots rebel groups that are seeking more democracy, but those groups are essentially moderate political groups with no effective military capabilities. Nonetheless, those moderate democratic rebel groups were co-opted by other groups that have an agenda other than democracy, but which pay lip service to democracy, while actually seeking fascist solutions, either Islamic fascism or secular militaristic fascism. In fact, the only apparent dividing line between the so-called moderate rebel groups and the terrorist rebel groups seems to be whether a group wants a militaristic secular fascism, or whether a group wants some version of a dreaded Islamic fascist state.

Looking at the rebel groups that we have been supporting, the so-called moderate Syrian rebels who either want a secular militaristic fascism or some low-key Islamic fascism (whatever that means), I would say that we have been deluding ourselves into thinking that anything other than the current Syrian government would be an improvement. Looking at what could possibly motivate us to be so myopic in the face of the obvious, I suspect that we have economic goals or political entanglements that have led to the truly unfathomable in our foreign policy. It reminds me of our recent and ongoing support of the essentially neo-Nazi coup d'état in the Ukraine, where the pro-democracy separatists are now finding mass graves of their raped and murdered women. That's essentially us, 'folks,' we did that. Would you like to visit the pro-democracy separatist regions and see how much they love us?

We are now bombing ISIS infrastructure in Syria, while failing to note that the infrastructure is actually Syrian infrastructure. We have recently bombed several small oil refineries in Syria so that we could prevent ISIS from processing and selling oil on the black market. However, by bombing those refineries, we have also prevented the current Syrian government from retaking those refineries from ISIS for the sake of the Syrian people and their economy. Thus, right in front of our eyes, our U.S. President and his compatriots in Congress, have done what we told them not to do: they are attacking the current government of Syria and calling it an attack on ISIS. They will not cooperate with the Syrian government in fighting ISIS because the attacks on ISIS are also economic attacks on Syria.

I do not have a solution for any of this foreign policy stupidity other than for the American people to vote these idiots out of office, every one of them, in both parties.

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_opposition
raydpratt
Intellectual
 
Posts: 299
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 7:22 pm

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest