A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
I wonder if all the people in the other thread downvoting me for saying that no matter who won between Assad's regime and the rebels, everyone else in Syria loses still feel that these rebels are "the good guys?"
I think you are highly oversimplifying the situation.
The rapid fall of the Assad regime means the end of the Syrian civil war, which is a good thing. Syria has been plagued by war for more than a decade now, perhaps some peace will finally settle and the millions of Syrian refugees will finally return to their homes. As for what happens after, it remains to be seen. The rebels are no monolith, they contain everything from Turkish backed mercenaries, jihadists to mostly secular Syrian anti-Assad nationalists.
Those who simply assume that the rebels are wholly "good" are no doubt naive, but there is certainly hope that the more reasonable elements of the movement will prevail and institute a more free society, perhaps by cooperating with the Kurdish autonomous zone in the east. If that happens however, or something else like a taliban-esque islamist theocratic tyranny is instituted instead remains to be seen.
The rapid fall of the Assad regime means the ~~end of the~~ beginning of the latest Syrian civil war
Assad is 100% a super bad. But the rebels are ex Al Qaeda and ISIS.
The US and Israel will support whichever group fights against their enemy.
Assad was supplying Iranian weapons to Hezbollah through Syria. And instead of fighting Israel these rebels used the opportunity to backstab the people who were fighting Israel because Assad was weakened.
In the short term this would be a win. But in the long term Israel is planning to take over Syria and not stopping Israel now will prove an incredibly stupid mistake.
Previously there was Saddam Hussein at the Sunni side who was growing too powerful. Thus the US and Israel supported the Shia's. Now it is the other way around.
The US and Israel keeps switching sides to support the weakest party until they all kill eachother. Then they steal their land.
Assad is 100% a super bad. But the rebels are ex Al Qaeda and ISIS.
That makes a lot more sense when you consider that many of these grew from militants fighting the US invasion of Iraq, so of course they were involved with Al Qaeda and ISIS (less ISIS because they're ISIS), who were also fighting the US invasion in Iraq. "Former Al Qaeda" says literally nothing about the people involved here other than they're maybe Islamist. "Al Qaeda" isn't a bad word that destroys anything it touches. Also you say backstab like Assad was acting for the good of Syria (or literally anyone other than himself), but this man is/was hated by most of Syria and the Arab world. Why you want anyone to tolerate him because he's doing one good thing I have no idea, but to the people being oppressed by that bastard they can't just tiddle their thumbs until he finishes liberating Palestine (hint: He wasn't going to do that, because he was too busy committing warcrimes against his own people).
Because the big war with Israel is going on. If the rebels do not stand up to Israel then Syria will suffer the same fate as Libya in the future. And subsequently be annexed into Greater Israel.
Furthermore it will make everyone more wary to help the Palestinians, knowing there are people who will take advantage of their weakened forces if they join the war.
Uh... This is Syria, not Libya.
If the rebels do not stand up to Israel then Libya will suffer the same fate as Palestine in the future.
They can stand up to Israel themselves, without having to get tortured in prison camps to satisfy Assad's whims. I'm not sure what-centric this way of thinking is, but to Syrians the big war is the one they've been fighting for 14 years against Assad-backed Russia.
knowing there are people who will take advantage of their weakened forces if they join the war.
Only if they have a civil war going on. Also Assad didn't join any wars (again, too busy committing war crimes against his own people), so the only lesson here is "don't oppress your people so bad they fight you for fourteen years". If anything, Palestinians could find themselves with a new ally depending on how the new government turns out.
Sorry I lost myself in the sentence. Meant Syria will suffer the same fate as Libya.
Assad was transporting Iranian weapons to Lebanon against Israel. It would be amazing if the new Syrian government fought against Israel but so far no single word about Palestine from them.
Dude, they're literally asking for a genocidal regime's help and you're turning this around and making it about who the U.S. and Israel supports.
Weak.
Who are you taking about right now?
The rebels? The ones literally asking Israel for help?
This would be like if the Chechens during their 1940s revolt asked Nazi Germany for help and you turned it around and talked about how the Nazis would support either the Soviets or the Chechens depending on which was better for them.
That's not the point, the point would be asking the Nazis for help.
And in this case, the regime that is now running Syria is asking the Nazis for help.
That is just indefensible.
Of course I agree with that. That is why this is a very bittersweet liberation of Syria. If it even will be a liberation at that.
There's no sweetness. One murderous regime is replacing another murderous regime and the rest of the Syrians lose either way. There is no victory here that should be celebrated. It's just Stalin replacing Hitler in East Germany. Everyone else who lived there lost.
There is no victory here that should be celebrated. It’s just Stalin replacing Hitler in East Germany. Everyone else who lived there lost.
You're talking as if there was ever a point in human history that wasn't like this. This is geopolitics. This is humanity. Yes, it sucks. However, there is a version of "sweetness" here, but this is the bittersweet kind. Its the periods of general peace between the hot wars of destruction and revolution where humanity has the chance to lurches forward a bit.
If the end of the Syrian civil war means a few decades where people in Syria can generally live in peace without bombs or artillery falling on their homes and their families, thats a win. That may be as good as it gets, but its a win.
I wish people in general stopped looking for good guys and bad guys. My maxim as I grow older and weary is everyone is awful, unless proven otherwise. Or, in other words, it’s all geopolitics and a complex web of conflicting interests. Combating factions choose their alliances less on principle and more on what serves their long term goals and immediate tactical aims. In the meantime we are fed whatever narrative paints one or the other side “good” and depending on our politics and possible stake in a conflict convince ourselves that we are “on the right side of history”. But history is largely written by the victor and in hindsight it is always easier to say what was good or bad. In the heat of the moment, when lives, money, and land are at stake, the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
I mean this is the FSA, the explicitly US-supported organization. Why did you expect anything else? The main actor was the HTS AFAIK, and they aren't like... that. Also Syrians (and the rest of the Arab world) are celebrating this so obviously they don't think they're losing here.
They're apparently currently asking the Israelis for help. That's just indefensible.
It's indefensible yes. But it's also one explicitly US-supported organization and doesn't say much about the Syrian opposition as a whole. These fuckers represent no one but themselves.
They're the ones in charge of Damascus.
Pretty sure it's a combination of HTS (who lead the offensive), other Islamist movements and the Syrian National Army. The article says "Free Syria Army" but that hasn't been a unified body for a while so while we can't be sure who exactly that guy is representing, fuck them anyway. Anyway my point is that there's nobody in charge of Damascus yet other than the vague grouping of "rebels", but you can rest assured that this guy is only representing at most one faction within the FSA and not at all the bulk of rebels in Damascus. You'd have to look to Al Jolani or whoever leads the SNA for that and neither has said anything of the sort.