Assad vs MBS

Musburger1

Musburger1

2,500+ Posts
If you are the kind of person capable of looking beyond the cliches and shallow propaganda:
“He’s a bad actor.”
“He’s a brutal dictator.”

You may wish to evaluate two articles, one focusing on MBS and Saudi Arabia and the other on Assad and his Arab vision of unity. Which version is tolerant? Which aligns more with your personal values rather than with geopolitical aspirations?

Read the damn articles and think for yourself.

https://southfront.org/israel-saudi-arabia-setting-preconditions-for-war-with-hezbollah/

http://theduran.com/arabism-for-the...ident-bashar-al-assads-most-important-speech/
 
Instead, I looked at Adam Garrie's other articles. Here are some of the highlights:
  • Russia good, US bad
  • Duterte on to something, US bad
  • Poor Mugabe isn't being taken seriously
  • US military full of addicts, mentally unstable, and alcoholics
  • Turkey good, US bad
  • Putin praises Xinping and criticizes US
  • Everything MSM says is a lie but not me
  • Macron is a flunky for the West
Sounds really level-headed.
 
Horns11 said:
Instead, I looked at Adam Garrie's other articles. Here are some of the highlights:
  • Russia good, US bad
  • Duterte on to something, US bad
  • Poor Mugabe isn't being taken seriously
  • US military full of addicts, mentally unstable, and alcoholics
  • Turkey good, US bad
  • Putin praises Xinping and criticizes US
  • Everything MSM says is a lie but not me
  • Macron is a flunky for the West
Sounds really level-headed.
Click to expand...
The article includes a transcript of Assad’s speech. Garrie’s
perspective is irrelevant. Assad lays out his vision of Arab Nationalism. Contrast the vision, which includes tolerance etc. (so called American values), with the actual ideology and practices of the Saudi ruler. That is, if you are intellectually capable. I suspect your biases and prejudices don’t allow you to challenge your belief system.
 
No, I think his speech is fluff that doesn't reflect the atrocities he's perpetrated and the messenger (Garrie) is pro-Syria, pro-Russia, anti-West. I'm not going to say I prefer anything Saudi Arabia has to offer, but Garrie's perspective IS the relevant factor.
 
If nothing else, can’t you even see the blatant hypocrisy in US policy? “Assad has to go. He oppresses his own people.”

What nonsense! The US gives total support, billions in weapons, to a regime that does everything we accuse Assad of, and more. Our entire premise for military operations in the region is based in lies and supported via propaganda and brainwashing of the public via media and political operatives.
 
Assad must go! Assad must go! USA! USA! :smile1:

Shia domination of the ME is not in the cards for U.S. interests. Simple as that.

It's also easy to understand why such expansion is ideal for Putin (and those who worship him).

Assad is openly aligned with those desiring and implementing plans for such Shia expansion...specifically Iran and Hezbollah.

Soon after Assad assumed power, he "made Syria's link with Hezbollah – and its patrons in Tehran – the central component of his security doctrine", and in his foreign policy.

"Hezbollah — is a Shi'a Islamist political party and militant group based in Lebanon. Hezbollah's paramilitary wing is the Jihad Council."

Putin doesn't have special affinity for Shia leaders, he's simply an opportunist that rightly exploited a ripe window of spineless American leadership.

If the roles were reversed and the U.S. was allied with Iran and Assad, Putin would be cozied up to the Saudis and their allies.
 
Last edited:
Brad Austin said:
Assad must go! Assad must go! USA! USA! :smile1:

Shia domination of the ME is not in the cards for U.S. interests. Simple as that.

It's also easy to understand why such expansion is ideal for Putin (and those who worship him).

Assad is openly aligned with those desiring and implementing plans for such Shia expansion...specifically Iran and Hezbollah.

Soon after Assad assumed power, he "made Syria's link with Hezbollah – and its patrons in Tehran – the central component of his security doctrine", and in his foreign policy.

"Hezbollah — is a Shi'a Islamist political party and militant group based in Lebanon. Hezbollah's paramilitary wing is the Jihad Council."

Putin doesn't have some special affinity for Shia leaders, he's simply an opportunist that rightly exploited a ripe window when American leadership was spineless.

If the roles were reversed and the U.S. was allied with Iran and Assad, Putin would be cozied up to the Saudis and their allies.
Click to expand...
Shia and Hezbollah are at least tolerant of Christians, Jews, and even atheists. All of the above live in Syria,
Lebanon, and in Iran (although Iran does have a thuggish state police that can be quite oppressive).

The Saudis on the other hand spread Wahhabism, do not tolerate anything outside of Wahhabism, are responsible for the starvation of tens of thousand in Yemen (with direct support from the USA), and is arguably the most evil regime on the face of the Earth.

Brad, can you justify an alliance with the Saudis on any moral grounds whatsoever? Of course you can’t. It’s all about sustaining dollar supremacy and global hegemony.

And the policies are rapidly failing. It would be better to pull back, make peace with Iran, ditch the evil Saudi regime and dry up funding which goes to support global Wahhabism which spawns terrorism.
 
I'd agree with you on most points about the Saudis. However, I do find the new regime interesting and will let it play out to form a new judgement.

BTW, I was responding mostly just to fire you up. It's been a while and you do get quite passionate about these subjects. :smile1:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top