Syria
Printed From: Tippmann Paintball
Category: News And Views
Forum Name: Thoughts and Opinions
Forum Description: Got something you need to say?
URL: http://www.tippmannsports.com/forum/wwf77a/forum_posts.asp?TID=190490
Printed Date: 12 July 2025 at 4:26pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Syria
Posted By: Linus
Subject: Syria
Date Posted: 14 August 2012 at 1:28pm
|
I just don't really know where I stand on this issue. Yes, I will say everyone deserves a shot at democracy over dictatorship. However, the way the FSA is fighting is too terroristic for me. Sure, a smaller, more out-gunned force generally has to fall back to guerrilla tactics, but I find a difference between small unit warfare and car bombs. What they're doing is reminiscent, if not outright out of the book, of Al Queda and such. Plus, the Allah Ackbars don't help. On top of that, if there was an insurrection in the US (a la civil war) that I fully expect the government to put it down swiftly and harshly. ------------- 
|
Replies:
Posted By: impulse418
Date Posted: 14 August 2012 at 2:04pm
|
Pssh, you think they are limited to car bombs? What ever happened to those 20,000 shoulder fired, anti aircraft missiles that left Libya? Speaking of Libya, who is running that country right now? |
Posted By: tallen702
Date Posted: 14 August 2012 at 2:20pm
|
Linus, the reason you're seeing AQ style tactics is because that is who the FSA is having to fall back on for support. AQ has actively sought out the out-gunned, under-supplied field commanders and offered them support. Embedded AP and Reuters journalists have repeatedly reported that field commanders are in some pretty dire straits given the lack of ammo. They have repeatedly had to call off missions and give up gains simply because they don't have any bullets left. They've been pleading to NATO and individual western powers for bullets and RPG rounds, but those pleas have been falling on deaf ears, so when AQ comes in and says "fly our flag, allow some of our fighters to join you, and we'll give you ammo and logistical support" they don't even hesitate. They don't agree with AQ and don't want them in their country, but at the same time, they need the ammo to continue the fight while we stand by and watch them get slaughtered for the sake of it being 2 months away from the general election. NATO was also afraid that a religious leadership would form in the power vacuum should we help with the ouster of Al-Assad. The reality is that our wait-and-see approach is going to do more for that than our aid would have. What's more, it would be in our interests to aid the rebels in an effort to prevent chemical weapons stockpiles from making their way onto the black market. ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |
Posted By: impulse418
Date Posted: 14 August 2012 at 2:28pm
| Didn't the CIA report that they can't find the chemical weapons? |
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 14 August 2012 at 4:59pm
|
...They're using guerrilla tactics because they *work*. Little different, really, from the effective partisan tactics of WW2. Syria's government continued to escalate with widespread systematic use of military force against protests and funeral marches. They made their own bed. No surprise many Syrians have risen up and are doing whatever they can to oust government forces; pretty much the same as Libya minus Western intervention. The continuous flow of rats fleeing Assad's sinking ship is indicative that the 'free Syrian army' is far from being on the ropes. Linus, is your own country not the one that has constitutionally enshrined the concept of an armed populace throwing out a bad government should it come to that? I find your position on this curious. Did you expect the Syrian rebels would constrain themselves to playing 'nice'? ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: __sneaky__
Date Posted: 14 August 2012 at 6:30pm
|
"One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." ------------- "I AM a crossdresser." -Reb Cpl Forum Vice President RIP T&O Forum |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 14 August 2012 at 6:58pm
|
^^^ I can't believe you said that . . . syriaously?
------------- 
|
Posted By: scotchyscotch
Date Posted: 14 August 2012 at 7:12pm
| It's Assad day went you're making puns about stuff this serious. |
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 14 August 2012 at 7:19pm
Case in point. During Katrina, NOPD ordered the confiscation of all lawfully owned firearms in the city. This not only goes against the US Constitution, but also technically is robbery, a crime which you are allowed to use deadly force in the state of Texas to prevent. If someone shot and killed an officer (or multiple officers) would it have been ok? I truly don't know. As a response to said unconstitutional confiscation, a federal law was passed barring all such confiscations in the future...it's already been settled that it's not allowed. However, if the order were to be given again, what recourse would be allowed? Armed resistance? Sure, it states in the bill that you can address it legally, but alas, what happens if that can't happen and takes time? Martial law gets called for mass rioting, you expect me to give up my only true defense of my life and hope the courts sort it out sometime in the future? Having said that, who decides if force used by a government to put down an insurrection is 'too much'? Where is it inherently wrong to send tanks against armed civilians? You yourself just said not to expect the rebels to play nice, so neither should the government, should it? You don't fight fair, you fight to win. And that, my friend, is why I stated that I truly don't know how to view this, as, taking the emotion out of it, I can play both sides of the argument. I'm against dictatorships, but I'm also against terrorist and needless killing from rebels. -------------
|
brihard wrote:Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 14 August 2012 at 9:44pm
|
<shrug> Without any firm formula for 'how bad' a government is to go buy, I have to simply accept that tens of thousands of people are putting their lives on the line and facing death and dismemberment to throw out their current political rulers. Who am I to argue against that? ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: tallen702
Date Posted: 15 August 2012 at 3:01pm
Meanwhile, the Free Syrian Army has perfected time travel, at least, that's the only way I can explain this picture: In all seriousness, they stumbled on a warehouse with 5,000 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stg44" rel="nofollow - StG-44's complete with magazines, etc. On the current US collectors market, that warehouse is worth $125-$250 MILLION just for those guns alone. Lucky bastards..... ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |
Posted By: impulse418
Date Posted: 15 August 2012 at 4:07pm
|
Wow, super jealous. Who the hell had 5k stock piled? And why? |
Posted By: Lightningbolt
Date Posted: 15 August 2012 at 6:32pm
| Stumbled upon it? Lol? Like the people that have a vested interest in the stockpile have better things to do than guard that with massive fire power. |
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 15 August 2012 at 7:37pm
|
Wow, that's an awesome find. Where the heck would you find enough 7.92x33mm to feed the things? ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: tallen702
Date Posted: 15 August 2012 at 8:07pm
Shorty said that he's heard from others that Syria bought up what the Ruskies were ditching from their inventory of captured arms from the war. It was these, GeW-43's and Mosins. My guess is that Ivan was talking with Assad and said "Hey, buy an extra AA unit and we'll throw in this whole warehouse of automatic assault rifles!" ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 15 August 2012 at 11:35pm
|
If I remember correctly, weren't there people shooting at officers and rescue personnel durin Katrina? That's reason enough to order confiscation of all weapons. ------------- Que pasa? 
|
Posted By: impulse418
Date Posted: 16 August 2012 at 12:09am
Who reported that? I like how the National Guard wasn't provided ammo. |
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 16 August 2012 at 12:57am
I know cops down there that were personally under fire during the looting. ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: impulse418
Date Posted: 16 August 2012 at 4:31am
And confiscating weapons from law abiding citizens seemed justifiable? Did anyone hear about the stories of the law abiding citizens, who tried to get their firearms back? If they did, it took years to do so. |
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 16 August 2012 at 10:18am
I didn't say a thing about the confiscations, because I'm not well versed on the topic. jMac mentioned officers were being fired upon during Katrina, and your response seemed like you were "skeptical." All I did was let you know that it did happen, and not on what I'd call a small scale, either. ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: impulse418
Date Posted: 16 August 2012 at 10:55am
| What were the suspects supposedly doing before shooting at the police? Or was your conversation with NOPD brief? |
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 16 August 2012 at 1:01pm
Climbing out of a store's window display with merch in their hands. ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 16 August 2012 at 1:23pm
Not nearly at all does it give reason enough. It's already been stated several times, through courts and legislature, that what they did was unconstitutional / illegal, and therefor 'not reason enough'. Cops have been run over by cars before. Is that reason enough to impound all cars? Here's the difference: Ownership of arms is a right, cars are not. -------------
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 16 August 2012 at 3:39pm
|
^^^ People type stupid stuff on the internet . . . should we impound all keyboards?
-------------
|
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 16 August 2012 at 6:33pm
And also a left. ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 16 August 2012 at 10:02pm
|
Refers to cracked article for your car analogy. ------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: impulse418
Date Posted: 17 August 2012 at 12:11pm
| Wait, is this the same Linus? |
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 24 August 2012 at 12:24am
Without getting in to specifics of my private life, let's just say I have some first hand knowledge in the experience and it has somewhat altered my views on certain aspects. -------------
|
Posted By: evillepaintball
Date Posted: 24 August 2012 at 1:27pm
How is owning a car not a right? ------------- 
|
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 24 August 2012 at 2:39pm
It's not enumerated in any piece of legislation as something delegated by the government. That's what doesn't make it a legal right. "Human rights" are another topic completely, and I'm not sure that a car would fit into those either. |