In League with Lucifer….
Is my Enemies Enemy …my friend?
In war… do expedients trump Ideals?
The Syrian mess.
The Rebels have a just cause against the Tyrant, yet does victory for their cause justify their allying themselves with Al Qaeda?
How does this effect the righteousness of their cause?
Some would say…. Such a pact with Satan negates their whole enterprise…. yet I was thinking about this today… and curiously my mind turned to WW2 and Churchill’s and Roosevelt’s pact with Stalin …. for the sake of defeating Hitler.
Hitler was defeated… yet does this justify Churchill’s and Roosevelt’s getting into bed with such a monster????
We all know that after the War Stalin became the greatest threat to Western civilisation and that the ‘Cold war’… and other communists conflicts in Korea, Vietnam, etc gained support from the USSR…. yet I would be interested in hearing opinions from those who oppose supporting the Syrian rebels because they are allied to Al Qeada…. yet condone the Pact between the Allies and the USSR in WW2.
What would have happened had Stalin been left unsupported and Hitler had been allowed to Conquer the USSR…. simply because Churchill and Roosevelt had refused to ‘ally’ with Stalin?????
Should not the Rebels accept help from Al Qeada to defeat Bashar al-Assad… and after that… take on Al Qaeda…. just as we did with the USSR *after* WW2?
Do you appreciate the dilemma I am presenting to ye who castigate the Syrian rebels on the basis that they have accepted aid from Al Qaeda?
I would be interested to hear what ye Arm Chair Field Marshals, Sages, and Peaceniks have to say on such matters.
If you condone the pact made with Stalin… for the expedience of defeating Hitler…. should you not also sympathise with the Syrian Rebels allying themselves with Al Qaeda?
How do you think Churchill felt having to rub shoulders with such a vile degenerate as Stalin???
Satan Laughing spreads his wings….
Yes, if you believe that
Strange comparisons. Churchill deliberately targeted civilians during the war. Assad claims casualties of war are to be expected.
If the rebels want sharia law then Assad is saving the people from tyranny.
What has Assad done that would make him worse than Churchill?
What has Assad done to make him a tyrant?
This article is worth reading Reed…
Bashar al-Assad: A Tyrant in Full….
http://www.nationaljournal.com/daily/bashar-al-assad-a-tyrant-in-full-20130909
“Remember that what happened in Syria started out as not as a revolution but with peaceful protesters asking for a few reforms, and on the first day 160 of them were killed,” Thani said at a Brookings Institution conference earlier this year. “I went to see Assad, and we had a long conversation. He promised to give an important speech to his parliament, and instead he cracked jokes as if nothing was happening, while blood was running in the streets! He agreed to meet with the opposition, and we saw that, too, was a joke to him! Other promises were made and not kept. As chair of the Arab League, we took the matter up with our friends and tried to solve it by sending a monitoring team to Syria to try and talk to him. And, finally, we concluded that Bashar al-Assad was just buying time to execute his one true strategy, which is to kill, and kill, and kill until he wins.”
What’s best for Syria’s Christians might not be what’s best for the rest of Syria.
A real elected president would have solved this problem the only possible way – nuke Damascs Aleppo Tehran Qom Isfahan Busheur Ramallah and the rest of em.
That’s the only way America can regain respect and protect Israel.