NationStates Jolt Archive

Five die as Syria thwarts attack

Four gunmen and a security guard have been killed in clashes between suspected militants and security forces in the Syrian capital, Damascus.

Officials said a "terrorist" attack on a building near the offices of Syrian state TV and radio had been halted.

Four militants were also arrested and were being interrogated. It was not clear why the building was a target.

Several international hotels, government buildings and the city university are located in the area.

"The security force dealt effectively with the group as shown from the number of casualties among its members," Fayez al-Sayegh, head of Syrian radio and television, told Reuters news agency.

Two years ago, gunmen clashed with security forces in the same location, close to Umayyad Square, after they again appeared to be targeting an empty building.

Syrian forces have clashed with Islamic militants a number of times in recent months, but official statements regarding Friday's incident have so far not made any references to Islamist groups.

source (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5040558.stm)


It's preposterous that we welcome terrorist-loving nations like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan as allies, but not countries like Syria, that are genuinely opposed to Islamofascist terrorism. If we're genuinely fighting Islamist extremism, why do we treat Syria like a pariah?

Because Syrians are secular fascists.

Terrorism- The use of force or violence to intimidate or subjugate.

I think that comes from the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, I memorized it years ago.

It's bugged me for a long time that we do not include state-sponsored terrorism under the heading of terrorism.

Now I really should shut up, rather than keeping going around and pointing out technicalities in these threads.

Because Syrians are secular fascists.
Correction: The Syrian government are secular fascists.

And I don't think that's the reason the US opposes them. Indeed, if you look closely, they don't oppose them at all. Syria is considered a vital ally in the war against terror. Or to be more exact, their prison and interrogation system (http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,386033,00.html) is.

Not only Syria, but Iran as well. The only reason that the West is oposed to those countries is because of the liability known as Isreal.

Because Syrians are secular fascists.

Syria's government be deplorable, but Syria's a haven of freedom compared to some other Middle Eastern dictatorships, like Saudi Arabia.

Five die as Syria thwarts attack

Four gunmen and a security guard have been killed in clashes between suspected militants and security forces in the Syrian capital, Damascus.



source (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5040558.stm)


It's preposterous that we welcome terrorist-loving nations like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan as allies, but not countries like Syria, that are genuinely opposed to Islamofascist terrorism. If we're genuinely fighting Islamist extremism, why do we treat Syria like a pariah?

So are Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. They just have larger populations supporting it. Not to mention the possibility of Iraq's WMDs being shipped over to Syria pre-OIF2.

So are Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. They just have larger populations supporting it.
That's a joke, isn't it? There are numerous big names from the highest echelon of the Saudi government directly involved, and the Pakistani secret service has had ties with terrorists for as long as it existed.

Not to mention the possibility of Iraq's WMDs being shipped over to Syria pre-OIF2.
That's a myth that has never been even attempted to be proven. Syria fought against Iraq during Desert Storm, and that quite aside from the complete senselessness of giving away your best weapons while your regime is being destroyed.

...and Pakistan is a member of the nuclear club...

...and Pakistan is a member of the nuclear club...

Yeah. We support Pakistan because if we DON'T, the Islamofascists will take over (instead of being the ISI's "little playthings", the Islamists are gaining strength due to the U.S.'s wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the fact Musharraf has been in power almost 7 years), and then we'll have a Radical Islamist state with a world-class military, an economy growing at like 6% a year, a good airforce, and a nuclear arsenal.

Because Syrians are secular fascists.

Possibly so - but one prefers Mussolini over Osama bin Laden.

Possibly so - but one prefers Mussolini over Osama bin Laden.
He was Saudi Arabian, not Syrian.

He was Saudi Arabian, not Syrian.

Of course - but does it really matter where OBL or Musso came from?
I'd also prefer Old Assad ( syrian ) over Torquemada ( spanish ).