As an introduction I would like us all to reasonably agree that no one is perfect and no one is always correct and no one is in expert in every subject. May we forgive each other when we are wrong and may we refrain from lying in ANY context.





Understanding the history of Syria, Shi'ism (The Religion of the Shia) and Arab nationalism is going to be a difficult and lengthy. However, let's have a brief and quick reminder made by VlogBrothers and entitled: Know Your News! Understanding the Syrian Revolution in Under 4 Minutes.

Embed CodePlays: 0 (Embed: 0)



The heavy sectarian history has made this a unique conflict. A lot of people are swallowing the mainstream media's words and opponents are swallowing the words of Bashar Al Assad. For many people it has came to trying to support what appears to be the lesser evil. However, to understand something which is quite simply beyond the scale of brief written or even audio visual media is something beyond the scale of many of us.

• Syria is the home to at least 3 major religions (Christianity, Islam and Shi'ism) and all of these groups have 'interests' and sometimes these interests will contradict the interests of others.



• The Syrian governments main allies are Iran, Lebanon and Russia. Iran and Lebanon because of the ties of Sh'ism and Russia because of the arms manufacturing industry.



• The 'Free Syrian Army' FSA has been supported by the west, western media, western governments and other governments in the middle east.



• Allied to the cause, but not the methodology of the 'Free Syrian Army' are muslims from around the world who have travelled to Syria to participate in fighting for the sake of god in co-operation with many of the more traditional and practicing muslims within Syria.



• 'Power vacuums' are great for foreign interests and other criminals.



• None of these groups are perfect

To further expand on these bullet points which would be widely accepted as truth, we can say that the 3 major religions have a history of plotting against each other.



Iranian, Lebanese and Russian media are certainly not going to be impartial (at the very least due to financial connections) and especially so when at least 2 of the allies have government funded international news agencies (Press TV of Iran and RT or 'Russia Today' of Russia).



The western media certainly isn't perfect or truthful either and it is strange that western governments want to get involved in another war (even if it is just by providing supplies).



The FSA is an army of means and man power but little experience (only defected police/military have experience). Also, because of this spontaneous arrival of the FSA movement people are arguing over power, many waiting inline to be the next ruler or perhaps dictator and increase their own wealth.



The international allies and migrated allies of the FSA are certainly practicing muslims (otherwise they wouldn't go and risk their lives) and certainly aware of the various international 'Jihadi' movements. We can firmly conclude that a practicing muslim that migrates to fight for the sake of god and accepting that he could die will know and appreciate 'the virtues of martyrdom' and importance of relying on God for victory.



This is something the FSA doesn't have. It severely restricts their capacity to fight because they fear death.



Additionally, with being aware of the international 'Jihadi' movements there is also a strong knowledge of military equipment, procedures, training, tactics and political strategies (or at least replace the word military with insurgent) within the mainly foreign fighter led networks. Again, this is something that the FSA does not have.







In this conflict, many of the factions have commited crimes but to begin with and to motivate the internal conflict there had to be a problem with the leadership and as such we have to conclude that there is a problem with the leadership.



It's acceptable that it's not perfect but surely when people rebel and take arms against the government it is certainly beyond not perfect and closer to an unbearable regime.







Another LiveLeak user by the name of 'Markan72' has become a staunch critic of the FSA and their allies which is fine, everyone is enetitled to their own opinions and thoughts about this conflict and the way to solve it.



However, I would like to take this opportunity to counter one of his repeated anti FSA arguments due to it's lack of apparent of integrity and also another popular argument used by many of his proponents.







Argument 1: The FSA are the Cause of Terror due to Their Tactics



Here and in other videos, Markan72 and other users have shown how the FSA have been fighting from Civillian buildings and then complaining when the Syrian Arab Army return fire into a civillian area.



Of course this is a valid point and concern that people have raised, I have to agree. However,

• In a civil uprising this is generally what happens. Especially in warfare that takes place for control of centers of administration (cities).



• The FSA and their allies aren't funded by tax payers and as such can't construct military buildings to fight from.



• Buildings provide cover



• How can the FSA control where the enemy is and what means they have to fight them effectively? They are a victim of circumstance.

Meanwhile, the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) is funded by tax payers and is trained in fighting and have all the equipment they need. However, their chosen response to such incidents is artillery in urban areas (this is certainly a way to cause terror among civillians) just as Palestinians launching rockets at Israeli civillians causes terror (whether it's justified or not is another matter).



Another response of the SAA is the 'Barrel Bomb' a crude explosive device which is literally dropped from a helicopter onto Urban city zones with no aiming devices.



It's hardly an appropriate response considering the means the SAA has. Especially when they try to persuade people that they are proud 'Syrian Arabs' and that the other factions are terrorists. Attacking Urban zones with artillery is definitely a cause of terror and thus terrorism and ironic.







Argument 2: If the FSA aren't Terrorists, Why do They Cover Their Faces?



This question is incredibly easy to answer but also understandable in it's nature.



Covering your face protects your identity and you might do this because you are a terrorist.



However, let's look deeply into the issue of facial coverings in the context of the argument:

• Concealment of identity



• Lessens risk of identification and persecution by authorities

Now, let's look at the counter argument regarding the use of facial covering in warfare:

• Concealment of identity



• Lessens risk of identification and persecution by authorities



• In authoritarian regimes where militant insurgency is occuring, the regimes can't always pursue the identified personnel and so they will resort to the kidnapping, torture and murder of the indentified individual's family and friends. This is something very common in Russian federal subjects of Chechnya and Dagestan.



• Authorities want to disguise their actions due to fear or disgust. For example, in Chechnya and Dagestan the police are targets of assasination on an almost daily basis and as such their armed units often cover their faces to reduce the risk of identification and thus assasination. In Afghanistan the afghan translators always cover their face because they are helping the enemy of the general public where there is little support of foreign forces (except in the Northern/Shia dominated areas).



• Reducing the risk of identity for highly trained and valuable special forces personnel and thus assasination of them.



• 'Voice cloaking' is also similar in purpose to covering ones face in this context.



• Pseudonyms also serve the same purpose in this context.



• Pixellation of faces also serve the same purpose in this context.

I hope it is now clear that covering your face even in the context of war does not mean that you are a terrorist. I appologise if I come accross as arrogant and if I have massively failed to substantiate the claims I have made.







May we all raise above ignorance , intolerence and bias in order to closer to some truth.

View comments (1)