Saudi Arabia VS Canada human rights activists

[Agarntrop]

Narnia is...Narnia.

I don't agree with Narnia but Narnia is probably cool IRL.

Narnia is serious but has some...very disagreeable opinions.



Anyone who kills gay people for being gay has no right running Canada.

Prince Salman should be thankful that we don't storm his country and turn it into the 11th province.

Canada couldn't conquer Saudi Arabia if it wanted to.

Neither Canada nor Saudi Arabia could conquer each other. It would be like ww1 if either of them tried- a total utter stalemate for 4 years.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Canada couldn't conquer Saudi Arabia if it wanted to.

Neither Canada nor Saudi Arabia could conquer each other. It would be like ww1 if either of them tried- a total utter stalemate for 4 years.

It would be a stalemate, but not like WWI, because WWI actually involved a lot of conflict.

[Agarntrop]

Maybe but that was just one incident.

But...
The Assad regime has-
Dropped chemical weapons on civilians in December 2012, March 2013 (twice), April 2013, August 2013, April 2014, August 2016, September 2016, December 2016, April 2017, February 2018 and April 2018.
Source- https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/ ... s-Activity

Committed several genocides of the Kurdish population in the past.

And puts prisoners in dehumanizing, medival-like torture chambers.

Which is worse, 1 war crime by the FSA or thousands by Assad?

You have to compare it on a control related basis. If one group controls a village of 10,000 and wipes out half of it, whereas another group bombs a country of 100 million and kills 10,000, the first group's act is still more atrocious. Comparing Assad's atrocities, during a Civil War, where Assad controls a good chunk of the country, to FSA/ISIS who take photos outside of their headquarters, isn't quite the same.

I think that if FSA had control equivalent to Assad, their actions would've been much more atrocious. Claiming that it was just one incident is the equivalent of bringing a style of lolcowdom arguments into a debate: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-w ... 80399.html

Indeed, there is an ugly side to the FSA that much of the Western media and its governmental supporters appear to be willfully neglecting. They are in essence turning a blind eye to many of the human rights violations and actions contrary to their own beliefs that the FSA is committing in order to support the ouster of Assad... In fact, of the approximately 23 million citizens in Syria, around eight million are minorities such as Christians, Druze, Alawites and Kurds, who are represented solely by the government. At least a third of the Syrian people support President Assad by default. Many others support him by virtue of alliances with his support base...

the FSA has been acting more like a force opposed to the citizens of Syria than a force intended to secure their freedom. For example, it has in the recent past stolen wheat reserves intended for the residents of Aleppo and sold it to private Turkish grain traders, expropriated stocks of pharmaceuticals and forcibly resold them back to its owners, and ransacked schools. These are hardly the actions of a ‘liberation force.’ In the outskirts of Aleppo, the FSA has implemented a Sharia law enforcement police force that is a replica of the Wahhabi police in Saudi Arabia — forcing ordinary citizens to abide by the Sharia code. This is being done in a secular country which has never known Sharia Law.

Lebanese newspapers such as Al-Akhbar and Assafir have broadcast a disturbing video of a 12-year-old child apparently forced by the FSA to cut off the head of a Syrian military officer. If such atrocities were more widely reported in the West, it seems unlikely that the FSA would enjoy such wide spread support. So, whether by intention or design, the Western media is also tacitly supporting FSA atrocities.

https://www.salon.com/2016/07/11/u_s_ba ... aw_report/

Syrian rebel groups backed by the U.S. and its allies "have committed serious violations of international humanitarian law, including abductions, torture and summary killings," according to Amnesty International. A report by the leading human rights organization details how extremist rebel groups have taken over large parts of major Syrian cities, in which they have created repressive theocratic regimes where critics are violently silenced and where religious and ethnic minority groups fear for their lives... U.S.-backed Syrian rebels committing war crimes, torture, abductions; imposing harsh Sharia law...

https://www.dw.com/en/concerns-grow-abo ... a-19277777

With a truce between the army and rebels in Syria close to unravelling, the list of abuses and potential war crimes on both sides appears to be growing longer... According to a recent report by Amnesty International, Syrian rebel groups may have actually used chemical weapons in Sheikh Maqsoud in early April, one in a series of "indiscriminate attacks that may account to war crimes."

I think some people here are getting the FSA confused with Tahir-Al-Sham, Al-qaeda's Syria wing.

[Shofercia]

You have to compare it on a control related basis. If one group controls a village of 10,000 and wipes out half of it, whereas another group bombs a country of 100 million and kills 10,000, the first group's act is still more atrocious. Comparing Assad's atrocities, during a Civil War, where Assad controls a good chunk of the country, to FSA/ISIS who take photos outside of their headquarters, isn't quite the same.

I think that if FSA had control equivalent to Assad, their actions would've been much more atrocious. Claiming that it was just one incident is the equivalent of bringing a style of lolcowdom arguments into a debate: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-w ... 80399.html



https://www.salon.com/2016/07/11/u_s_ba ... aw_report/



https://www.dw.com/en/concerns-grow-abo ... a-19277777

I think some people here are getting the FSA confused with Tahir-Al-Sham, Al-qaeda's Syria wing.

HuffPo, Salon, and Amnesty International specifically said it was the FSA. Not sure how that can be made any clearer.

[Painisia]

Trudeau did something right here. Why is every single nation silent about the Saudis, when they all complain about the Israelis

[Frievolk]

Canada couldn't conquer Saudi Arabia if it wanted to.

Neither Canada nor Saudi Arabia could conquer each other. It would be like ww1 if either of them tried- a total utter stalemate for 4 years.

Ironically, Saudi Arabia is ranked one score below that of Canada in Global Firepower lol.

[Torrocca]

Trudeau did something right here. Why is every single nation silent about the Saudis, when they all complain about the Israelis

Reminder that Trudeau gave them $15 billion in weapons, which they're now using to slaughter Yemenis.

Neither Canada nor Saudi Arabia could conquer each other. It would be like ww1 if either of them tried- a total utter stalemate for 4 years.

Ironically, Saudi Arabia is ranked one score below that of Canada in Global Firepower lol.

lmao

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Narnia is...Narnia.

I don't agree with Narnia but Narnia is probably cool IRL.

Narnia is serious but has some...very disagreeable opinions.



Anyone who kills gay people for being gay has no right running Canada.

Prince Salman should be thankful that we don't storm his country and turn it into the 11th province.

Canada couldn't conquer Saudi Arabia if it wanted to.

We would snipe them to death.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Canada couldn't conquer Saudi Arabia if it wanted to.

We would snipe them to death.

The Canadian military can't even get to Saudi Arabia.

[Shofercia]

Canada couldn't conquer Saudi Arabia if it wanted to.

We would snipe them to death.

With hockey pucks?

(I'm sorry, I couldn't resist. It was just so tempting. Sowwy.)

[Torrocca]

We would snipe them to death.

With hockey pucks?

(I'm sorry, I couldn't resist. It was just so tempting. Sowwy.)

High stakes for the Sandley Cup this year, eh?

[Constitutional Technocracy of Minecraft]

Canada couldn't conquer Saudi Arabia if it wanted to.

We would snipe them to death.

Sorry, but the Saudi Arabian military is far larger than the Canadian military. You'd need the US military on your side to win.

[Shofercia]

We would snipe them to death.

The Canadian military can't even get to Saudi Arabia.

Huh? Yeah, they can. Fly to Qatar, set up artillery, and start Operation Maple Leaf Storm. I'm not sure if they can take all of Saudi Arabia, but Canada can certainly do a lot of damage. I know I make a lot of Canadian jokes, but Canada's military is quite good for its size.

[Shofercia]

With hockey pucks?

(I'm sorry, I couldn't resist. It was just so tempting. Sowwy.)

High stakes for the Sandley Cup this year, eh?

Now there's a cup that Canada might actually win

[United Muscovite Nations]

The Canadian military can't even get to Saudi Arabia.

Huh? Yeah, they can. Fly to Qatar, set up artillery, and start Operation Maple Leaf Storm. I'm not sure if they can take all of Saudi Arabia, but Canada can certainly do a lot of damage. I know I make a lot of Canadian jokes, but Canada's military is quite good for its size.

It doesn't have the airlift capacity to get enough troops there. They would need US transport to get any significant force there. And even if they managed to somehow get their entire military there, the Saudis would still put up a hell of a fight.

[Torrocca]

We would snipe them to death.

Sorry, but the Saudi Arabian military is far larger than the Canadian military. You'd need the US military on your side to win.

Size isn't what matters, it's how you use it.

... Which, in this case, means that the Saudis are royally fucked.

High stakes for the Sandley Cup this year, eh?

Now there's a cup that Canada might actually win

I dunno, the Saudis wouldn't desert from that kinda win that easily.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

We would snipe them to death.

The Canadian military can't even get to Saudi Arabia.

Unless we camp in Eilat Israel and send a naval invasion via the gulf of aqaba.

[Kashida]

Way to go Canada I wish the U.S would take more stances like this

[United Muscovite Nations]

The Canadian military can't even get to Saudi Arabia.

Unless we camp in Eilat Israel and send a naval invasion via the gulf of aqaba.

You don't have the ships for that.

[Shofercia]

Huh? Yeah, they can. Fly to Qatar, set up artillery, and start Operation Maple Leaf Storm. I'm not sure if they can take all of Saudi Arabia, but Canada can certainly do a lot of damage. I know I make a lot of Canadian jokes, but Canada's military is quite good for its size.

It doesn't have the airlift capacity to get enough troops there. They would need US transport to get any significant force there. And even if they managed to somehow get their entire military there, the Saudis would still put up a hell of a fight.

You can transport military in civilian planes, or cargo planes. And I've no doubt that Saudis would put up a fight. But so would the Canucks. They might be smaller, but they have better cohesion, organization, etc.

Now there's a cup that Canada might actually win

I dunno, the Saudis wouldn't desert from that kinda win that easily.

But with quality goaltending, (defending artillery and missile launchers as they take ground,) the Canucks might just have them for desert

[United Muscovite Nations]

It doesn't have the airlift capacity to get enough troops there. They would need US transport to get any significant force there. And even if they managed to somehow get their entire military there, the Saudis would still put up a hell of a fight.

You can transport military in civilian planes, or cargo planes. And I've no doubt that Saudis would put up a fight. But so would the Canucks. They might be smaller, but they have better cohesion, organization, etc.

The Canadians would have to be absurdly better organization. Moreover, civilian planes wouldn't be able to transport that much in terms of really heavy equipment.

[Shofercia]

You can transport military in civilian planes, or cargo planes. And I've no doubt that Saudis would put up a fight. But so would the Canucks. They might be smaller, but they have better cohesion, organization, etc.

The Canadians would have to be absurdly better organization. Moreover, civilian planes wouldn't be able to transport that much in terms of really heavy equipment.

That's what cargo planes are for! You can also refit a tanker or two.

[United Muscovite Nations]

The Canadians would have to be absurdly better organization. Moreover, civilian planes wouldn't be able to transport that much in terms of really heavy equipment.

That's what cargo planes are for! You can also refit a tanker or two.

Even if the Canadians did get all of their troops there, I mean every single one, they'd still be outnumbered about 10:1.

[Torrocca]

It doesn't have the airlift capacity to get enough troops there. They would need US transport to get any significant force there. And even if they managed to somehow get their entire military there, the Saudis would still put up a hell of a fight.

You can transport military in civilian planes, or cargo planes. And I've no doubt that Saudis would put up a fight. But so would the Canucks. They might be smaller, but they have better cohesion, organization, etc.

I dunno, the Saudis wouldn't desert from that kinda win that easily.

But with quality goaltending, (defending artillery and missile launchers as they take ground,) the Canucks might just have them for desert

Aye, maybe, but the Canucks will be losing their home turf advantage of winter and ice, so they'll really be up against the (sand) grain(s) here.

[Spaceania]

I find it funny that a country with a large history of human rights abuse in the past (The native american and metis genocide and hanging of Louis Riel, and also the attack on villages in Québec who supported the Patriotes for asking a responsible government which resulted in many killings and many women being raped), is actually accusing another country of commiting human rights abuse. And I find Saudi's response even more funnier.

Half of those were not even Canada they where british
Patriots where the British since the parties original name was PARTI CANADIEN and where Canadian nationalists against the British

The other to ya those where actualy Canada but where working to help people impacted by those