[Comment] Response to Asa Wistanley

(The below was a ‘raw’ comment posted on an article by ‘Asa Wistanley’)

Asa, I’ve read your article, the ‘revolution that never was’. besides the usual pseudo-leftist disclaimers of ‘Assad is bad but..’ you essentially support a fascist dictator (don’t care if its as a ‘lesser evil’ or otherwise) and pretend that his enemies are worse, against all fucking available evidence – and yes that statement includes ISIS for that matter, who in objectively verifiable terms have killed far less innocent civilians than Assad did, and who for that matter have killed far more rebels than they have regime soldiers. Aleppo has been the most aerially bombarded city in the world since World War II and I wish that was a metaphorical statement. You pretend to be a pro-Palestinian whilst supporting a regime that has made Israel go jealous on its ability to starve (up to now more than 160) Palestinians – yet alone Syrians – in a refugee camp – using the same excuse of ‘terrorists in a small beseiged area taking human shields’ allowing collective punishment – that has made it go jealous on being able to wipe out neighbourhoods from the sky for three years without any significant backlash, that has done to Syria from within what Israel could never dream of doing from without. and you have the audacity to defame the resistance because of the extremists present within it (as if such an extreme situation wouldn’t have produced them), or for getting Western weapons (through Gulf states no less, who could never give weapons without the approval of their masters, which is why they STILL don’t give the resistance anti-aircraft missiles because the US hasn’t authorised it) as if they were supposed to be asking for fucking Russian weapons!

You and all the pseudo-leftist faux-anti-imperialist identity-politics-dominated scabs like Galloway, Stop the War, etc. are hypocrites, and ill tell you why you are; because you supported the Iraqi resistance a few years ago even though it also had Al-Qaeda AND FOR THAT MATTER WHAT FUCKING BECAME ISIS, and during that time when attacked you would (correctly) apply a contextual analysis as the left is supposed to do and say ‘its foreign policy and state terror that’s created this extremism’, ‘these people are fighting to defend their territory’, or ‘Al-Qaeda’s not the entire resistance’, and a few years later practically THE SAME TYPE of resistance comes up (in the case of ISIS literally the same fighters) but lo and behold, its Russian imperialism they’re up against rather than the Western imperialism that would make me feel good about myself, so out of the window goes our brains, our analytical facilities, our contextual understandings, that we afford to the parties we like, like Hamas in Gaza or the Iraqi resistance, and we’ll suddenly turn into idiotic fucking sounding neo-cons who repeat the words ‘takfiri’ and ‘jihadi’ as if they digested them everyday for breakfast. Your selectivity and identity politics is the reason why the Left is so shit in your country and why so many good leftists I know there have fucking left it. Rise of ISIS and Nusra – expected outcome of the extremism of the situation? Noooo, suddenly this evil has dropped out of the sky. Mainstream rebels still bigger than ISIS and Nusra combined? Noooo, I only go on disconnected shallow sensationalist media heresay and not actually study what I seek to be an expert about. I challenge you to name the main rebel coalition fronts there in Syria – go on! Or what factions they consist of? Go on! In your article you even singled out rebel abuses in Latakia and a Christian village as indicative, you fucking hypocrite! Why did you not talk about the same type of sectarian massacres that happened in Houla, where kids were having their heads bludgeoned open by sectarian shabiha, in Bayda, in Baniyas, in Qubeir, in in in in.., long before Latakia or Qusair!

Who was it who was saying for three years that the longer the world ignores Assad the more sure it is that you will get extremists? You try to peddle the amateur myth that the resistance wouldn’t exist ‘without foreign backing’ when anyone who actually knows or is a so-called ‘expert’ on the subject, including people critical of rebels (James Foley, Vice, etc.) know that foreign backing has been so miniscule that every single reporter that has gone there (including one critical of the rebels) have reported that these guys have home-made rocket launchers and Kalashnikovs. If Saudi was so invested in arming the rebels they would have had the anti-aircraft missiles that they have in stock 3 years ago, instead of continuing to beg for it and shoot guns at aircrafts hoping to pull them down. And the reason you support Assad (as a ‘lesser evil’) is either because he’s secular and/or makes you feel good as a Westerner that you’re ‘standing up to Western imperialism’, not even understanding an iota of what Western policy on Syria has been. So do us a favour and shut up.

EDIT: Just to back up the first claim I made: Out of 80,000+ civilian casualties in Syria ISIS have killed 2,234, the rebels with all their stripes and groupings 1,562, and the regime 78,999 – in other words the regime has been responsible for 95% of the civilian casualty count in Syria -from the non-aligned ‘The Syria Campaign’)

[FB post] Western Assadists and leftist neo-cons

Love those Western pro-Syrian government forum idiots who after having an hour or so of a Wikipedia session pretentiously itch to splurt their ‘DONT YOU KNOW AMERICA TRAINED BIN LADEN IN THE 80s’ or ‘DONT YOU KNOW WHAT AMERICA DID IN IRAQ’, as if the people who support the Syrian resistance were against the Iraqi one or pro the US invasion in 2003. These smug idiots don’t actually study the current situation they seek to speculate about so assuredly and instead generalise the experience of entirely seperate conflicts on the current one, thinking that they can ‘guess’ what’s happening because they see some form of American involvement as a constant (which will obviously be the case as the fucking superpower of the world – but they don’t actually study how the characteristics of the involvement differ). The funniest thing actually is how those idiots (represented on an institutional level by groups such as ‘Stop the War’ – or Stop a War only where we can feel good about ourselves) supported the Iraqi resistance (which also included Al-Qaeda) as ‘heroic freedom fighters’, whilst opposed the currently simultaneous Syrian one as ‘brutal jihadis’. Oh that’s another thing – that Iraqi resistance they supported just a few years ago – yeah no they’re all terrorists and terrorist sympathisers now, funnily enough (or they’ve disappeared).

Alternatively, another reading is that Maliki has been sectarian and exclusionary in Iraq, unlike Assad in Syria, who has been an angel by comparison. I mean who in their right mind (even those who support Assad as a supposed ‘lesser evil’ – i.e. not those who are completely brainwiped) will think that Assad has alienated less people than Maliki, or that Assad has done worse than Maliki? (not that you should compare different types of crap). Ah but you know the difference, Maliki was ‘directly’ put there by the US, Assad wasn’t (regardless of course that the Syrian faction of the Baa’th party was one that constantly compromised and negotiated with imperialism since the rightist coup of Assad Snr in 1970 – from fighting against the Palestinians and Leftists in Lebanon, from joining the US in its coalition against Iraq in 1990, from torturing Bush’s War on Terror prisoners during the 2000s, from stating that it was willing to sell out Hamas in secret negotiations with the US in 2010, etc.). The Iraqis claimed that this was part of the reason for the split between the Iraqi and Syrian branches of the Baa’th, where the Iraqis essentially saw the Assadist Ba’ath as sell-outs (not that that made the Iraqis ‘good’).

And the greatest thing is that they don’t see any of those contradictions – when they faced off with neo-cons during Iraq who used the same ‘Jihadi’ language they would go and say ‘they’re resistance fighters’, ‘Al-Qaeda are just a part’ or ‘the situation has produced them’, or in other words apply some sort of contextual understanding, but when it comes to Syria these pseudo-anti imperialists metamoprhise into essentially leftist neo-cons: The entire resistance is essentially ‘brutal Jihadis’ who have dropped out of the sky. Funniest thing is that the Syrian resistance and Iraqi ones are very closely tied, a fact which ISIS has undoubtedly exploited.