Is he gonna make it bros?

America has effectively lost it's proxy war in Syria, they're just going to harass Assad more unless the current US military leadership gets purged for one in favor of nuclear war. He'll probably survive

So no full on war?

Attached: assadliberal.jpg (891x536, 64.69K)

No, if Mattis is to be believed (take it as you will), then it's a one time thing for show on some abandoned research facilities

Down with the USA! Down with Assad! Up with the workers!

t. delusional islamist rebel supporting Trot

kill yourself

Attached: trot.jpg (454x458, 41.95K)

THIS
THIS
THIS
THIS
THIS
THIS

Attached: assad action.jpg (225x224, 10.28K)

we must support a murderous capitalist dictator because ameriKKKa is against him which means that he is good. ppl who disagree with me are imperialist NATO shills !!!

Wow I love this capitalist because other capitalists are against him

this but unironically

This is basically the British Empire vs Fascist Brazil argument
You would support the fash because if the brits win they will just place their own puppet who is the same or worse than the one before
But if the brits lose, there will be trouble and there is a chance for the workers in the empire to revolt.

can I support the brazilian fascists without going full LION OF BRAZILIA FUERA SIONISTA BRAZIL IS ACTUALLY EXISTING SOCIALISM!!! though, or that is still pro-imperialist

are you one of those trying to suggest that every authoritarian regime which didn't abolish commodity form is literally fascism?

Attached: 1230xijinping01.jpg (854x570, 49K)

Baathism is literally just Arab fascism

Is government sponsoring terrorist groups, or using it's own police force to destroy worker movements and unions?

I hope this was a frivolous statement

Yes. The Assad regime suppressed Marxist activists while supporting terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah.

Except hamas and hezbollah aren't terrorists

What about Russian imperialism keeping him in power? Shouldn't we protest that too?

I much prefer Russian imperialism to American imperialism.

russia is not imperialist you khokhol banderite CIA shill! russia is actually existing socialism, uphold petroligarch thought

why

Yes, I’m sure that organizations which deliberately kill unarmed civilians are not terrorist because they are NOBLE FIGHTERS AGAINST AMERICAN IMPERIALISM™

Russians have been way less hostile to Muslims and leftists than Americans.

Oy vey muh poor isreali settlers

we are not talking about NATO

Which in turn are allied to the PFLP and Lebanese Communist Party. Also there are two Syrian communist parties which are completely legal and have seats in parliament.

Am i on leftpol?

it's leaking with high-quality discussion they keep talking about

What's wrong with the claim that Russia is imperialist though? The ML parties in my country both support the Syrian government against western imperialism, but they still maintain that Russia is an imperialist country, just a significantly weaker one.

Attached: sadboys.jpg (960x752, 238.96K)

no, Zig Forums is full of liberals. I am a Marxist, not a liberal, which is why I fully support Russian oligarchical capitalism and plutocracy

kys yourself

It really doesn't, given that the country who has the power and the means to remove dictators also supports several of them, so that clearly isn't the principle behind their selection of targets. And that this country also finances forces hostile to enemy regimes when they're democratic, which has lead to tons of coups in the past.

So maybe the fact he's a dictator is besides the question and not even worth bringing up, you fucking retard.

...

Attached: support_for_al_assad.png (1230x1229, 783.96K)

It’s not beside the question because many people on this board do not simply oppose American military intervention in Syria, but enthusiastically support the Assad regime. Being anti-imperialist is one thing, being an apologist for murderous dictators is another.

Countries don't exist in a vacuum, retard

He didn’t say that countries exist in a vacuum, he said that Russian imperialism is a bad thing which must be opposed. I realize that it may be difficult for you to comprehend that Western countries are not the only ones that can be imperialist, but at least try.

The west is the dominant imperialist faction, which is why they must be opposed, they'll be supported when they're no longer the dominant aggressor in the whole world.

Excuse me where are the evidences for proving????
Do you have any idea how much murder there is in the middle east?

AHHH THIS IS NOT HOW REVOLUTIONARY DEFEATISM WORKS READ LENIN

Reading is gay

t. leftypol

If an actual war broke out, they'd go after him to install "Democracy™". They did it to Gadaffi, if the US goes into one of these places, they're going to kill the leader.

How the fuck can you defend Assad with all the medical neutrality violations he has made over the years?

Because the alternatives suck worse.

Shut the fuck up
LIBERAL

You have few friends but many enemies. No matter what you do, the enemy will think you are doing something wrong.

This is why the left is a joke

Just oppose American interventionism you idealist dumbasses

Well, would it matter if we did? It was 200 years ago.

Yeah, because the right to recieve medical attention in warzones is an imperialist invention and shouldn't be protected.

Attached: 39455014a6ece0a75ec7cc8fad14856ef0f7ba0b0d4f00d3d9808a805f85d9fb.jpg (645x729, 48.72K)

tell me right now without googling anything, whats imperialist about russia's relationship with syria?

protip: foreign military assistance =/= imperialism

plus russia just isn't that powerful. i'm not scared of russia at all really. maybe i should be? but idk, i truly think they would get taken the fuck out in a large scale conflict. it's china i'd be a bit more on edge about tbh. but russia alone is small potatoes to me. putin is an infantile little bastard and just is an embarassment to his former USSR countrymen

No.
Screen cap this post tbh, I called it first.

Who is going to protect it? Say that the SAA nicely obeyed all the laws of war. It is established fact that none of the terrorists opposing them did, so where is the benefit? Do you think NATO would suddenly line up behind the SAA and stop funding the terrorists because they saw how neatly the SAA obeyed international law? Of course not! It's a vicious civil war to the death, with no help coming from the outside. Humanitarian laws are by and large only obeyed only as long as it does not interfere with the prospect of victory.

Their army may have known better days but they still have nukes tho…

pakistan has nukes, are they imperialists?

So leftypol has become a RT/Russia propaganda board. Nice.

I hope Kurds get their own country. Remember over a dozen US military bases in Syria? Yeah, Assad doesn't like them.

such a low effort…

No, but Russia and China are definitely imperialist

Wow. Are you that delusional? Next thing you'll say Assad is a good guy who didn't do anything wrong except provide heaven on Earth for his people.

Forgot my flag. I often forget this board is full of ☭TANKIE☭s who will die clinging to their beliefs never having experienced the things they want. While us anarchists are lucky because we are able to form non-hierarchical relationships and exercise a gift economy. For ☭TANKIE☭s to experience what they want they need the whole world to be ☭TANKIE☭.

Also, the Americans on this board are plagued by the same false dichotomies and black/white thinking as the liberals and conservatives. Just because I don't support Assad, doesn't mean I support American imperalism. The ideal for me would be for Russia and USA to annihilate each other.

It'd probably take a miracle. The US clearly wants war. Whoever happens to be secretary of state at the time is gonna have a "we came we saw he died" moment and the liberals will cheer as Syria collapses, refugees flee, and islamism grows stronger. ISIS was getting beat, so the us needs to make more enemies to fight otherwise how are they going to justify buying yet more weapons from the contractors? Unless they're stopped the US MIC will go to war with everyone until the world is nothing but "barbarians" whom they can fight like whack a mole until capitalism collapses.

Dude I've been here since the boards inception, there are posters who under any circumstance will allow that simple thought to pass through their head. They're just going to ignore you and continue shitposting.

Attached: kimlaugh.png (289x272, 69.68K)

Attached: BookchinVsAssad.jpg (1024x730, 142.71K)

Can BO just ban these cunts?

Attached: 1513124678889.png (630x504, 39.4K)

I know people will rebut with China and Africa but the situation there is fundamentally different to what the US is doing in the middle east and what europe had done to Africa in the past. It is just not comparable.

What is Chechnya? What is Tibet? What is Taiwan?

"States" used to partition and weaken the countries to the benefit of NATO. Chechnya was just NATO's attempt to encroach ever closer to russia.

so, we're in full denial mode now. ok then.

They are all provinces, some more restive than others.

now resorting to semantics. you can deem any place a "province", doesn't mean that the people of this region don't have the critical mass to demand sovereignty and self determination.

They were conquered by the emperors before the gommies took over, and the gommies kept the territories, das all

well, I'm sorry the gommies sadly cannot keep them

None of these provinces ever had a democratic movement for autonomy, only armed gangs (Chechnya), a former feudal despot trying to reassert authority (Tibet), and in the case of Taiwan a government in exile that essentially displace the indigenous people of Formosa. Just because a few local elites and criminals call for autonomy, does not make it a sustained movement for self-determination.

The last remnant of Nationalist China, which still claims Mainland China including Tibet along with all of Mongolia and some areas of other countries as part of its territory.

and leave the territory in control of western imperialists? pretty sentiments user

Tibet and Chechnya were both made into autonomous regions by the gommies

...

Right because they wont be used as pawns by western imperialists, get your head off your ass and see the last 70 years of history fam

They might be, but I would rather risk that than just changing the ratios of which oppressive regime gets the biggest part of the pie. I guess it comes from living in a neighboring country to Russia. As much as seeing the obvious US influence here annoys me, I prefer struggle of achieving any semblance of autonomy in future (which is more likely now than before) to being vassal under a turbo black pilled Russia.

And i live in a country colonized by the gringos who have every fucking single advantage in the world stage, taking them down even an inch of a peg is a great victory for the world

Them not winning in Syria would not change a thing in your country. I get that revenge can be a motivator, but through it you will uselessly spend time and effort on useless shit, and fuck over others in collateral damage

It wont change shit in my country but that dosent mean others will benefit from it. If chile would nationalize their mines it still wouldnt change shit but that dosent mean it wont be a good thing for them

The difference here is that US being knocked down a peg in Syrian war would not be to anyone's benefit, except would-be empires that just want to take the place US has right now. The only reasonable stance here is non-intervention.

Better to have squabbling empires than a monolithic one

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THE ABSOLUTE CHAD.

Attached: hassanjuref.png (581x543, 405.26K)

Assad is a dictator and the FSA are ISIS under a different name.

it's shit vs shit.

Attached: 1419186419866.jpg (206x255, 13.9K)

at least Ba'ath has free health care

I may have cancer but at least I don't have syphillis