The debate "We should not kill Bashar Assad" was started by
March 12, 2017, 4:56 am.
11 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 4 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
sherrieshoffman02 posted 1 argument, thereal posted 2 arguments, historybuff posted 3 arguments to the agreers part.
historybuff posted 1 argument, blue_rayy posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.
sherrieshoffman02, thereal, historybuff and 8 visitors agree.
blue_rayy, mmjd14, human and 1 visitor disagree.
correction, he started murdering his people months before the death of Gadafi. not that he hadn't been torturing and murdering anyone he didn't like the whole time.
killing him doesn't solve anything. at this point he is mostly a symbol anyway. the people propping him up, the military and the wealthy elite, would just replace him with a new dictator.
and the original protests may not have been directly calling for his head, but it was the Arab spring. thry wanted political reform. his removal was certainly part of what they wanted. given what happened to gadafi, he decided better hundreds of thousands of his people than him.
lets hang him on the lamp post.
his people didn't want him gone until after he responded to their protests with barrel bombs. they just wanted more opportunity and access to food.
I'm not voting to kill him FYI. it wouldn't solve anything. the app keeps changing my vote.
where exactly did I compare them to the west? why do you just make things up like that? it makes you look very stupid and dishonest.
he murdered his own people to hold onto his dictatorship. that is an objective fact.
his people wanted him gone, he wanted to stay. so he killed them. that is a bad thing. does that simplify it enough for you to follow?
oh look, another retard comparing american and western democracy to a region which has been war torn BECAUSE of the the west for decades...
he murdered his own people with barrel bombs, chemical weapons and starvation in stubborn attempt to hold onto power. yeah, he's an ******.
he wasnt bad. how is he bad? most spacktards havent even seen a single interview by him to understand his side of the story.
are you saying he wasn't bad?
or are you just against capital punishment and the killing of anyone?
I know that but do you think we should kill him for being "bad" or no? (I'm sorry for my English, I feel I cannot explain what I want to say)
no one killed him