BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria

Subject: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 27 Jun 14 - 06:45 PM

Our reportage says: --
"Amer Deghayes, 20, grew up in Brighton, enjoying lessons in media and film at college, and going swimming.
But now he believes it is his "duty" to fight for rebels in Syria's civil war, and will not leave until the job is done.
Deghayes has gone to fight the "holy war" for rebel groups against Bashar al Assad's regime."
But in the 30s, young people from all around the world, many communists (not strictly a religion but certainly a belief), went to Spain to fight against German-assisted fascists, for the International Brigade. We regard them as heroes.
Why do we fear that people like Deghayes are terrorists?
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/why-im-fighting-syrias-civil-3775190#ixzz35siQuK5f
Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Jun 14 - 07:09 PM

Principle. Principle. Principle.

We don't have any, any more. The barbarians attacked- emergency- some French intellectual called it art, shock horror how could anybody do that to us.

We (we being the rich west) seldom see the world as others see it. And when our comforts are challenged, we don't do as we say very often.

Oil. Democracy. Free markets. Free expression. Surely fine things.

Nigeria/ Biafra. Chile/ Nicaragua. Algeria (hey I bet you don't remember that one).

Then the CIA helped to create the Taliban to destroy the best government Afghanistan has ever known.

Then there's underemployment at home, and discrimination in jobs.. and finally, the magnet of manly action abroad against decadent stagnation at home (read Rupert Brooke).

No hope at home, wielding the sword of justice abroad. Which would you choose?

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Janie
Date: 27 Jun 14 - 08:05 PM

Wouldn't it be nice if life was simple and choices were clear, unambiguous, and never had unintended or unforeseen consequences?

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 03:10 AM

Bridge is right. (Sorry, let me rephrase that.). Bridge's source document makes an interesting comparison. (That's better.)

When the trade unionist Jack Jones died, politicians on all sides lamented the passing of a man so principled, he fought in Spain.

Some of the people on Mudcat reckon all Muslims are potential terrorists yet I am sure they have at some point in a folk club applauded when hearing McColl's Ballad of Jamie Foyer.

Any ex soldier may know of ex colleagues going on to fight as mercenaries for the highest bidder. Every war crimes trial in The Hague gestures references to assistance by Western mercenaries for dictators and despots.

It's just that idealistic young men make better story lines than wage earning mercenaries.

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 03:55 AM

The rebel Free Syria Army ask foreign fighters to stay away.
They are ordinary Muslim folk fighting for a more just and democratic government for their country.
The jihadists are not fighting for any kind of democracy.
They do not believe in it.
As Richard says, they are fighting a "holy war" against the infidel Shia and Christian, to impose an Islamist regime under extreme Sharia.

The fear is that they have the same aspirations for us.

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 04:18 AM

It is an interesting statement, if a little fogged with emotive terms like 'martyrdom' and 'duty'.
I know from hearing stories from childhood of Spain, that those who went to fight there were a motley crew, made up of Jews who were concerned about what was happening in Germany, idealistic liberals, intellectuals like Orwell and Cauldwell, trades unionists, vague lefts, hardened Marxists, Irish, Sots and general Republicans.... ll fighting under the 'Anti fascist banner.
Like the war itself, there was no definite identifiable ideology to those who volunteered.
My father was a liberal left Catholic republican, an ex-choirboy, a Liverpool Collegiate student with a promising future - somewhat contrarily, he was a professed pacifist (all very confusing).
For those who went, the rise of Fascism in Europe was the deciding and uniting factor.
The parallels of Spain and Syria are unavoidable, as far as I'm concerned; the failure of the major powers to intervene and the somewhat lukewarm response of the Soviet Union, coupled with the internal conflicts and power struggles within the Republican forces.
My father returned home wounded and traumatised; after eighteen months in prison and hospital in Spain, he was considered a security risk in Britain, was labelled 'a premature anti-Fascist' and was blacklisted from work.
Potential employers would receive a visit from the police and be informed of his 'record'; eventually, in desperation, he became a navvy with John Laing, so my sister and I never got to know him properly until I was 10 years old.
Incidentally, he was excommunicated from his religion, but by then, he had lost his faith, so he regarded that as the medal he never received from fighting in Spain.         
To me, he will always be a hero, and, while I have reservations regarding the motivations and beliefs of some of those fighting in Syria, I tend to regard them the same.
They are doing something they consider necessary in making up for another great betrayal.
Syria kicked off as part of The Arab Spring - hopefully it will achieve some of those aspirations of ending Middle East feudalism.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 04:32 AM

The Jihadists are fighting AGAINST democracy and FOR theocracy and religious persecution.
They are committing unspeakable atrocities.
They hate us every bit as much as they hate the Shia.

They have nothing in common with the International Brigade.

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 04:40 AM

The Independent last Sunday

"Mr Barrett is co-author of a new report, released this month, which states that the Syrian war "is likely to be an incubator for a new generation of terrorists" and reveals that more than 12,000 foreign fighters have gone to Syria since the war began. That is more than the 10,000 who went to Afghanistan during the decade-long jihad against Russian occupation. One in four foreign fighters in Syria is from the West – part of a global phenomenon, with fighters from more than 80 countries represented on the battlefield.

Yet the number is greater than official estimates which, the report says, tend to "underestimate the true numbers because would-be foreign fighters who wish to keep their activities secret have little trouble in getting to Syria without anyone knowing, and while there can conceal their identities".

The authors suggest that one in nine foreign fighters could become domestic terrorists. If this ratio is applied to the current estimates of fighters in Syria, the conflict there will have already spawned more than 1,300 terrorists – dozens of whom are British."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/syria-civil-war-mi6-fears-the-jihadist-enemy-within-9554429.html

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 04:44 AM

Daily Telegraph last week.

"British Islamists have travelled abroad to fight before in recent years, including to Chechnya, Bosnia, Afghanistan and Libya. But Syria has attracted more foreign jihadists than any previous conflict, with Britain supplying the greatest number of recruits.
To put Mr Cameron's warning into context, we should consider that over the past 10 years 34 terrorist plots connected to Pakistan have been foiled in Britain. Several would have caused mass casualties had they succeeded. The security services think the potential threat from Isis is greater. And, in any case, as the July 7 bombings in London showed in 2005, it only needs four extremists prepared to commit suicide to cause carnage on the transport system of Europe's biggest city.
In Syria and now Iraq, al-Qaeda recruiters are on the look-out for the next generation of terrorists. Finding out who they are is the main preoccupation of British intelligence."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/10914803/Are-the-British-jihadists-going-to-turn-their-guns-on-us.html

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Musket
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 05:18 AM

Jihad vs overthrow of despot by disaffected population?

Interesting moot point. A bit like USA and UK teaming up with USSR to overthrow nazis. Or us both looking to Iran to help stop the Isis movement. Perhaps we would be interested in hearing what Saudi Arabia is doing to help stem the tide? Mmmm.

My enemy's enemy and all that.

Still, when you pick and choose newspaper articles, articles with inflammatory "going to turn their guns on us" does tend to mask the simple truth that Muslims are fighting "Islamist" terrorists in the main.

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 05:53 AM

No.
It is now a three way fight.
The jihadists are fighting both Assad's forces and the Free Syria Army

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Van
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 06:05 AM

I always wonder what the estimates are based on.

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: akenaton
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 07:09 AM

Although we are at separate ends of the UK political spectrum, I agree 100% with Keith's no nonsense evaluation of the situation in Syria.
The Islamists hate "liberal" western values, even more than they hate other branches of their religion and before long all will be absorbed into an Islamic Caliphate and moderate voices will be silenced.

This is a grave danger and only ideological fools like a few on these pages would consider support of such action.
These people believe all who do not support Islam should be exterminated.
All the Eastern dictators, from Saddam through Gaddafi to Assad, warned us of the danger from Islamist terror, but we preferred to believe that we could set up exploitable Western style democracies in these countries......The result has been chaos and terror.
Our politicians made serious errors in Middle Eastern policy and people like Blair, Hague and Cameron should be called to account.

In Russia, Putin realised the danger of Islamic terrorism having experience of fighting jihadists in Chetnia and Afghanistan, where Russia's defeat was assisted by the West.

Western "democracy" is NOT exportable.....our participation should be against all terrorism and not as political expediency.

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Ed T
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 08:03 AM

""Pick a target, shoot it, and call it the enemy.""

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: akenaton
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 08:07 AM

Ed... your incessant printing of quotations without explanation is becoming extremely tiresome.
If you have a point to make why don't you just do so, you are usually civil, if somewhat devious.

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Lighter
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 08:17 AM

There was an unavoidable moral ambivalence about Stalin too - in 1941-45.

Politics makes strange bedfellows, who screw each other. It's all part of life's rich pageant.

The friend of the enemy of my friend's enemy may not be my enemy or my friend.

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Musket
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 08:22 AM

I said it is mainly Muslim soldiers fighting jihadists and Keith says no, that it is a three way fight.

Now I'm even more confused.

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Ed T
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 08:35 AM

""Just open your eyes,
And realize, the way it's always been.
Just open your mind
And you will find
The way it's always been.
Just open your heart
And, that's a start""

The Balance, Moody Blues

""Polarize and vilinize, that's a propaganda plan used to support all warfare and conflict. It often involves "demonizing the enemy with the public"". Society should always be wary about those who promote conflict, and for what reasons...and give room to be skeptical of potential propaganda.

There is often a perception of security through conflict with a perceived enemy-a belief that "attacking this enemy" protects local democracies - but there are some recent examples (such as in Iraq ) of how people were misled not just with the tactics and the strategy, but the main goals and benefits of many secret and poorly thought out foreign policies. ""


"It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry." Thomas Paine

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Ed T
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 08:42 AM

I see no reason for me to take any advice (or insults) from you seriously Ake.

The number of people commenting negatively on your many questionable posts serve to establish your record and position well (But, you are free, as I am to post as you may).
If you dont like my posts, you are free to pass them by without reading, fella.

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: akenaton
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 09:01 AM

I didn't say I disagreed with your quotations Ed, just that I did not understand the point you were trying to make by printing them.

Had I know that you were quoting notable philosophers or experts in political science like the Moody Blues, I wouldn't have bothered taking you to task.
"Devious"...an insult?......You need to get out more. :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 09:25 AM

I said it is mainly Muslim soldiers fighting jihadists and Keith says no,

Keith never did.
It is true.
In Iraq and Syria the Holy War is against the wrong kind of Muslims.

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Ed T
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 09:41 AM

If you dont understand quotes, or choose not to look for meaning, that is your personal issue to deal with, Ake. As this is a music website, I suspect most here (but, obviously not you) would have some capacity to think deep and explore a variety of meanings in lyrics, poems, or quotes.

If seeing things diferently from a narrow, right wing viewpoint represents deviousness, well, maybe it is not an insult. If smoking you out of your "foxhole" exposing "sketchy" opinions and unkind theories on large groups of people is devious, well, I guess I am guilty, Ake. You are right that your insult was very pale compared to many you have garnered,and possibly earned, on Mudcat. But, nonetheless that comparison does not exclude your intentional one as an uncalled-for personal insult...which is against the posting rules (which you have referred to when you were the target on many occasions).

I decided some time ago it was not worth my time, nor grey-matter interest, in discussing anything directly with you Ake. As I suspect it is the same with you...just leave me out of your posting gunsight and posting games, whatever they may be. I make a request that, you dont address me and I will give you the same respect. A good start may be for you not to read any posts from me, as they seem to give you some stress or confusion....but, that is your call, of course.

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Musket
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 12:16 PM

Keith never did it is true.....

Wrong kind of Muslims now.

Beer and the Brazil Chile match methinks.

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 12:25 PM

The Jihadists of ISIS and al Qaeda groups are Sunni and the "infidels" they fight is Syria and Iraq are Shia.

Is that simple enough for you to grasp Musket?
Sorry I can't draw pictures for you.

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Musket
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 12:33 PM

Tell me Keith, do you write scripts for Viz magazine? Major Misunderstanding being one character that springs to mind....

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: pdq
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 12:33 PM

only 1 in 8 Syrians is Shiite

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 03:57 PM

"In Iraq and Syria the Holy War is against the wrong kind of Muslims." "Infidels"
I really wasn't going to bother until you and Ake had finished your two-man Nuremberg Rally, but for **** sake, go and read something before you make this into another of your Whitehall Farces.
The inter-Muslim fighting has nothing to do with religion - it is an argument about tactics, political domination and territory.
Stop making thing up you bleeding halfwit
INTER-REBEL CONFLICT
Wonder if Morcamb and Wise is on the tele - must go and look - at least they have a decet scriptwriter
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 08:51 PM

Perhaps if we suggest that the rivers of honey may have dried up with the collapse of bee colonies, and the 72 virgins just MIGHT be Catholic nuns, with horsewhips!

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 28 Jun 14 - 08:57 PM

I still find myself wishing that we had minded our own business and kept our intrusive noses OUT of the affairs of the Middle East altogether.

We can no longer claim any moral credibility for our interference, when said interference depends entirely upon the presence or absence of valuable resources.

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 29 Jun 14 - 02:44 AM

I can always find you someone willing to dress up as a nun with a horsewhip if you wish?

You'll have to use your imagination concerning the virgin aspect though.

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jun 14 - 02:51 AM

"I still find myself wishing that we had minded our own business and kept our intrusive noses OUT of the affairs of the Middle East altogether."
Abso-******-lutely - that's what the U.N. is supposed to be about
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: akenaton
Date: 29 Jun 14 - 03:55 AM

But what about our mission to spread "freedom and democracy"......and "equality"...   :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jun 14 - 03:56 AM

You who deny that it has become a sectarian conflict are seriously out of touch with reality.

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jun 14 - 04:31 AM

"out of touch with reality."
You've had the facts on what the conflicts are about - prove otherwise.
At the same time, I suggest you take a look at the full definition of Jihadism - in all its aspects.
There is no indication whatever that this is the 'holy war' you people have distorted it to be.
I take it Ake's hit-and-run intervention is a sarcastic one?
Maybe we should start a bit nearer home before we set out to 'civilise' the world (as we did once before!!) - pretty much the root of the present mess
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Ed T
Date: 29 Jun 14 - 06:19 AM

'Deus vult' - "God wills", was the cry used from the first crusade onwards and was the main cry heard when the crusaders were fighting. 

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: akenaton
Date: 29 Jun 14 - 06:28 AM

and "OH my God!" in the main cry heard on Mudcat when Ed posts his "quotable quotes"....... :0(

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Ed T
Date: 29 Jun 14 - 07:03 AM

Get an actual life Ake. Trolling does not look good on you- and reveals your purpose on this site.

Could it be you are looking for a new demon, as you have no threads to post your anti homosexual bunk and Orwell hero worship crap?

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Ed T
Date: 29 Jun 14 - 07:31 AM

"A student of Syrian affairs soon becomes used to paradox. A comparatively small country, narrowly chauvinistic and jealous of its national sovereignty, Syria is nevertheless the repository, and has often been the origin, of oecumenical and transcendental ideas about Arab unity. Its society is one of the most heterogeneous in the Middle East and yet its leaders have been the proponents of a radical integrative political movement: Arab Nationalism. It has kindly and hospitable inhabitants, but it is also a police state where a man can be locked up indefinitely without a trial. Your Syrian friends are your friends for life, but a curious current of xenophobia runs through the country. Syrians love culture and natural beauty, but the ugliness of many Syrians towns and their architecture has to be seen to be believed." 
― David Roberts, The Ba'th and the Creation of Modern Syria

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jun 14 - 07:31 AM

Trolling does not look good on you-
Oh - I don't know!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Ed T
Date: 29 Jun 14 - 07:34 AM

Doubletalk?

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Musket
Date: 29 Jun 14 - 08:04 AM

And who are they Keith?

Putting words in the keyboards of others again?

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jun 14 - 08:55 AM

Musket, you ridiculed me for referring to the sectarian inter-Muslim conflict.
This was you,

"Keith never did it is true.....
Wrong kind of Muslims now.
Beer and the Brazil Chile match methinks."

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: GUEST,keith a
Date: 29 Jun 14 - 09:02 AM

Reuters
"A report presented on Tuesday to the U.N. Human Rights Council said foreign Sunni jihadi militants and funds had poured into Syria where rebel factions including ISIL were wantonly abusing civilians in zones they controlled.

"A regional war in the Middle East draws ever closer. Events in neighbouring Iraq will have violent repercussions for Syria," the investigators' report said.

"Growing numbers of radical fighters are targeting not only Sunni (Muslim) communities under their control but also minority communities including the Shi'ites, Alawites, Christians, Armenians, Druze and Kurds," it said of Syria.

Its reference to Sunni militants targeting Sunni civilians involved forceful pressure on Sunni women to comply with sharia (Islamic religious law) and acts of revenge against Sunnis who had served in the Syrian government."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/17/us-syria-crisis-warcrimes-idUSKBN0ES10S20140617

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jun 14 - 09:31 AM

"Wrong kind of Muslims now."
Repetition of lie doesn't make it any more true - you have the given reasons, which you will continue to ignore.
Stick to the football - you don't have to think about that
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jun 14 - 09:48 AM

Jim, it is a sectarian war between Shia and Sunni Muslims.
Your Wikipedia link is hardly evidence against.
Even Musket will not back you on this.

Guardian earlier this month,
"A leader of Jabhat al-Nusra in Damascus, who called himself Abu Hafs, said: "These Shia fighters have been in Syria since the beginning of the revolution fighting with the regime. We know that Iran and Iraq are sending fighters to Syria – only now it has become public."

Jabhat al-Nusra, which includes large numbers of foreign fighters in its ranks, has made little effort to hide its hatred of the Shia branch of Islam and its willingness to attack shrines that are important to its followers.

Groups that fight under the banner of the Free Syria Army, however, are much less inclined to view the Shia as a theocratic foe, regarding them instead as a powerful backer of their main enemy, the regime.

"Now, they are in Qusair," said Abu Hafs. "They kill everyone they see on their way, even children. They slaughter them by knives. We are in a continuous fight with them in Damascus and Qusair.

"We worship God and they worship graves, but we also avoid attacking religious sites. A week ago, the Syrian army was hiding behind a church – we cancelled our attack in order not to destroy the church."

Abu Hafs's claim to be a protector of shrines is derided by Shia fighters. One of them, Jamal al-Ali, a member of Hezbollah who had volunteered to fight with Abu Fadl al-Abbas, said: "You have to know that the aim of these rebels is to destroy the Alawite state in Syria and to start that they have to destroy all the shrines. They are issuing endless calls for jihad against Hezbollah and Abu Fadl al-Abbas.

Back in Baghdad, Sadiq is preparing for a second bid at jihad. Hoping to make his next trip more successful than the last, he is waiting for a chaperone – a Lebanese woman based in the US – to take him to Beirut and finally back to Syria.

Whatever their motivations, the undeniable outcome is that both sides are now in open war across an ancient sectarian faultline in place since the schism in Islam emerged nearly 1,400 years ago."

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/04/syria-islamic-sunni-shia-shrines-volunteers

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jun 14 - 09:51 AM

(my italics)

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Musket
Date: 29 Jun 14 - 10:06 AM

Interesting. Wahabi interest and funding of terror is an angle you haven't cut and pasted yet.

Your choice of simplistic stories based on easy explanations of a complicated situation says more about your capacity for understanding than a quest for understanding.

I don't understand either, but at least I try to take in the many aspects rather than just those that suit my prejudice.

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: akenaton
Date: 29 Jun 14 - 10:39 AM

Another cop out?

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jun 14 - 11:09 AM

I was not offering an easy explanation, any more than the Guardian or Reuters were.
I was showing Jim that the conflict has long been seen as a sectarian holy war.
Sunnis and Shias regarding each other as "the wrong kind of Muslims" or not Muslims at all.
Care to make fun of that again Musket?

Subject: RE: BS: Moral ambivalence about Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jun 14 - 11:20 AM

What -?
A millenia and-a-half-year-old schism as proof that the present fighting has anything to do with religion
You have obviously dredged the web for evidence and you come up with a reference only to a divide we are already aware of.
As the article says "open war across an ancient sectarian fault line" - sort of like Catholics fighting Protestants in Ireland, which you insisted wasn't religious - once again, can't have it both ways.
Religion may have divided the sects 15,00 years ago - nowhere is it shown that this is what the conflict is about now - any more than the Irish Troubles were about religion.
The West might like to make the war a religious issue - it would get them off the hook nicely for their own role in supporting manipulative extremist groups in the past, Irag, Afghanistan, B#blanket support for Israel in Palestine, et al, plus the Guantanamo concentration camp and decades of general abuse of Muslims.
Doesn't add up as far as the evidence goes, no matter how many italicised lines from cut-'n-pastes.
Defiitely should have stayed with the football   
RELIGION AND CONFLICT IN SYRIA
Jim Carroll