The Activists Assad Hates Most Are Now Obama's Problem

For Western critics of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights is the quintessential resource for documenting his regime's mass atrocities. But as the United States undertakes direct military involvement in Syria, the monitoring group's methodical casualty counts and network of local sources have become a double-edged sword for Barack Obama's administration.

No longer just a PR problem for the Assad regime and radical Syrian rebel groups, the monitoring organization has begun publishing allegations of civilian deaths at the hands of the U.S. military. And the observatory's founder, Rami Abdul Rahman, says he's not going to stop.

"We are going to continue to document all crimes committed against the Syrian people as long as there are hearts beating inside all of us because we do not follow any government or any international intelligence apparatus," Abdul Rahman told Foreign Policy

read the rest here -> http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2014/10/10/the_activists_assad_hates_most_are_now_obama_s_problem


So the human rights group that reported on civilians killed by Assad in Syria are now reporting on civilians killed by Obama in Syria. It should be news to no one that America's foreign policy is extraordinarily hypocritical

Probably, for me, the most interesting part of the article... Is this verified? If so then why?

..the abandonment of the policy known as " near certainty " that was designed to keep civilians safer in Afghanistan was announced on Sept 30 . This is war folks...

its war to save people that we are killing.
Im sure that makes sense somewhere

...remember to shed a tear or two for the thousands of civilians and surrendered Iraqi soldiers who have been executed by Isis when you guys are on your next crying jag .

...and just so we are perfectly clear , our war against Isis is not being fought to save lives , it is being fought to destroy ISIS .

This post was edited by WidowMaKer_MK on Oct 11 2014 06:35am

Still all efforts should be made to prevent civilian casualties surely?



Why does the ISIS need to be destroyed?

This post was edited by Scaly on Oct 11 2014 06:37am

Oil

The iraqi army was massacring sunni prisoners as they retreated, isis was liberating them and joining ranks as they advanced.
Both sides were massacring each other in droves, it was hardly one sided

Also true.

ISIS are being made out to be monsters... but when you consider the society they live in they are no worse than their opponents. Crucifixions, public lynchings, torture, beheading... none of this is new to the middle east. The media has just played on it because it is shocking to us in the west. But ISIS are not the only ones guilty of these atrocities.

The FSA for instance, who Obama is currently financing and arming, are guilty of beheading whole families, women and children included.

...the end game is not oil . Even when the wells eventually run dry the Middle East and the surrounding area will still be the focal point of global tension and concern . Radical Islam will lose much of it's ability to wage war due the lack of funding but another major antagonist will take their place . My guess is that it will be Russia but whoever it is you all better accept that since the advent of modern technology the possibility that the world will ever know peace is long gone .