Cyprus-Forum.com

[Paphitis]

Its not me that can have a ceasefire, this is what should happen between the rivaling groups in Syria so that elections can proceed.

What if Assad wins? will the rebels accept it? Will the coalition accept it?

It's not hapenning because Assad seems to think that a ceasefire is the surrender of the FSA and that the Syrian Security Forces can just roll in and reclaim the territory.

That is not a ceasefire but a surrender.

This is what you think, its not what Assad thinks and its not what I asked either.

Ceasefire then fair and free elections.

What if Assad wins? will the rebels accept it? Will the coalition accept it?

It is what is the case. I think you will find that we have been talking about a ceasefire for a long time but Assad thinks he can just roll on in. In other words, he wants a complete and unconditional surrender.

Assad won't win and we all know it too. If everyone gets to vote, he can't win.

[Maximus]

You wont even listen to the guy. You don't know what he thinks. You have made your mind up based on what the coalitions media outlets have told you.

I think that the answer is obvious by your inability to answer my question. The rebels wont accept an Assad win, the coalition wont accept it either, therefor it will not be fair and free. My research and understanding points to an Assad win. The coalition know's this too so they distort, propagate and obstruct.

[Paphitis]

You wont even listen to the guy. You don't know what he thinks. You have made your mind up based on what the coalitions media outlets have told you.

I think that the answer is obvious by your inability to answer my question. The rebels wont accept an Assad win, the coalition wont accept it either, therefor it will not be fair and free. My research and understanding points to an Assad win. The coalition know's this too so they distort, propagate and obstruct.

Ok let's say we accept an Assad win. We have the Luxury to say these things.

Assad will still not sign a ceasefire in the true meaning of what a ceasefire means. He seems to want a complete surrender which is not going to happen.

The FSA would sign a ceasefire today with our blessing if it was on offer. They won't surrender.

There are no elections under the UN auspices either and any election Assad conducts is flawed since most Syrians are excluded. The only thing everyone is prepared to agree to is a ceasefire and a transitional period at the end of which Assad will step down. When that happens, the rebels may lay down their weapons.

[Robin Hood]

Paphitis,

What you are expecting is effectively for ASSAD to surrender to the FSA (the 2%) and the Islamic Terrorists (The other 98%). In that case what is this so called war on terror all about? Why not just stop killing off the terrorists and hand Syria over to them, then ISIS can join the Islamic coalition and they will have their Caliphate!

Try looking at the situation logically. What you seem to think is that 'WE' have a say in deciding who will be eligible to stand for office! As Putin has said from the very beginning, what will happen and who will govern Syria will be up to the Syrian people. The only function of outsiders is make sure the process is a fair one and done through the UN ...... not The 'WE' you keep refereeing to, it is none of their friggin business.

The first step is to call a ceasefire in the civil war, you cannot have a civil war and elections going on at the same time. That is common sense.

[Paphitis]

Paphitis,

What you are expecting is effectively for ASSAD to surrender to the FSA (the 2%) and the Islamic Terrorists (The other 98%). In that case what is this so called war on terror all about? Why not just stop killing off the terrorists and hand Syria over to them, then ISIS can join the Islamic coalition and they will have their Caliphate!

Try looking at the situation logically. What you seem to think is that 'WE' have a say in deciding who will be eligible to stand for office! As Putin has said from the very beginning, what will happen and who will govern Syria will be up to the Syrian people. The only function of outsiders is make sure the process is a fair one and done through the UN ...... not The 'WE' you keep refereeing to, it is none of their friggin business.

The first step is to call a ceasefire in the civil war, you cannot have a civil war and elections going on at the same time. That is common sense.

Jam expecting a transition of power where he steps down! Yes that is correct!

I refuse to answer your other hideous statements because you're just being silly.

[Kikapu]

Paphitis, the truth of the matter is, no matter how fair elections are held in Syria, the west is not interested, because they want Assad gone their way, and not at the ballot box. The west has not learned a thing when it comes to removing foreign leaders they don't like because they do not any longer dance to the west's tune. Do you think the mess we have in the Middle east today would be if Saddam was still in power? The answer would be a resounding , NO. I have come to learn that in general, Muslim religion and Democracy cannot co-exists. Turkey thinks they are Europeans and look and see how democracy works there. Even there it does not work. Somethings are the way they are, and no matter how well intention the west may be, although, the west intentions mostly are not well intended, you cannot export west's understanding of democracy to Muslim countries. They don't understand it and they don't want it, and when you try to force it on them, you have the mess you have in the middle east today.

[Lordo]

Paphitis, the truth of the matter is, no matter how fair elections are held in Syria, the west is not interested, because they want Assad gone their way, and not at the ballot box. The west has not learned a thing when it comes to removing foreign leaders they don't like because they do not any longer dance to the west's tune. Do you think the mess we have in the Middle east today would be if Saddam was still in power? The answer would be a resounding , NO. I have come to learn that in general, Muslim religion and Democracy cannot co-exists. Turkey thinks they are Europeans and look and see how democracy works there. Even there it does not work. Somethings are the way they are, and no matter how well intention the west may be, although, the west intentions mostly are not well intended, you cannot export west's understanding of democracy to Muslim countries. They don't understand it and they don't want it, and when you try to force it on them, you have the mess you have in the middle east today.

more bullshit. there was a respectable democracy in iran till the yanks removed it and placed a dictatorship in its place in the 50s and have done the same ever since right up to more recently when they removed an elected government in egypt and replaced it with another dictatorship. you understanding of democracy in the middle east and who is responsible for the dictatorships says more about you then them kikopoulluimu.

[Kikapu]

Paphitis, the truth of the matter is, no matter how fair elections are held in Syria, the west is not interested, because they want Assad gone their way, and not at the ballot box. The west has not learned a thing when it comes to removing foreign leaders they don't like because they do not any longer dance to the west's tune. Do you think the mess we have in the Middle east today would be if Saddam was still in power? The answer would be a resounding , NO. I have come to learn that in general, Muslim religion and Democracy cannot co-exists. Turkey thinks they are Europeans and look and see how democracy works there. Even there it does not work. Somethings are the way they are, and no matter how well intention the west may be, although, the west intentions mostly are not well intended, you cannot export west's understanding of democracy to Muslim countries. They don't understand it and they don't want it, and when you try to force it on them, you have the mess you have in the middle east today.

more bullshit. there was a respectable democracy in iran till the yanks removed it and placed a dictatorship in its place in the 50s and have done the same ever since right up to more recently when they removed an elected government in egypt and replaced it with another dictatorship. you understanding of democracy in the middle east and who is responsible for the dictatorships says more about you then them kikopoulluimu.

You are a perfect Muslim who does not understand or accept democracy, specially in Cyprus.

You think democracy is ONLY at the ballot box, much like Erdogan.

I rest my case!

[Lordo]

you have a problem sunshine. you do not understand who creates dictatorships in the middle east as well as the rest of the world and why. when somebody learns you that perhaps you can begin to understand.

[Paphitis]

Paphitis, the truth of the matter is, no matter how fair elections are held in Syria, the west is not interested, because they want Assad gone their way, and not at the ballot box. The west has not learned a thing when it comes to removing foreign leaders they don't like because they do not any longer dance to the west's tune. Do you think the mess we have in the Middle east today would be if Saddam was still in power? The answer would be a resounding , NO. I have come to learn that in general, Muslim religion and Democracy cannot co-exists. Turkey thinks they are Europeans and look and see how democracy works there. Even there it does not work. Somethings are the way they are, and no matter how well intention the west may be, although, the west intentions mostly are not well intended, you cannot export west's understanding of democracy to Muslim countries. They don't understand it and they don't want it, and when you try to force it on them, you have the mess you have in the middle east today.

I do not uphold these opinions Kilapu.

We have a genuine sorrow for the plight of Syria. Our interest is for peace and stability to return to Syria as quickly as possible and at the same time change the Status Quo in Syria so that other people's who have been denied will now have their fair share of the pie. We have no desire to enforce democracy on Syria if they are not ready for it. We will be quite happy with a composite administration/dictatorship.

Even though they may not be ready for democracy today, I believe they will eventually achieve it in a number of years. Many Syrians aspire to it. But there are so many factions, we are happy to accept a hardline dictator prepared to rule for all Syrians not just one sect of Islam.

We have no interest in denying Russia its bases in Syria. We understand that we can't have them under siege otherwise we will get problems from them. Their presence is no threat to us anyway.

I believe DAESH would have spread even with Saddam at the helm of Iraq. The Islamists would be gunning for him.

We do not believe Assad can remain and still achieve peace and stability. The other stakeholders in Syria (Sunnis) won't accept this Status Quo and factions of various rebels are supported by Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey. On the other side you have Iran and Lebanon.

What we want to achieve is a new administration that brings these 2 factions together. If that is not possible, then the only other solution is a Sunni State, an Assyrian/Yazidis/Turkmen State, and a Kurdish State in Syria. That's partition.

We are not wanting the rebels or Saudi Arabia/Qatar et al to have complete control of Syria either at the expense of the Alawites. If that happens then we are still at square 1. There must be a cohesive Government for all or they will need to look at other options. We can't accept Assad in the medium or longer term. That won't achieve peace either.