Shelling in Syria Kills 3 After Deadly Day

[oberliner]

Source: Associated Press (via ABC News)

Syrian troops shelled a restive district on Saturday and conducted sweeping raids, killing three people one day after 40 were reported to have died in one of the deadliest crackdowns in months in the country's uprising, activists said.

The Syrian opposition's two main activist groups, the British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and the Local Coordinating Committees, said shells slammed into the Baba Amr district of Homs. Raids and arrests also were reported around the eastern city of Deir el-Zour.

The popular revolt against Syrian President Bashar Assad's regime has proved remarkably resilient over the past seven months, with protests erupting every week despite the near-certainty the government will respond with bullets and tear gas. The U.N. estimates the regime crackdown on the protests has killed 3,000 people since March.

Much of the bloodshed Friday happened after protests had ended and security forces armed with machine guns chased protesters and activists, according to opposition groups monitoring the demonstrations. Authorities disrupted telephone and Internet service, they said. At least 40 people were killed, according to the observatory and the LCC.

Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/shelling-syria-deadly-day-protests-14840678

[Arctic Dave]

1. Funny, not a single mention of the soldiers that are killed by the "protestors".

This an internal conflict. Soldiers and former soldiers (defectors) are killing each other.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/27/world/middleeast/army-defectors-in-syria-take-credit-for-deadly-attack.html?_r=1

BEIRUT, Lebanon — A force of Syrian Army defectors claimed responsibility for a Wednesday attack that killed a military officer and eight soldiers in central Syria, another signal that disaffected troops are taking a larger role in the antigovernment uprising and pushing it into more violence after months of a brutal government crackdown.

[oberliner]

2. Not sure why that is funny

Also not sure why you put protestors in quotes.

Are they not actually protestors in your opinion?

If not, what are they?

[Arctic Dave]

3. What is "funny" as the obvious slant of the term "protestor".

When they armed themselves and the soldiers defected they ceased being "protestor" and became insurgents.

[oberliner]

4. Aren't there some protesters who are not army defectors?

And isn't there also a fairly large number of protesters who are not armed?

[Arctic Dave]

5. Could be, I would you tell them not to use the protestors as shields.

Maybe the protestors should distance themselves form the violent ones. If they don't they could be labeled an insurgent like the defectors.

[oberliner]

6. Is there a good news source on this topic that you would suggest?

I am interested in learning more.

[Arctic Dave]

7. NY Times is a good start.

Try google for more.

[oberliner]

8. Seriously? Both of them seem to contradict everything you are saying

The NY Times and Google News have countless articles that present the protesters as exactly that (not as "defectors" but rather non-violent protesters).

I am shocked that those would be the sources you would suggest, considering what you have just written here.

[Arctic Dave]

10. Here a is story in the NYT.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/27/world/middleeast/army-defectors-in-syria-take-credit-for-deadly-attack.html?_r=1

There are more. Syrian soldiers aren't killing themselves. What they have is a good ol fashion insurrection that is bordering on civil war. It is what it is.

Most likely a smaller version of what will happen in Iraq when we leave.

[oberliner]

11. Thanks

I do read the NY Times fairly regularly - I was hoping you knew about a source more on the inside of what is going on.

The Times reporter who wrote the article you linked to isn't actually in Syria (I know very few journalists are).

I wonder if any bloggers or independent voices on the ground have been getting any info out.

[Uncle Joe]

9. The Syrian People have the inherent right to self-determination, Assad is a dictator

and it matters not whether a dictator is benevolent, he/she is still a dictator, it's time for Assad to go.

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/a/bashar_al_assad/index.html?inline=nyt-per

Bashar al-Assad has been president of Syria since 2000, when he succeeded his father, Hafez al-Assad, who had ruled with an iron hand for more than a quarter of a century.

After taking office, Mr. Assad sought to present himself as a youthful and forward-looking leader in a region full of aging autocrats, a man who might yet reform the repressive police state he inherited from his father, given time and opportunity.

But when protests broke out against his regime in March 2011, inspired by the Arab Spring revolts across the region, he at first vacillated and then used force to seek to crush the unrest.

(snip)

The conflict is complicated by Syria's ethnic divisions. The Assads and much of the nation's elite, especially the military, belong to the Alawite sect, a small minority in a mostly Sunni country. And observers question how much leeway Mr. Assad has to act, with key positions in the regime and military in the hands of family members who favor a harder line.

Thanks for the thread, oberliner.