• theneverfox@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        18 hours ago

        After going through all these links, I’m inclined to agree. I think I was correct initially…

        The rest of this feels like bullshit to me. .

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      20 hours ago

      The strongest period of the civil war has ended (probably), but there’s still ongoing Assadist insurgencies, and the control of the state over the innumerable militias and paramilitaries, which it did not control before the Assad regime fell, is far from solid. Back in May, for example, Assadist paramilitaries committed a massacre of Sunni Muslims, and shortly thereafter, local paramilitaries committed a counter-massacre of Alawites. The central government has formally condemned this, but its power to restrict this ongoing violence remains limited - and, in all truth, it’s probably less interested in restricting massacres in pro-Assad areas than in anti-Assad areas.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          18 hours ago

          It’s muddy insofar as the government’s responsibility for, control over, and actual effort put forward to restrain sectarian reprise-killings is in question. Officially, they’ve come out strongly against it, and realistically, they probably have little control.

          However, some believe, not without reason, that they aren’t particularly interested in restraining the reprise-killings, either out of the belief that it will suppress Assadist insurgents, or out of spite against Alawite communities which supported Assad.

      • wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        19 hours ago

        The central government has formally condemned this

        The Reuters investigation proved this to be patently false. They organized those death squads.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          18 hours ago

          From your own link:

          President al-Sharaa has ordered a committee to investigate the violence and set up “civil peace” mediations.

          Yasser Farhan, the spokesperson of the committee, said the president will receive its findings in two weeks as the committee is currently analyzing information then writing its final report based on testimonies and information gathered from over 1,000 people, in addition to briefings from officials and interrogations of detainees. He advised Reuters against publishing its findings before the report’s release.

          “We are unable to provide any responses before completing this process in respect for the integrity of the truth,” he said, adding, “I expect that you will find the results useful, and that they uncover the truth."

          One official of the new government, Ahmed al-Shami, the governor of Tartous province, told Reuters that Alawites are not being targeted. He acknowledged “violations” against Alawite civilians, and estimated around 350 people died in Tartous, in line with what Reuters also found. That figure has never been published by the government.

          “The Alawite sect is not on any list, black, red or green. It’s not criminalized and it’s not targeted for retaliation. The Alawites faced injustice just like the rest of the Syrian people in general” under Assad, the governor said. “The sect needs safety. It’s our duty as a government which we will work on.”

          In a sign of the government’s tenuous control over its own fighters, newly integrated factions faced off in village streets at times, according to witnesses in three different locations who all described seeing one side trying to protect bewildered civilians from uniformed men trying to kill them.

          But I understand that reading your own links is a bit too much effort for you to put in. Why bother with that when you have a narrative to peddle?

          • wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 hours ago

            Maybe read more than a quarter of the article. But I understand it’s a bit much effort for someone like you.

            • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 hours ago

              Aw, someone’s mad that it was pointed out that their own source disproves their point.

              • wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                4 hours ago

                It’s funny you think I’m mad, I’m just disappointed there are people like you around here.

                Try to work on your reading comprehension and maybe in a couple years you can read through the whole article again.

                • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  3 hours ago

                  I’m just disappointed there are people like you around here.

                  People with basic reading comprehension?

                  Yes, I suppose that must be deeply disappointing for people who want to peddle thought-free narratives.