I had no idea you were trying to do a serious debate. You wrote so much weird irrelevant stuff that had nothing to do with what I had said that I just thought you wanted to just argue

[–] gorikan@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

lol, you compared mossad to lenin, bruv what position you have to say whats a weird claim

[–] Saapas@piefed.zip 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

No I didn't. You could quote the part here where you think I sair that and you'd notice for yourself. This is exactly why I didn't think you were trying to be serious.

[–] gorikan@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Yes you said that foreign infiltration brought people like lenin. Thats how this began, when you tried to use this to not see an issue with us and mossad infiltration.

[–] Saapas@piefed.zip 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

You're already changing what you claimed I said. Like you seem to have realized, I said that all revolutions have foreign influence and as example imperial Germany sent Lenin home to destabilize Russia. The point being that do you really condemn the possible toppling of their regime because foreign countries are involved, since even Russian revolution had some very direct foreign involvement.

It would be so much easier if you'd just told me you didn't understand what I was saying and asked me to explained it...

[–] gorikan@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Tell me when you address one of my points.

[–] Saapas@piefed.zip 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Now you just silently dropped your claim about what I said. And you were trying to have a serious debate in your mind. See why I didn't take you seriously?

If you genuinely want a second attempt at a serious debate, you might want to restate some of your more relevant points with actual quotes from me in parts where you are claiming I was arguing for a thing. Otherwise there's no much point since your prior stuff has been just one big misunderstanding of what I've actually said.

[–] gorikan@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

So not yet?

[–] Saapas@piefed.zip 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

If you just want the last word without actually trying to actually debate anything, I can give you that. I don't mind.

But like said, I just genuinely didn't see any points that actually addressed what I said or were relevant. But if you rephrased or just repeated them in proper context we could get into it, if you want to.

[–] gorikan@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Ah sorry, i was asking whats wrong with syrian socialism.

[–] Saapas@piefed.zip 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

What about Syrian socialism? I don't understand what you mean

[–] gorikan@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Well the governmemt there war overthrown with israeli and us support. So the syrian people are finally free no? I dont know, it doesnt seem socialist or even better for that matter to me.

[–] Saapas@piefed.zip 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I'm not sure what you're trying to say. That people shouldn't try to overthrow their current government if that overthrow doesn't guarantee socialism?

[–] gorikan@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

No it just seems to me that you dont support the syrian govenment. Did you even support the previous overthrow?

[–] Saapas@piefed.zip 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

I'm neutral on the current Syrian government. Haven't seen much from them so far tbh. If that was the people's will then I support the people's will. Do you mean with the previous overthrow the one that overthrew the Shah?

[–] gorikan@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

the overthrow in syria in my view didnt install a democratic or popular socialist, or in fact a democratic popular leader per say. President is a former islamist militia commander. Meanwhile while the state deals with secrarian violence between alawites christians kurds druze, israel has expanded settlements in golan and does now regular strikes even further into syrian territory. framing potential iran or syria as socialist is just marketing, it shows no connection to either of the situations there. thats why i asked. If this is the sort of freedom you are "neutral" on then we disagree. in syria the popularity cannot even be argued on the same grounds because it wasnt toppled through uprising.

in iran the protests were followed by orders larger pro gvmt anti foreign influence ones. I can give source its on craddle for example. Also notice how the revolution against shah is different, point me to significant backing of it by foreign power. That was grassroots, this one has mossad and cia all over it