That may have been true when it broke out but not now. quote from the International Crisis Group:
"To varying degrees, each developed a distinctive Salafi perspective, depicting their fight as an inherently religious struggle against a sectarian Alawite
regime."
if you combine the reports this wasn't a major deal in January 2012 but became a major one in jan 2013.
A report on the Syrian Islamist Front by the Swedish Institute of International Affairs appears to contradict this narrative about it not being about religion even a little bit. This paragraph in particular jumped out at me:
"The fsa had been catering to Western sensitivities
by trying to appear secular and anti-jihadi, but the slf
instead cast its lot with local fighters and pronounced
itself in favor of an islamic state."
then....
"each of these (FSA) groups receive some
level of foreign support and media attention, and they
remain active as minor political figures, but none of
them controls a serious military force inside syria"
I have to disagree with most of this. Hezbollah's position isn't a double standard. Their position is consistant their primary motivation is arab/muslim self determination and Iran has that. They are not amnesty international or a human rights organization nor have they ever claimed to be to my knowledge.That's the difference mubarak is corrupt western backed and Iran isn't. If Iran had some western backed government that didn't commit any human rights violations they would probably oppose it. you may disagree with those objectives or priorities but it's not a double standard.
That may have been true when it broke out but not now. quote from the International Crisis Group:
"To varying degrees, each developed a distinctive Salafi perspective, depicting their fight as an inherently religious struggle against a sectarian Alawite
regime."
if you combine the reports this wasn't a major deal in January 2012 but became a major one in jan 2013.
A report on the Syrian Islamist Front by the Swedish Institute of International Affairs appears to contradict this narrative about it not being about religion even a little bit. This paragraph in particular jumped out at me:
"The fsa had been catering to Western sensitivities
by trying to appear secular and anti-jihadi, but the slf
instead cast its lot with local fighters and pronounced
itself in favor of an islamic state."
then....
"each of these (FSA) groups receive some
level of foreign support and media attention, and they
remain active as minor political figures, but none of
them controls a serious military force inside syria"
I have to disagree with most of this. Hezbollah's position isn't a double standard. Their position is consistant their primary motivation is arab/muslim self determination and Iran has that. They are not amnesty international or a human rights organization nor have they ever claimed to be to my knowledge.That's the difference mubarak is corrupt western backed and Iran isn't. If Iran had some western backed government that didn't commit any human rights violations they would probably oppose it. you may disagree with those objectives or priorities but it's not a double standard.