Talk:Bashar al-Assad

	This Politics related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

This article contains information about one or more living persons. Articles about living people must be handled carefully, because they are more open to legal threats. Reference any contentious allegations solidly; unreferenced allegations should be removed. If legal threats are raised on this page, please direct the potential litigant to RationalWiki:Legal FAQ; do not interact with them.

This article seems to have an excessively pro-Assad slant and not in an obviously snarky way. Correct for bias? Should we give it the right(or anti-authoritarian, as it were) bias that is?--CarthAnne (talk) 05:49, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Ideally, RationalWiki articles are always on the anti-authoritarian side. So, yes, it should be rewritten. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 07:48, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Anyone want to get on this?--CarthAnne / talk / contribs 06:02, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia has detailed accusations of murder/torture for his political opponents. Chemical weapons/ barrel bombs (whatever those are) should be added.

Yet it also mentions that he made fun of Arab/Muslim cultures and and religious tolerance, which makes me think he *might* be a closet secularist.

As for the "not as bad as" charge: Who exactly is the alternative now? Free elections = new civil war. 193.62.251.21 (talk) 01:59, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Assad is openly secular. Syria is a secular state, too, unlike the rebel-held areas or the Islamic State. PBfreespace (talk) 02:05, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for the info. Now I got even more sympathies for yet another dictator I'm not supposed to have. 193.62.251.21 (talk) 02:09, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

The murder and torture is bad, but it's not anything anyone else in the region (besides the Kurds) doesn't already do. It's just on an industrialized scale, so people notice it more. The chemical weapons are debatable, but assuming the government conducted the attack, it made sense. Take a look at the frontlines when the attack happened and 3 months afterward: the government made great advances as a result, splitting the enemy territory into 3 pieces. Sarin gas is heavier than air, so it goes toward the lowest area. Rebel fighters in Damascus were notorious for using tunnel bombs and underground tunnels to transport their fighters without being bombed by the Air Force. The chemical attack did succeed in killing many enemy fighters, and as you can see, today the government is in its best position in that area in 4 years. PBfreespace (talk) 03:30, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

To whoever added the rokurokubi joke, you deserve a medal.

TheMyon will make one for you as soon as they get home. 165.138.64.112 (talk) 14:33, 19 September 2016 (UTC)