ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.

RaohNS said:
Lets see what the facts of the engagement turn out to be. Either way I cannot help but question the convenience of this attack in the wake of the US breaking a ceasefire to bomb and kill 60+ Syrian soldiers.

A useful distraction imo
Click to expand...

There was never a ceasefire against IS. They hit the wrong targets and admitted as much immediately.

The bombing of an aid convoy everyone knew about goes beyond the pale.

I'd suggest they organise another one, declare a complete no fly zone the whole world knows about and shoot down anything in the air within 5 miles.
 
Washout said:
There was never a ceasefire against IS. They hit the wrong targets and admitted as much immediately.

The bombing of an aid convoy everyone knew about goes beyond the pale.

I'd suggest they organise another one, declare a complete no fly zone the whole world knows about and shoot down anything in the air within 5 miles.
Click to expand...

Pfft, except for the fact that the Russians have a pretty good anti-air system in place, the US would never risk it, they need that neutral space to keep the war going.

Regardless, the US would have had plenty of intel on the syrian soldiers, and killed them all anyway.
 
Washout said:
There was never a ceasefire against IS. They hit the wrong targets and admitted as much immediately.

The bombing of an aid convoy everyone knew about goes beyond the pale.
I'd suggest they organise another one, declare a complete no fly zone the whole world knows about and shoot down anything in the air within 5 miles.
Click to expand...

The trucks look the have been set on fire. I can't see and bomb damage?

The British and the yanks
Bomb a hospital and not much is said and they called it a mistake.
They then drop arms and food to IS calling that too a mistake.
Then they murder Syrian soldiers and call that a mistake.

Drivers are killed and trucks set on fire(I can't see any bomb damaged) and the British and yanks have a field day in the news papers.
 
I know. Amazing isn't it. The big bad Russia narrative.

When they do wrong I will say, but we do not have evidence here that they did. The trucks from glances just look how you say. Set ablaze. A bomb or missile leaves a mangled mess. In the case of a big bomb you are lucky find much in the crater left behind.
 
RaohNS said:
I know. Amazing isn't it. The big bad Russia narrative.

When they do wrong I will say, but we do not have evidence here that they did. The trucks from glances just look how you say. Set ablaze. A bomb or missile leaves a mangled mess. In the case of a big bomb you are lucky find much in the crater left behind.
Click to expand...

Footage I saw, though I skipped through it quickly, appeared to show fireballs above some of the trucks not consistent with normal burning.

The Russians are well known to have and use thermobaric, FAE and similar which will result in different types of damage to normal high explosives and the Syrians have been known to use various phosphorous, thermite, etc. type weaponry.

So its far from conclusive.
 
Yes it is but any FAB will leave more damage than what we have seen surely. Thus far we can see a technical driving alongside it. We also know Russias drone left when it arrived in Aleppo. ISIS are known to operate in Aleppo. The US broke terms and bombed 60 soldiers. They've done well to escape a media storm and have a UNSC called by Russia to answer to.

Now this happens conveniently as a suitable deflection. My money is on the friends of the US (ISIS)
 
It's also quite fantastic that posters here are up in arms that active MILITARY MEMBERS were killed in a MILITARY ENVIRONMENT by accident when a convoy of innocent aid workers have been killed by what is most probably a Russia air asset.

It beggars belief but I guess the rhetoric must always be peddled mustn't it?
 
Probably the Russians, the timing alone! And they probably still deny having thousands of troops and armoured vehicles in Ukraine.
 
RoboCod said:
Back at you. Here is a clue: RT is as much evidence as the BBC is. This is all you have access to, you know little to nothing of the actual facts.
Click to expand...

Its been posted above by other posters as well as backup from RT, who more people are starting to trust btw. I clearly know more than you Robo with: Russia bomb anything and everything"

RoboCod said:
It's also quite fantastic that posters here are up in arms that active MILITARY MEMBERS were killed in a MILITARY ENVIRONMENT by accident when a convoy of innocent aid workers have been killed by what is most probably a Russia air asset.

It beggars belief but I guess the rhetoric must always be peddled mustn't it?
Click to expand...

But we don't know who did it conclusively to the aid workers do we? So far the best if the evidence seems to suggest ISIS. The US is happy because between them they can implicate Russia to deflect blame from killing soldiers during a ceasefire.

It does beggar belief. A bit like when 70 odd people were indiscriminately bombed in a hospital and there was barely a peep about it. Yet the radio this morning is awash with Russia, Russia, Russia.

Can I just ask: What group currently operating in Syria and Iraq has previously and repeatedly killed aid workers?

I rest my case :cool:
 
RoboCod said:
Back at you. Here is a clue: RT is as much evidence as the BBC is. This is all you have access to, you know little to nothing of the actual facts.
Click to expand...

No. Just no.

RT is a state media outlet that exists to put Putin's desired narrative out there. That's the entire reason it exists. The BBC is a publicly funded media outlet. These are not the same thing at all.

The BBC isn't the best news source in the world, and has got a lot worse over the last ten years or so, but it's still far, far less biased than RT.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom