ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.

Pudney said:
Depleted uranium is used as armour piercing ammo. You use armour piercing on tanks and fortified emplacements. Not to casually shoot people from small arms.

Edit: which of course you know because you read the link you posted.

Edit 2: and that still doesn't explain why DU is worse than chemical bombs. Surely both are bad?
Click to expand...

US fired depleted uranium at civilian areas in 2003 Iraq war, report finds

not all chemicals are the same tho, DU effects on people from the second gulf war are still around, do you think chlorine bombs will affect people in the same time duration


Dis86 said:
Answer the question I asked.

Your source only says some people believe something. Doesn't mean it's true. Millions of children believe in Santa. Is he therefore real?
Click to expand...
no I don't support isis or the moderate jihadists that you and robocod defend
 
ThestigGT999 said:
US fired depleted uranium at civilian areas in 2003 Iraq war, report finds

not all chemicals are the same tho, DU effects on people from the second gulf war are still around, do you think chlorine bombs will affect people in the same time duration



no I don't support isis or the moderate jihadists that you and robocod defend
Click to expand...

Please show my defence of them.

You're the one who everything someone posts a criticism of assad attempts a pathetic deflection.

'But but look what America did'

Get it in to your skull that this isn't about saying someone else is bad too. This is about the fact that peaceful protests were oppressed and a giant crap storm arose. Those that are suffering are the innocents.
 
Dis86 said:
Please show my defence of them.

You're the one who everything someone posts a criticism of assad attempts a pathetic deflection.

'But but look what America did'

Get it in to your skull that this isn't about saying someone else is bad too. This is about the fact that peaceful protests were oppressed and a giant crap storm arose. Those that are suffering are the innocents.
Click to expand...

He has chosen, many times, to ignore the fact they were peaceful protests. He appears to have skipped to the point that they took up arms instead. It's all very easy when you create your facts.

Clueless.
 
Seriously its been 7 years, this crap about what happened on day 1 is completely pointless now, just stop trying one up each other. Jesus.

There are no saints in war. (Actors i mean)
 
StriderX said:
Seriously its been 7 years, this crap about what happened on day 1 is completely pointless now, just stop trying one up each other. Jesus.

There are no saints in war. (Actors i mean)
Click to expand...

If day 1 had gone differently we probably wouldn't be here. That's not the point being made.
Also there are saints. They certainly ain't the people gassing their own citizens though.
 
Dis86 said:
If day 1 had gone differently we probably wouldn't be here. That's not the point being made.
Also there are saints. They certainly ain't the people gassing their own citizens though.
Click to expand...

I don't count the likes of MSF as Actors in a war.
That is entirely the realm of nations.
 
Dis86 said:
Please show my defence of them.

You're the one who everything someone posts a criticism of assad attempts a pathetic deflection.

'But but look what America did'

Get it in to your skull that this isn't about saying someone else is bad too. This is about the fact that peaceful protests were oppressed and a giant crap storm arose. Those that are suffering are the innocents.
Click to expand...

crapstorm happen by outside influences as in when countries like Turkey and Saudi Arabia alarm the West by backing Islamist extremists the Americans had bombed in Syria or when In Syria, militias armed by the Pentagon fight those armed by the CIA
 
RoboCod said:
Some bizarre conclusions there uber :confused:
Click to expand...
It really isn't, I explained why their evidence is not actual evidence but hearsay, and I gave a detailed explanation of why what they say makes no logical sense, then I drew the most likely conclusion. That's not bizarre it's rational, of course it could be wrong, but it's most likely correct.
 
ubersonic said:
It really isn't, I explained why their evidence is not actual evidence but hearsay, and I gave a detailed explanation of why what they say makes no logical sense, then I drew the most likely conclusion. That's not bizarre it's rational, of course it could be wrong, but it's most likely correct.
Click to expand...

No.

It's your opinion, that's all. It is not a factual expert conclusion on matters. Therefore it is not necessarily "the most likely".
 
RoboCod said:
It's your opinion, that's all. It is not a factual expert conclusion on matters.
Click to expand...
I shall reiterate:

1: I explained why what they claim as their "evidence" is not actually evidence.
2: I gave a detailed explanation of why what they say makes absolutely no logical sense.
3: I then pointed out that it's unlikely what they say is true (I drew the most likely conclusion from the facts available, not opinion but analysis).

Again it's not a bizarre conclusion it's rational, of course it could well be wrong, but with the information currently available it's the most likely one.
 
ubersonic said:
I shall reiterate:

1: I explained why what they claim as their "evidence" is not actually evidence.
2: I gave a detailed explanation of why what they say makes absolutely no logical sense.
3: I then pointed out that it's unlikely what they say is true (I drew the most likely conclusion from the facts available, not opinion but analysis).

Again it's not a bizarre conclusion it's rational, of course it could well be wrong, but with the information currently available it's the most likely one.
Click to expand...

2: It claims it happened in Aleppo. To put that in perspective, while all the fighting was going on in Aleppo between the rebels/loyalists neither side took out the city's power station or tried to cut the other off from it (because both having power was preferable to neither). Considering that level of planning/sense it seems ludicrous that the side controlling the majority of the city (the bigger target) would use chemical weapons on the smaller side thus opening themselves up to retaliatory action in kind.
Click to expand...

This bit. You can't possibly know this, or make this assumption. Hence bizzare.
 
Pants said:
Using armour piercing rounds on oil tankers in 2 ISIS convoys in November is FAR WORSE than ISIS using chlorine bombs? That would be the case if you support ISIS i guess, otherwise i'm not seeing it?
Click to expand...
DU rounds create dust and contaminate the area around them. It's not just what they were being used to destroy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom