ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.

Danny75 said:
The word of a man that the best of Syrians believe in, or ally with, given the alternative. You have to wonder how fast the opportunistic Treason May and her ilk (on both sides of the aisle) would get out of Britain if the same situation developed.
Click to expand...

The word of a man who claims in that video that Syria has never, ever, used its CW stockpile?

End of the day he isn't exactly going to admit to it on camera if Syria or Russia did carry out a CW attack anyhow - so far all I'm seeing is unsubstantiated words, lies and distortion by both sides so why believe any of them at face value?
 
Rroff said:
End of the day he isn't exactly going to admit to it on camera if Syria or Russia did carry out a CW attack anyhow
Click to expand...

I thought you said he didn't care what the world thinks. If that's not true, and he would lie about it because he does care, that would mean he'd be smart not to admit it, and if he's smart he wouldn't do it in the first place, with nothing to gain and everything to lose.
 
Danny75 said:
I thought you said he didn't care what the world thinks. If that's not true, and he would lie about it because he does care, that would mean he'd be smart not to admit it, and if he's smart he wouldn't do it in the first place, with nothing to gain and everything to lose.
Click to expand...

I said he isn't particularly concerned about what the wider world thinks as in its particularly a primary concern in decision making, etc. - there is a difference between not caring and being reckless about it.

He certainly isn't in a position of nothing to gain and everything to lose - anyone saying that isn't paying attention to what is actually going on in Syria right now - there is a lot more going on than defeating ISIS and some pockets holding out around Damascus.
 
Rroff said:
I said he isn't particularly concerned about what the wider world thinks as in its particularly a primary concern in decision making, etc. - there is a difference between not caring and being reckless about it.
Click to expand...

So he's not reckless.

You're smarter than to not realize the fallacy in your argument. You speak of primary concerns, and I don't have to argue with that, but to ignore that how the world might ACT because of how the world might THINK, would not be a concern high up the list of the concerns for a man who is both smart and not reckless, is the flaw that destroys that argument.
 
Danny75 said:
So he's not reckless.

You're smarter than to not realize the fallacy in your argument. You speak of primary concerns, and I don't have to argue with that, but to ignore that how the world might ACT because of how the world might THINK, would not be a concern high up the list of the concerns for a man who is not reckless, is the flaw that destroys that argument.
Click to expand...

There is no fallacy - you are only seeing what you want to see.

I mean talk about fallacies - in the video he is talking about how supposedly only 10 days ago his forces were in retreat under serious threat on this front - yet people are claiming here that he has practically won as if its all a clear run...

(It is all lies and distortion on both sides).
 
Rroff said:
There is no fallacy - you are only seeing what you want to see.

I mean talk about fallacies - in the video he is talking about how supposedly only 10 days ago his forces were in retreat under serious threat on this front - yet people are claiming here that he has practically won as if its all a clear run...

(It is all lies and distortion on both sides).
Click to expand...


did he not say that when his forces were retreating that he did not use it so why use it when the terrorists are on the run ?
 
Rroff said:
There is no fallacy - you are only seeing what you want to see.
Click to expand...

I'm seeing what's missing from it, which makes the argument very weak, if not null. That does not mean I know if it happened or not, but the motive is evidently stronger for the Jihadis to have staged it, and that is my issue with your argument - that you take the time to suggest weak explanations of why Assad might have done it, but I have not seen you admit that the Jihadis have a far stronger motive.


Rroff said:
I mean talk about fallacies - in the video he is talking about how supposedly only 10 days ago his forces were in retreat under serious threat on this front - yet people are claiming here that he has practically won as if its all a clear run from here...
Click to expand...

Think it through - how do these terrorists fight in cities these days? Do they come in 4x4 troops blaring their horns and firing their rifles as they used to in the past? Or do they discreetly gather little by little in pockets of cities, merging in with the rest of inhabitants, and then once they have brought in enough weapons and ammo, they take women and children as hostages and launch an assault? De facto, the government forces are going to lose ground immediately when that happens, until the surge is repelled. The bigger picture is that every time this happens, Assad's forces are winning every single battle.
 
Last edited:
Screeeech said:
Russia has been propagating BS for years - it's what it does
Click to expand...

Of course. The British has done exactly the same thing also and continue to do so. Following my departure from MSM 4years ago you realize how pernicious and clever the BBC for example operates. I.e. It will have more people on a panel pro their agenda.

you think all of the state sponsored fake news that they've been peddling - which pretty much everyone (including non-governmental organisations) has been affected by, has nothing to do with Russia? of course it does - it's how it operates in this day and age, it floods the world with BS, then uses that BS to it's advantage - by making it very difficult to figure out exactly what's happening.
Click to expand...

You do realize if that was the case they have the perfect template to copy in the way the British do their manipulation.

I pointed out earlier, one of the major hallmarks of BS is that it has a tendency to not be consistent, if you read through what Russia has said about many incidents
Click to expand...

Again, no different than the UK. Perfect example: Skripal case, how many times has the story and narrative changed? Buffoon Boris is doing a sterling job as is the BBC and Sky and the tabloid press.

from the Annexation of Crimea
Click to expand...

While wrong, the whole Ukrainian situation was instigated by the US (the "**** the EU" phone call intercepted and released by the Russians in all likelihood). Equally, Crimea voted overwhelmingly to rejoin Russia (under the provision of people having the freedom to collectively decide on their own direction. Its just we don't agree with the decision of people (many of whom are ethnic Russians and identify as such).

the Chemical attack in 2017, to the thing in Salisbury, a whole bunch of different stories tend to come out every time
Click to expand...

From the UK press too, but the UK press has been far more diverse eg they are critically ill, they should allow them to die with dignity, oh look she's walking around and is fine. A nerve agent that is 10x more potent than VX, designed to kill instantly and somehow it takes 5hrs to take effect.

Because people are lying, it's very difficult for people in a large organisation to all tell a lie and it be consistent, remain consistent and stand up to scrutiny, things change, people make mistakes, stories end up contradicting each other - more lies are spun to cover up the lies which are failing - which is why each time something happens, we end up with three or four different versions; "Nothing happened!" "they're all actors!" "That satellite photo is from a video game" "It's fabricated!" "He tripped and fell"
Click to expand...

... They will be prepared to launch chemical weapons in 45minutes...

... Brexit will result in Godzilla coming and Putin parking tanks in the City of London...

fact our own governments are run by a bunch of verminous cretins is beside the point, the issues we mostly have with our government are mostly down to incompetence and poor quality individuals, to put it simply - they're just rubbish, compared to somewhere like Russia - look at what they've managed to achieve with all of their targeted confusion and fake BS, it's pretty incredible when you think about it.
Click to expand...

Reverse the roles there and you arrive at the same conclusion. Fundamentally speaking, Governments are a very bad thing. Its what they are or should be replaced with that are the problem.
 
RaohNS said:
Governments are a very bad thing. Its what they are or should be replaced with that are the problem.
Click to expand...

If enough of the public was vigilant and questioned enough, governments wouldn't be half as bad as they actually are (allowed to be).

“Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty and peace.”
 
Minusorange said:
I think a bigger question is why is the former head of British armed forces questioning the narrative of "Assad dun it", not quite the background you'd expect for what most on here would call a conspiracy theorist
Click to expand...

Good observation. As was his own before he got censored live on air - that nobody wants to talk about motive.
 
Danny75 said:
If enough of the public was vigilant and questioned enough, governments wouldn't be half as bad as they actually are (allowed to be).

“Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty and peace.”
Click to expand...

Question everything. As the old saying goes a man living with only certainties will die with only doubts. A man who lives with doubts will at least die with certainties.

I say this after having just had a heated discussion with my Grandad who thinks "The Long Walk" by that Rawicz bloke is factual. He read the witness accounts and documents before declaring The Long Walk was still true. At 82 he can be somewhat forgiven but keeping an open mind to all possibility is something he in his obdurate state should be prepared to remedy. Hopefully it won't come to me.

I am still prepared to accept Assad or even Russia is behind the attack. The evidence is extremely fuliginous however. Judge Judy it, if it doesn't sound right its not true.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom