Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Double standards in how we cover Saudi Arabian and Iranian behavior and statements

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ljadw
    replied
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    BS!

    You do not give any source

    I gave the map, and the city was controlled by rebells while the ISIS controlled areas were clearly away from Douma



    20180414_wom983_0.png




    Also, the fact that there were report by medical personnel and humanitarian workers there shows that it was not controlled by ISIS

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douma_chemical_attack

    The chemical attack in Douma reportedly happened on 7 April 2018. The Union of Medical Care and Relief Organizations, a humanitarian organization that supervises medical services in the region, attributed seventy deaths to the attack. On-site medics reported smelling a chlorine-like odour, but that symptoms and death toll pointed to something more noxious such as sarin nerve agent caused the deaths.[7] A video from the scene showed dead men, women, and children with foam at their mouths.[31]

    Also, you do not give a source about any evacuation of any terrorist towards the Turkish area. Did you read Kurdish sources again? Not to mention that a simple look at the map shows that Douma is not near the Turkish controlled area!

    You will not distort facts to support your bigotry against Iran or Muslims. At least you will not do it unchallenged!
    There is no difference between ISIS and the rebels .For the rest, I do not care what you and the other members of the ISIS lobby are saying .

    Leave a comment:


  • Emtos
    replied
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    Well, previous events do not count in Russia? Also, we have to be clear if your position is that we do not have chemical attacks or if your position is that we do have chemical attacks but we do not know the origin. For the latter, we can discuss it to see which side has airplanes to deliver airborne attacks. We also have to see the victims. I mean if the victims include ones loyal to Assad, then I can understand the point that we do not know the origin of the chemical attacks, but I have not seen such evidence. Nor have I seen ISIS intimidating in videos his enemies by using its CW capabilities or accomplishments.
    I'm in Belgium. We know that Syrian chemical weapons were destroyed. We also should ask the question why the use of those weapons by the regime. It has no military value and it gives a negative image in western media.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nichols
    replied
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    You do not make sense:
    You are trying to weasel your way out of a hole that you dug yourself into with your 'facts'

    Originally posted by pamak View Post
    I am saying that ISIS DID DEFEAT US allies in the field and it is reasonable to expect that some of the US equipment used by the defeated units ended up in ISIS' hand. Are you seriously having difficulty to understand this scenario?
    You are trying to deflect/misdirect again....as usual.

    What does ISIS defeating anyone have to do with the Administration supplying them with equipment?

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by Nichols View Post

    Wow, you are taking it to a whole new level. Are you saying that ISIS could/might defeat a unit supplied with US equipment so it is okay that the Administration armed them? With your logic, the US should give equipment to all terrorist.....

    Here's a hint for you, if they weren't armed by the US, they wouldn't have been able to engage other units.
    You do not make sense:

    I am saying that ISIS DID DEFEAT US allies in the field and it is reasonable to expect that some of the US equipment used by the defeated units ended up in ISIS' hand. Are you seriously having difficulty to understand this scenario?

    Leave a comment:


  • Nichols
    replied
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    And what is your point? If ISIS defeats a Kurdish unit equipped with US equipment would not it gather such US weapons?
    Wow, you are taking it to a whole new level. Are you saying that ISIS could/might defeat a unit supplied with US equipment so it is okay that the Administration armed them? With your logic, the US should give equipment to all terrorist.....

    Here's a hint for you, if they weren't armed by the US, they wouldn't have been able to engage other units.

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by Emtos View Post

    I used the quote about the "attack" which occured in April of this year. You posted about previous events. Furhtermore, it doesn't indicate who was behind those attacks.
    Well, previous events do not count in Russia? Also, we have to be clear if your position is that we do not have chemical attacks or if your position is that we do have chemical attacks but we do not know the origin. For the latter, we can discuss it to see which side has airplanes to deliver airborne attacks. We also have to see the victims. I mean if the victims include ones loyal to Assad, then I can understand the point that we do not know the origin of the chemical attacks, but I have not seen such evidence. Nor have I seen ISIS intimidating in videos his enemies by using its CW capabilities or accomplishments.

    Leave a comment:


  • Emtos
    replied
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    Do we agree that the same agency confirmed the presence of chemical attacks here?
    I used the quote about the "attack" which occured in April of this year. You posted about previous events. Furhtermore, it doesn't indicate who was behind those attacks.

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by Nichols View Post

    They shipped arms to Syria which ended up going to ISIS, that is supporting ISIS. The real kick to this is that the Administration already learned that lesson via Fast & Furious.


    And what is your point? If ISIS defeats a Kurdish unit equipped with US equipment would not it gather such US weapons? You act like you do not know that the winner in battle can get such "benefits"...and you are a military person!

    Leave a comment:


  • 101combatvet
    replied
    Originally posted by Nichols View Post

    They shipped arms to Syria which ended up going to ISIS, that is supporting ISIS. The real kick to this is that the Administration already learned that lesson via Fast & Furious.


    It is also highly suspected that the Obama administration provided training to ISIS as well.

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by Emtos View Post
    Didn't you read the wiki article ? I took the quote from it.
    I want to see you make a clear statement of what source you use because multiple sources may use the same report but at different context. And since you are from Russia, we have to be very clear regarding what sources everybody uses and which source you accept as credible enough that you can use in your posts



    Now, if you used wiki, then you should know that the quote came from the following link

    https://www.opcw.org/news/article/op...arrab-in-2016/

    OPCW designated labs conducted analysis of prioritised samples. The results show that no organophosphorous nerve agents or their degradation products were detected in the environmental samples or in the plasma samples taken from alleged casualties. Along with explosive residues, various chlorinated organic chemicals were found in samples from two sites, for which there is full chain of custody. Work by the team to establish the significance of these results is on-going. The FFM team will continue its work to draw final conclusions.


    The above is the full quote, and does not give a final verdict

    Now let's see one FINAL conclusion from the same agency


    https://www.opcw.org/news/article/op...25-march-2017/

    THE HAGUE, Netherlands —13 June 2018—The Fact-Finding Mission (FFM) of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), confirmed in a report released today that sarin was very likely used as a chemical weapon in the south of Ltamenah, Syrian Arab Republic, on 24 March 2017. The FFM also concluded that chlorine was very likely used as a chemical weapon at Ltamenah Hospital and the surrounding area on 25 March 2017.

    Do we agree that the same agency confirmed the presence of chemical attacks here?

    Leave a comment:


  • Nichols
    replied
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    If you think that you read the fact that the US government and Clinton supported ISIS during Obama's presidency
    They shipped arms to Syria which ended up going to ISIS, that is supporting ISIS. The real kick to this is that the Administration already learned that lesson via Fast & Furious.



    Leave a comment:


  • Emtos
    replied
    Didn't you read the wiki article ? I took the quote from it.

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Do not be shy... give us the link.

    Leave a comment:


  • Emtos
    replied
    The results show that no organophosphorous nerve agents or their degradation products were detected in the environmental samples or in the plasma samples taken from alleged casualties. Along with explosive residues, various chlorinated organic chemicals were found in samples from two sites, for which there is full chain of custody.[

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by ljadw View Post
    Douma was occupied by ISIS/ allies of ISIS ,=by the Jayshal al-Islam with 10000/15000 men in the region . : a week after the attack with CW only the SDF entered the city and the terrorists werre evacuated to the north of Syria where the Turkish occupation army was welcoming them .
    Other terrorist groups in the Ghouta region are

    Faylaq al-Rahman
    Hayat Tahrir al-Sham
    Harakat Nour al-Dia al-Zenki
    Harakat Ahrar al-Sham al-Islamiyya .

    The fact that the terrorists who occupied the city of Douma were evacuated to the north of Syria,occupied by Turkey,proves the connection between Turkey and the terrorists .

    But, continue to excuse Turkey and Iran and deny excuses for Syria . You only indicates on which side you are .
    BS!

    You do not give any source

    I gave the map, and the city was controlled by rebells while the ISIS controlled areas were clearly away from Douma



    20180414_wom983_0.png




    Also, the fact that there were report by medical personnel and humanitarian workers there shows that it was not controlled by ISIS

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douma_chemical_attack

    The chemical attack in Douma reportedly happened on 7 April 2018. The Union of Medical Care and Relief Organizations, a humanitarian organization that supervises medical services in the region, attributed seventy deaths to the attack. On-site medics reported smelling a chlorine-like odour, but that symptoms and death toll pointed to something more noxious such as sarin nerve agent caused the deaths.[7] A video from the scene showed dead men, women, and children with foam at their mouths.[31]

    Also, you do not give a source about any evacuation of any terrorist towards the Turkish area. Did you read Kurdish sources again? Not to mention that a simple look at the map shows that Douma is not near the Turkish controlled area!

    You will not distort facts to support your bigotry against Iran or Muslims. At least you will not do it unchallenged!
    Last edited by pamak; 23 Aug 18, 07:56.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X