It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Inside Isis: The first Western journalist ever to be given access to the 'Islamic State' has just

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 22 2014 @ 01:15 PM
link   
a reply to: muckleduck




i might aswell bring up the friendly fire incidents aswell where america has shot down british jets and helicopters, strafing our troops, shooting our convoys that are marked following the americans on the same route.


In all fairness mate, they were precision strikes...unfortunately, killing our lads instead of the enemy.




posted on Dec, 22 2014 @ 01:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: muckleduck

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: muckleduck

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
a reply to: grey580

Sounds more like this journalist is somewhat of a "sympathizer" to their cause and is being allowed this opportunity in order to write some propaganda on their behalf. IS is not going to do much of anything. They have already proven to not have the ability to truly fight a war, and are seemingly only capable of striking fear in unarmed communities around them.

These guys will be the next big nothings.....just like Al-Q.


much like the american military and the co-allition then ? we killed more women and children than we did combatants.


Umm...no. I wouldn't compare the 2 at all. US military is VERY capable of highly accurate strikes. I would say the US military and IS are polar opposites when it comes to abilities. IS is like a mob throwing rocks compared to most any well trained/armed force. They are a joke everywhere except the cities they occupy and try to scare everyone. If the US did get fully involved and were allowed to exterminate them in whatever city/country they are in, they would be very splintered and on the run very quickly.

Got any sources or figures to back up your claim of killing more innocent than non?


accurate strikes? are u having a laugh? agent orange in vietnam anyone?

dropping a 2000lb jdam into an area isnt classed as precision strike, ur just hoping to hit it b dropping 3 of them, if u were any good at precision strikes this conversation wouldnt be happening.

i might aswell bring up the friendly fire incidents aswell where america has shot down british jets and helicopters, strafing our troops, shooting our convoys that are marked following the americans on the same route.

costsofwar.org...

www.unknownnews.org...

www.huffingtonpost.com...

need i go to youtube and provide u with the drone footage?





ok ill pull up the info on all civlian casualties since u insist.



Since you're answering his question, can you answer mine too? I'll restate it: how does any of this mitigate what IS is doing? Or are you just taking the opportunity to bash America?


it doesnt take away from what isis is doing, but who is funding them?

we can hardly complain when they fight for us in syria then go home to fight their own wars.

im just tired of the contradictions, if were gonna stand for something then we should be definite about it.

not create different rules for different dictatorships and terror orginisations.

treat them all the same or dont bother at all.



posted on Dec, 22 2014 @ 01:16 PM
link   
Social welfare AND schooling for girls?!?!

They've gone too far this time, do they honestly think were happy knowing our hard earned tax dollars is going to fund this sort of lefty radicalism???



posted on Dec, 22 2014 @ 01:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: muckleduck




i might aswell bring up the friendly fire incidents aswell where america has shot down british jets and helicopters, strafing our troops, shooting our convoys that are marked following the americans on the same route.


In all fairness mate, they were precision strikes...unfortunately, killing our lads instead of the enemy.



yea like the patriort missile that collided with one of our jets in iraq, real precision.

or when they shot down a chinook full of our troops, professional.



posted on Dec, 22 2014 @ 01:16 PM
link   
a reply to: MysterX

Nobody in this thread had said anything about how the U.S. has never hit civilians when he made his comment. Nobody said anything about the US being a bastion of sweetness and light and all that is good. So how can he be pointing out hypocrisy when none was evident to begin with? Was it a preemptive strike against possible hypocritical statements that may or may not have been made?



posted on Dec, 22 2014 @ 01:18 PM
link   
In some shape or form this journalism will be bull#. Agenda driven, biased bull#.



posted on Dec, 22 2014 @ 01:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: muckleduck

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: muckleduck




i might aswell bring up the friendly fire incidents aswell where america has shot down british jets and helicopters, strafing our troops, shooting our convoys that are marked following the americans on the same route.


In all fairness mate, they were precision strikes...unfortunately, killing our lads instead of the enemy.



yea like the patriort missile that collided with one of our jets in iraq, real precision.

or when they shot down a chinook full of our troops, professional.


i try not to hold a grudge with american citizens , unless they support their government blindly.

sadly britain has much the same loyal unionists.

were not much different.



posted on Dec, 22 2014 @ 01:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: muckleduck

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: muckleduck

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
a reply to: grey580

Sounds more like this journalist is somewhat of a "sympathizer" to their cause and is being allowed this opportunity in order to write some propaganda on their behalf. IS is not going to do much of anything. They have already proven to not have the ability to truly fight a war, and are seemingly only capable of striking fear in unarmed communities around them.

These guys will be the next big nothings.....just like Al-Q.


much like the american military and the co-allition then ? we killed more women and children than we did combatants.


Umm...no. I wouldn't compare the 2 at all. US military is VERY capable of highly accurate strikes. I would say the US military and IS are polar opposites when it comes to abilities. IS is like a mob throwing rocks compared to most any well trained/armed force. They are a joke everywhere except the cities they occupy and try to scare everyone. If the US did get fully involved and were allowed to exterminate them in whatever city/country they are in, they would be very splintered and on the run very quickly.

Got any sources or figures to back up your claim of killing more innocent than non?


accurate strikes? are u having a laugh? agent orange in vietnam anyone?

dropping a 2000lb jdam into an area isnt classed as precision strike, ur just hoping to hit it b dropping 3 of them, if u were any good at precision strikes this conversation wouldnt be happening.

i might aswell bring up the friendly fire incidents aswell where america has shot down british jets and helicopters, strafing our troops, shooting our convoys that are marked following the americans on the same route.

costsofwar.org...

www.unknownnews.org...

www.huffingtonpost.com...

need i go to youtube and provide u with the drone footage?





ok ill pull up the info on all civlian casualties since u insist.



LOL...Ok, lets compare Vietnam to war now...brilliant.

And as far as your sources, yes please do cite your youtube drone strikes because EVERY one of your sources was civilians killed in general by war during those times, not from US strikes. Come on....you opened it up...show me a source for the US killings of 500K civvies....

Please don't cite sources that state very clearly that their numbers are based on ALL casualties of war on all sides by any of the warring factions.



posted on Dec, 22 2014 @ 01:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: muckleduck

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: muckleduck




i might aswell bring up the friendly fire incidents aswell where america has shot down british jets and helicopters, strafing our troops, shooting our convoys that are marked following the americans on the same route.


In all fairness mate, they were precision strikes...unfortunately, killing our lads instead of the enemy.



yea like the patriort missile that collided with one of our jets in iraq, real precision.

or when they shot down a chinook full of our troops, professional.


Tragic i know. Mistakes do happen in war, we all know that...but it's such a heartbreak when it's our own side that is responsible for violently ending the lives of who were essentially just teenagers and young adults trying to escape life on the dole by joining up.

It happens.

But it seems to happen quite a lot from the 'precise Americans' though...didn't they blow to pieces a couple of packed APC's of ours too?



posted on Dec, 22 2014 @ 01:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: MysterX

Nobody in this thread had said anything about how the U.S. has never hit civilians when he made his comment. Nobody said anything about the US being a bastion of sweetness and light and all that is good. So how can he be pointing out hypocrisy when none was evident to begin with? Was it a preemptive strike against possible hypocritical statements that may or may not have been made?


I think you'll find every secretary of state, every US president that has ever made an address to an international audience especially in the run up to, or during a war, would disagree with that statement of not being all that is good etc.

That's how they sell the conflicts to the masses, who to their credit are mostly unwilling to HOORAH as much as many Americans seem to be about slaughter.

Just my opinion of course.

OH...and the hypocrisy was how he interprets it, not necessarily how you might.



posted on Dec, 22 2014 @ 01:26 PM
link   
a reply to: muckleduck

Well...we did have millions marching against the war in Iraq...how many millions of Americans marched against the war?

Not that it did any good of course, as we all now know...but the majority of people in Britain are not of the same mindset as the decision makers here, mores the pity.



posted on Dec, 22 2014 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

In the first year of the invasion of Afghanistan the U.S killed little over 3,000 civilians by airstrikes alone. God knows how many civilians they have murdered over the decades. Obviously they have to do it to secure strategic resources I mean protect our freedom, but still, it seems rather high for a country that cares so much.


edit on 22-12-2014 by Dabrazzo because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2014 @ 01:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: muckleduck

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: muckleduck

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
a reply to: grey580

Sounds more like this journalist is somewhat of a "sympathizer" to their cause and is being allowed this opportunity in order to write some propaganda on their behalf. IS is not going to do much of anything. They have already proven to not have the ability to truly fight a war, and are seemingly only capable of striking fear in unarmed communities around them.

These guys will be the next big nothings.....just like Al-Q.


much like the american military and the co-allition then ? we killed more women and children than we did combatants.


Umm...no. I wouldn't compare the 2 at all. US military is VERY capable of highly accurate strikes. I would say the US military and IS are polar opposites when it comes to abilities. IS is like a mob throwing rocks compared to most any well trained/armed force. They are a joke everywhere except the cities they occupy and try to scare everyone. If the US did get fully involved and were allowed to exterminate them in whatever city/country they are in, they would be very splintered and on the run very quickly.

Got any sources or figures to back up your claim of killing more innocent than non?


accurate strikes? are u having a laugh? agent orange in vietnam anyone?

dropping a 2000lb jdam into an area isnt classed as precision strike, ur just hoping to hit it b dropping 3 of them, if u were any good at precision strikes this conversation wouldnt be happening.

i might aswell bring up the friendly fire incidents aswell where america has shot down british jets and helicopters, strafing our troops, shooting our convoys that are marked following the americans on the same route.

costsofwar.org...

www.unknownnews.org...

www.huffingtonpost.com...

need i go to youtube and provide u with the drone footage?





ok ill pull up the info on all civlian casualties since u insist.



LOL...Ok, lets compare Vietnam to war now...brilliant.

And as far as your sources, yes please do cite your youtube drone strikes because EVERY one of your sources was civilians killed in general by war during those times, not from US strikes. Come on....you opened it up...show me a source for the US killings of 500K civvies....

Please don't cite sources that state very clearly that their numbers are based on ALL casualties of war on all sides by any of the warring factions.


yea ur right vietnam was just a slaugther of farmers and women and children, much like afghanistan.

withou the invasion the deaths would b nowhere near as high as what they are, america is responsible for those wether u accept it or not, the world came to YOUR aid on the war on terror, not the other way around, u invaded and occupied 2 countries illegally in the past 10 years.

what about those illegal drone strikes in yemen?

in order to kill 1 combatant the figuire shows the co-allition had to kill around 20 civilians in order to kill 1 militant.

even your own government admit to causing 100ks of civilian casualties in the middle east.

please wake up.



posted on Dec, 22 2014 @ 01:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: muckleduck

Well...we did have millions marching against the war in Iraq...how many millions of Americans marched against the war?

Not that it did any good of course, as we all now know...but the majority of people in Britain are not of the same mindset as the decision makers here, mores the pity.



very true, we have pensioners that still remember the ww2 era and dont want to retun us to such days.

or they would have fought for nothing.

i have no desire to join the military anymore, if someone is stupid enough to invade these islands we inhabit then so be it on their own graves!

and thats why i sympathis with the arab world, were just on a modern day crusade to protect that petro dollar and the american way of living.



posted on Dec, 22 2014 @ 01:31 PM
link   
a link from ww2 to present day that goes into how many deaths america has caused due to war
www.dangerouscreation.com...

The first part of the table (lines 2 to 42) calculates the number of Japanese that died in Japanese wars, 1937 to 1945. This amounted to 1,771,000 to 3,187,000 Japanese, most likely 2,521,000 (line 42). Of this number, 672,000 probably were civilians (line 32), virtually all killed in American air raids (including the two atomic bombs).

these estimates are closer to 20-30 million,

need i elaborate further?
edit on 22-12-2014 by muckleduck because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-12-2014 by muckleduck because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-12-2014 by muckleduck because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2014 @ 01:33 PM
link   
a reply to: muckleduck

I've read your posts in several threads recently.
I admire your passion and admit you make some pertinent points.....but with respect I question your motivation.

You do know that many, if not the majority, of those innocent civilian victims of drone attacks you seem so keen to mention were the direct result of the all too common and acknowledged practice of Taliban / Al Qaida / IS using civilians as human shields and deliberately placing them in vulnerable positions within legitimate targets?

Are you sure you aren't using all this as an excuse to vent an anti-US / West agenda?
I'd like to think not.

And surely you can't blame the US / UK or anyone other than IS for the indiscriminate slaughter of Muslim and Christian civilians who don't adhere to their particularly vile and barbaric brand of Islamic fundamentalism?

They and they alone are responsible for their actions.



edit on 22/12/14 by Freeborn because: spelling



posted on Dec, 22 2014 @ 01:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: muckleduck

I've read your posts in several threads recently.
I admire your passion and admit you make some pertinent points.....but with respect I question your motivation.

You do know that many, if not the majority, of those innocent civilian victims of drone attacks you seem so keen to mention were the direct result of the all too common and acknowledged practice of Taliban / Al Qaida / IS using civilians as human shields and deliberately placing them in vulnerable positions within legitimate targets?

Are you sure you aren't using all this as an excuse to vent an anti-US / West agenda?
I'd like to think not.

my qualms is not with the people in the west but the foreign policies our governments are run on.

i live in the uk, cant even bare to watch t.v anymore , tired of bbc propoganda.

who set up the taliban? who swet up al qaeda? who set up isis?

my guess is the very same people behind their creation, and they arent from the arab world.

And surely you can't blame the US / UK or anyone other than IS for the indiscriminate slaughter of Muslim and Christian civilians who don't adhere to their particularly vile and barbaric brand of Islamic fundamentalism?

They and they alone are responsible for their actions.




my qualms is not with the people in the west but the foreign policies our governments are run on.

i live in the uk, cant even bare to watch t.v anymore , tired of bbc propoganda.

who set up the taliban? who swet up al qaeda? who set up isis?

my guess is the very same people behind their creation, and they arent from the arab world.
edit on 22-12-2014 by muckleduck because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2014 @ 01:39 PM
link   
a reply to: muckleduck




or they would have fought for nothing.


Don't hold your breath...the way the world is going, they might yet have died for absolutely nothing...unless you count the extraordinary payday for the military industrial complex and bankers who financed all sides...



posted on Dec, 22 2014 @ 01:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: muckleduck




or they would have fought for nothing.


Don't hold your breath...the way the world is going, they might yet have died for absolutely nothing...unless you count the extraordinary payday for the military industrial complex and bankers who financed all sides...



yea im well aware of the american federal reserve and large corporations filling the reich banks , in order to loan us planes tanks troops etc, they didnt win anything, they come into the war near the end and act like its their victory, the war was already over by the point they came along to fight in europe, most of hitlers elite units were sent to the russian front which was a poor choice for him, russia and britain should not forget what we achieved in the face of american funded tyranny.

i dotn want to fight in co-allition with america in any scenario, they are some poorly trained individuals.

and the general feeling between the commonwealth forces that went is the same, same with the european nations that sent troops, none want to fight alongside americans.

more likely to die from friendly fire than anything else.

edit on 22-12-2014 by muckleduck because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2014 @ 01:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Freeborn




And surely you can't blame the US / UK or anyone other than IS for the indiscriminate slaughter of Muslim and Christian civilians who don't adhere to their particularly vile and barbaric brand of Islamic fundamentalism?

They and they alone are responsible for their actions.


Alone?

Don't those signing the cheques bear at least some responsibility?

I'm still unsure if ISIS or whatever the West prefers to call them today are actually any kind of threat at all, i have a sneaking suspicion they are a deliberate creation that i can't shake. Even if they are exactly what they are purported to be, is it really any surprise, after the years of desolation, death and destruction the West has wreaked in their part of the world?

I don't think so...in fact, i seriously doubt that we ourselves would not be doing the same thing, if our homelands and lives had been ravaged to the degree the ME has been over the last 15 years or so.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join