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.

 

West should compensate Russia for fighting terrorists in Syria: Pundit

page: 7
6
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 4 2015 @ 07:47 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

My source was July not August. Then you post one from March and fly all over me....big ooops once you realized your mistake. Guess that was embarrassing. So here's the most recent you tried to link to.


Here's a video describing the action on that map


What was your point again? I forgot. Oh yeah, Russia's not bombing ISIS and it's big scam.
edit on 4-10-2015 by FlySolo because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 4 2015 @ 08:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: FlySolo
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

My source was July not August.

False. Your last post, the one I replied to clearly said August. Thanks for admitting your other source you posted earlier was even older, from July.

originally posted by: FlySolo
Aleppo Aug 2015

Am I mistaken or did you not clearly say August? Big oops, guess that's embarrassing.

Then you post one from March and fly all over me....big ooops once you realized your mistake. Guess that was embarrassing. So here's the most recent you tried to link to.

No embarassment, the C button is stuck on this computer, the image I intended to link did not copy so it pasted something I had copied earlier. Why would that embarrass me? Seems you just want to be confrontational and make stuff up, nothing new.


Here's a video describing the action on that map


What was your point again? I forgot. Oh yeah, Russia's not bombing ISIS and it's big scam.

My point was almost all of Russia's strikes are in areas held by rebels, not ISIS. You posted a source to try to claim I was wrong and used old information. I used the SAME source you used, and quoted where they AGREE with ME and flat out say Russia is targeting rebels with very few strikes hitting ISIS. I don't need you to tell me what they are showing on the map, I already quoted them.


Key Takeaway: Russian airstrikes continue to primarily target Syrian opposition groups in areas far from ISIS's core terrain. These strikes are concentrated in northwestern Syria, particularly in rebel-held areas of Idlib Province and the northern countryside of Hama Province. The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) claimed only three airstrikes targeting positions in known ISIS-held terrain between October 1 and October 3. However, local reporting only confirmed two of these strikes. The Russian air campaign in Syria appears to be largely focused on supporting the Syrian regime and its fight against the Syrian opposition, rather than combatting ISIS.


Care to explain how that contradicts me?



posted on Oct, 4 2015 @ 08:42 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

You know what? I tried to read your post but this back and forth March AUG, July crap is just childish. The entire argument has turned into petty nonsense with no point anymore. Lets go back tot the beginning. You say Russia isn't bombing ISIS. I said you're wrong. You say they're just bombing rebels. I say that's because the rebels are backed US militia. You say ISIS doesn't hold any territory in the maps. I provided a video from the SAA explaining the ISIS command centers bombed in those areas you say ISIS isn't in.

Done. Not mad, just case closed.



posted on Oct, 4 2015 @ 08:48 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04





originally posted by: FlySolo
Aleppo Aug 2015

Am I mistaken or did you not clearly say August? Big oops, guess that's embarrassing.


If you're going to quote me, please stay in context. My map was from July.



posted on Oct, 4 2015 @ 08:49 PM
link   
a reply to: FlySolo

Per your source.


The Russian air campaign in Syria appears to be largely focused on supporting the Syrian regime and its fight against the Syrian opposition, rather than combatting ISIS.


You are done because your source agrees with me. Must be embarrassing.



posted on Oct, 4 2015 @ 09:13 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

First of all, lets get this straight. The ISW logo from your map is where I got the others. It's not my source, it's YOUR source but you didn't even know that because you just snagged it from another right wing talking head. Didn't you? You didn't even know where your own map came from. Now that's got to be embarrassing.

Second, you keep quoting me out of context. That's got to be embarrassing.

Third. This comment "The Russian air campaign in Syria appears to be largely focused on supporting the Syrian regime and its fight against the Syrian opposition, rather than combatting ISIS." was from the first day of the bombing campaign. It's already day 5 and ISIS attacks have been confirmed countless times from multiple sources. If that's the only thing you've got to hang on then you are surely done.



posted on Oct, 4 2015 @ 09:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: FlySolo
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

First of all, lets get this straight. The ISW logo from your map is where I got the others. It's not my source, it's YOUR source but you didn't even know that because you just snagged it from another right wing talking head. Didn't you? You didn't even know where your own map came from. Now that's got to be embarrassing.

No, it's your source because you used it in your argument. I posted an article from the BBC not a right wing talking head, must be embarrassing for you to be wrong on everything you say. The source became YOURS when you posted a map and claimed my information was outdated and obsolete. At that point that is tacit recognition that the source is legitimate and sound and you accept it.

Except, embarrassingly enough for you, the map I posted was from Oct. 1, and you posted one from July, and claimed yours was "correct" and mine was obsolete.


Third. This comment "The Russian air campaign in Syria appears to be largely focused on supporting the Syrian regime and its fight against the Syrian opposition, rather than combatting ISIS." was from the first day of the bombing campaign. It's already day 5 and ISIS attacks have been confirmed countless times from multiple sources. If that's the only thing you've got to hang on then you are surely done.

Wow how Embarrassing, the map I used was from Oct. 3rd, which was yesterday, you know, the day the topic was started and the day I replied to it.
edit on 4-10-2015 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2015 @ 09:57 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04




No, it's your source because you used it in your argument.


You posted it, I fact checked so it's your source. Whatever. Can we move forward to other mindless immature arguments?




Wow how Embarrassing, the map I used was from Oct. 3rd, which was yesterday,


Thought you just said Oct 1 was your map. Speaking of maps, you're all over it. Lets get back to your claim Russia isn't attacking ISIS. As per Oct 1 map. Day 5 in Russia now. Where is your proof ISIS isn't getting attacked?



posted on Oct, 4 2015 @ 10:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: FlySolo
a reply to: OccamsRazor04




No, it's your source because you used it in your argument.


You posted it, I fact checked so it's your source. Whatever. Can we move forward to other mindless immature arguments?




Wow how Embarrassing, the map I used was from Oct. 3rd, which was yesterday,


Thought you just said Oct 1 was your map. Speaking of maps, you're all over it. Lets get back to your claim Russia isn't attacking ISIS. As per Oct 1 map. Day 5 in Russia now. Where is your proof ISIS isn't getting attacked?


October 3rd.
3.bp.blogspot.com...

How many attacks total? How many in ISIS controlled areas?



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 04:04 PM
link   
lol



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join