Russia PM says Trump attack came within an inch of war with Russia

a reply to: Velatropa24

Perhaps you should pay more attention then.

Monday saw yet another targeted strike in Syria. Not against Isis or against anyone threatening. No, the latest attack was another deplorable airstrike on a Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) hospital that was providing vital medical care to the region surrounding Maarat al-Numan.
www.independent.co.uk...

Just one of several carried out by Russia or its friend Syria , but Vlad can do no wrong in some peoples eyes.

a reply to: gortex

..and the US blew the living crap out of one of their hospitals in Afghanistan with AC130 gunships,there is no sainthoods in geopolitics

Almost $90 million of cruise missiles. For what? Another typical Trump investment strategy. Wonder if they taught that strategic thinking at TrumpU...

a reply to: allsee4eye

Totally why they are blocked from coming here huh? It's best for them.
We gonna bomb the # out of you but you can't come here. It's better that way.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Velatropa24

Perhaps you should pay more attention then.

Monday saw yet another targeted strike in Syria. Not against Isis or against anyone threatening. No, the latest attack was another deplorable airstrike on a Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) hospital that was providing vital medical care to the region surrounding Maarat al-Numan.
www.independent.co.uk...

Just one of several carried out by Russia or its friend Syria , but Vlad can do no wrong in some peoples eyes.

Perhaps you should go beyond reading headlines (especially from propaganda crap rags such as the independent, the telegraph or cnn), and research the full story. An empty building which used to once be a medical center used by terrorists does not constitute a hospital which provides "vital medical care to the region". I take it you didn't see the sattelite maps which show the very building in question still intact to this day either...

Why do I even bother...

a reply to: Velatropa24
Don't want to take issue with your post but in the interest of accuracy I wanted to point out that publicly available satellite images can be months and even years old.

a reply to: TinySickTears

There are 21 Arab countries other than Syria. It's not like there's a shortage of Arab countries they can go to.

This is an absolute reckless act with no justification.

The deep Nazi state forced Trump to do it because of his bad press.


So there going to risk a war with Russia, a potential world destroying event just for this deep state political act against Assad without any clear proof he used gas.


No investigation


We are in trouble folks

God help us

originally posted by: jtma508
a reply to: Velatropa24
Don't want to take issue with your post but in the interest of accuracy I wanted to point out that publicly available satellite images can be months and even years old.

The Russian ministry of defence released the maps especially for the press. But hey, who cares about that when you can point fingers.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
The Russians claim the sa 22 can shoot down the f35 and the f22.
They sure let a bunch of old cruise missiles hit their targets and probably with warning they were coming.

Interesting

Yep and usa brag that their radar is good enough to track a football on the oppisite side of the world, but they can not find a aeroplane that fell in the ocean. Go figure

I'm not jumping on the band waggon to bash the US because of this. I still think Trump did the right thing and now they are at least all forced to find a diplomatic solution together. Currently there are no plans or any other indication that the US wants to invade Syria.

a reply to: Velatropa24

You can't make it any simpler: you're making things up. That's why you're arguing about the definition of hypocrisy (which I'm not arguing about) and not arguing about the fact that nobody here has claimed the US is morally superior to Russia, which is what your original comment is all about.

Stating that Russia has no moral superiority in Syria is not hypocritical unless one claims that the US does have it. While I'm glad that you read the dictionary and sort of (but not really) know what hypocrisy is defined as, your attempt to apply it to this situation is incorrect.

hy·poc·ri·sy
həˈpäkrəsē/
noun
the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

It's that first part that you seem to not understand, so I'm posting the definition for you. Nobody here claimed that the US has moral standards superior to Russia.

You're welcome

"Russia PM says Trump attack came within an inch of war with Russia"

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Velatropa24

You can't make it any simpler: you're making things up. That's why you're arguing about the definition of hypocrisy (which I'm not arguing about) and not arguing about the fact that nobody here has claimed the US is morally superior to Russia, which is what your original comment is all about.

Stating that Russia has no moral superiority in Syria is not hypocritical unless one claims that the US does have it. While I'm glad that you read the dictionary and sort of (but not really) know what hypocrisy is defined as, your attempt to apply it to this situation is incorrect.

hy·poc·ri·sy
həˈpäkrəsē/
noun
the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

It's that first part that you seem to not understand, so I'm posting the definition for you. Nobody here claimed that the US has moral standards superior to Russia.

You're welcome

When you claim something about someone but you are no better - you are a hypocrite. When you critisize someones actions, but do the same thing yourself - you are a hypocrite. When you selectively apply different principles to the same situations, depending on who is the culprit - you are a hypocrite.

There we go, I expanded and chewed it over for you.

a reply to: Velatropa24

Correction: you changed the definition in an effort to be right so that now it not only covers doing one thing while saying another but also includes simply acknowledging that somebody else isn't a ray of sunshine while not professing to be one yourself.

Whatever makes you feel better about being wrong, bucko.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Velatropa24

Correction: you changed the definition in an effort to be right so that now it not only covers doing one thing while saying another but also includes simply acknowledging that somebody else isn't a ray of sunshine while not professing to be one yourself.

Whatever makes you feel better about being wrong, bucko.

Disagree all you want, it is what it is.

a reply to: TonyS

I find it ironic considering how often Trump talks about CNN being fake news.

originally posted by: Velatropa24

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Velatropa24

Correction: you changed the definition in an effort to be right so that now it not only covers doing one thing while saying another but also includes simply acknowledging that somebody else isn't a ray of sunshine while not professing to be one yourself.

Whatever makes you feel better about being wrong, bucko.

Disagree all you want, it is what it is.

I know. And what it is is what I posted from the dictionary for you, not whatever crap you're making up to try and be right.

We're done here. No amount of continual posting to try and get the last word is going to change that you attacked a member over something they didn't even say while simultaneously redefining things to try and support your attack.

But that probably won't stop you from trying to get the last word in anyway.

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: Velatropa24

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Velatropa24

Correction: you changed the definition in an effort to be right so that now it not only covers doing one thing while saying another but also includes simply acknowledging that somebody else isn't a ray of sunshine while not professing to be one yourself.

Whatever makes you feel better about being wrong, bucko.

Disagree all you want, it is what it is.

I know. And what it is is what I posted from the dictionary for you, not whatever crap you're making up to try and be right.

We're done here. No amount of continual posting to try and get the last word is going to change that you attacked a member over something they didn't even say while simultaneously redefining things to try and support your attack.

But that probably won't stop you from trying to get the last word in anyway.

Fine - call it double standards if it is not one and the same to you. It is to me.