Syria and the US's Motive
Comments
-
you have stated who is telling the truth and who isn't (western/mainstream media).polaris_x said:
where did I say from my sources? ... i didn't ... in fact, I said to do research from all sources ...HughFreakingDillon said:
you didn't "strike a nerve". god I hate that passive agressive shit.polaris_x said:
i'm sorry ... but what's going on in syria are massive crimes against humanity ... so, when I ask people to do a little bit of research so that they better understand the issue - all I get is that there is no way of finding out the truth there because everyone is biased .... do you know how frustrating that is to hear? ... the fucking terrorists groups there (al qaeda, isis, etc..) are using children in propoganda campaigns ... and no one is reporting the truth in western media ...HughFreakingDillon said:
gee, thanks. have a wonderful fucking day.polaris_x said:
this is sad ...HughFreakingDillon said:
I was just about to say pretty much the same thing. everything has a source. everyone has their opinions on what sources are credible and which aren't, and it runs the gamut. everything is owned by someone, nothing is independent or non-partisan. it just doesn't exist anymore.mrussel1 said:
The problem here is that both sides will spin whatever evidence they have to make their point. There are zero publications you can read to achieve what you are advocating here. It all comes down to which sources you believe to be more accurate (which unfortunately is usually confirmation bias). The only way to know is to be on the ground. I know that I never believe jack shit about what a Russian publication says.polaris_x said:again ... why don't y'all spend the weekend and do some research and figure this thing out on your own ... read from all the sources ... see which ones have more evidence and facts to back up the claims ...
so ... there is no such thing as truth anymore to anyone because so many people are willing to distort it for their own beliefs? ...
honestly, if you don't really care what's going on there and you don't want to take the time ... just say so ... but pulling this shit is pathetic ...
so, i'm sorry if i struck a nerve with you but I say if you don't want to do a little research on a topic - then just say so ... but don't use biases as a reason for not ...
I just have zero patience for the tower-dwellers who constantly shout down to the idiots "do your research!" then say "but only my sources, yours are wrong!"
I never said I didn't want to do research. that is an incorrect assumption you made. what I said was that all sources have SOME bias, whether you want to believe that or not is your issue.
also mrussel said that there there is bias everywhere and that people ultimately will believe what they want to believe and you agreed ... so, if you believe that the truth is ultimately indiscernible then there is no point in doing any research ...
I do research and if enough of it is corroborated by enough credible sources, then yes,I tend to believe it. but there is bias everywhere. we are humans, flawed emotional beings.
if I thought the truth was indiscernible I wouldn't come here, read the news, or anything of the sort.By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.0 -
I am quite surprised by this.cincybearcat said:Canada prime minister supports US action....Didn't expect that
By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.0 -
our prime minister is an asshole ... we've been arming saudis and there obliteration of yemen ... so, canada sucks in this regard as well ...cincybearcat said:Canada prime minister supports US action....Didn't expect that
0 -
jesus, do you just hate everybody?polaris_x said:
our prime minister is an asshole ... we've been arming saudis and there obliteration of yemen ... so, canada sucks in this regard as well ...cincybearcat said:Canada prime minister supports US action....Didn't expect that
By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.0 -
yes ... i obviously have my opinion ... but when I specifically asked people to do their own research ... i didn't say from where ... i said from all sites ... cross check ... check sources ... investigate sources ... etc...HughFreakingDillon said:
you have stated who is telling the truth and who isn't (western/mainstream media).polaris_x said:
where did I say from my sources? ... i didn't ... in fact, I said to do research from all sources ...HughFreakingDillon said:
you didn't "strike a nerve". god I hate that passive agressive shit.polaris_x said:
i'm sorry ... but what's going on in syria are massive crimes against humanity ... so, when I ask people to do a little bit of research so that they better understand the issue - all I get is that there is no way of finding out the truth there because everyone is biased .... do you know how frustrating that is to hear? ... the fucking terrorists groups there (al qaeda, isis, etc..) are using children in propoganda campaigns ... and no one is reporting the truth in western media ...HughFreakingDillon said:
gee, thanks. have a wonderful fucking day.polaris_x said:
this is sad ...HughFreakingDillon said:
I was just about to say pretty much the same thing. everything has a source. everyone has their opinions on what sources are credible and which aren't, and it runs the gamut. everything is owned by someone, nothing is independent or non-partisan. it just doesn't exist anymore.mrussel1 said:
The problem here is that both sides will spin whatever evidence they have to make their point. There are zero publications you can read to achieve what you are advocating here. It all comes down to which sources you believe to be more accurate (which unfortunately is usually confirmation bias). The only way to know is to be on the ground. I know that I never believe jack shit about what a Russian publication says.polaris_x said:again ... why don't y'all spend the weekend and do some research and figure this thing out on your own ... read from all the sources ... see which ones have more evidence and facts to back up the claims ...
so ... there is no such thing as truth anymore to anyone because so many people are willing to distort it for their own beliefs? ...
honestly, if you don't really care what's going on there and you don't want to take the time ... just say so ... but pulling this shit is pathetic ...
so, i'm sorry if i struck a nerve with you but I say if you don't want to do a little research on a topic - then just say so ... but don't use biases as a reason for not ...
I just have zero patience for the tower-dwellers who constantly shout down to the idiots "do your research!" then say "but only my sources, yours are wrong!"
I never said I didn't want to do research. that is an incorrect assumption you made. what I said was that all sources have SOME bias, whether you want to believe that or not is your issue.
also mrussel said that there there is bias everywhere and that people ultimately will believe what they want to believe and you agreed ... so, if you believe that the truth is ultimately indiscernible then there is no point in doing any research ...
I do research and if enough of it is corroborated by enough credible sources, then yes,I tend to believe it. but there is bias everywhere. we are humans, flawed emotional beings.
if I thought the truth was indiscernible I wouldn't come here, read the news, or anything of the sort.0 -
There is a truth of course. Who released the chemical attack? There is a truth there. I'm not sure which sources are saying it was Al Qaeda vs Assad, but there is a truth to that answer. I know the Russian Federation's position is that it was the terrorists. Western media says Assad. You believe it was the terrorists. Share with us your primary sources that lead you to your conclusion, that runs counter to the western conclusion.polaris_x said:
where did I say from my sources? ... i didn't ... in fact, I said to do research from all sources ...HughFreakingDillon said:
you didn't "strike a nerve". god I hate that passive agressive shit.polaris_x said:
i'm sorry ... but what's going on in syria are massive crimes against humanity ... so, when I ask people to do a little bit of research so that they better understand the issue - all I get is that there is no way of finding out the truth there because everyone is biased .... do you know how frustrating that is to hear? ... the fucking terrorists groups there (al qaeda, isis, etc..) are using children in propoganda campaigns ... and no one is reporting the truth in western media ...HughFreakingDillon said:
gee, thanks. have a wonderful fucking day.polaris_x said:
this is sad ...HughFreakingDillon said:
I was just about to say pretty much the same thing. everything has a source. everyone has their opinions on what sources are credible and which aren't, and it runs the gamut. everything is owned by someone, nothing is independent or non-partisan. it just doesn't exist anymore.mrussel1 said:
The problem here is that both sides will spin whatever evidence they have to make their point. There are zero publications you can read to achieve what you are advocating here. It all comes down to which sources you believe to be more accurate (which unfortunately is usually confirmation bias). The only way to know is to be on the ground. I know that I never believe jack shit about what a Russian publication says.polaris_x said:again ... why don't y'all spend the weekend and do some research and figure this thing out on your own ... read from all the sources ... see which ones have more evidence and facts to back up the claims ...
so ... there is no such thing as truth anymore to anyone because so many people are willing to distort it for their own beliefs? ...
honestly, if you don't really care what's going on there and you don't want to take the time ... just say so ... but pulling this shit is pathetic ...
so, i'm sorry if i struck a nerve with you but I say if you don't want to do a little research on a topic - then just say so ... but don't use biases as a reason for not ...
I just have zero patience for the tower-dwellers who constantly shout down to the idiots "do your research!" then say "but only my sources, yours are wrong!"
I never said I didn't want to do research. that is an incorrect assumption you made. what I said was that all sources have SOME bias, whether you want to believe that or not is your issue.
also mrussel said that there there is bias everywhere and that people ultimately will believe what they want to believe and you agreed ... so, if you believe that the truth is ultimately indiscernible then there is no point in doing any research ...
I will freely say that when the all the British and US sources say the same thing, I'm going with that. That's my bias. I don't believe anything the Russians say. Never have.0 -
Weren't you a Harper hater as well?polaris_x said:
our prime minister is an asshole ... we've been arming saudis and there obliteration of yemen ... so, canada sucks in this regard as well ...cincybearcat said:Canada prime minister supports US action....Didn't expect that
0 -
no ... i simply do not believe in blind faith ... i believe in peace for all ... not just people who are lucky to be born into western nations ... i fight for the disadvantaged and the planet ... i come on here because i hope that besides people who post ... there are lurkers who read ... those who read with an open mind and open heart ... because of what I know to be happening in syria is soul crushing I come here to give voice to those that cannot ... i don't come here to be popular with anyone ...HughFreakingDillon said:
jesus, do you just hate everybody?polaris_x said:
our prime minister is an asshole ... we've been arming saudis and there obliteration of yemen ... so, canada sucks in this regard as well ...cincybearcat said:Canada prime minister supports US action....Didn't expect that
in normal circumstances - it would is asking a bit much to get people to do some reading but I figured because Syria is actually at war with Al Qaeda and ISIS - people would actually make the effort ...0 -
Right. Assad is a great guy and we're all idiots.polaris_x said:
ok ... so, officially you know nothing about syria ... or assad ... no longer need to reply to you ...BS44325 said:
No. You please explain how you can fall for the refined talk of a lying murderous thug.polaris_x said:
why wow? ... please explain ... can't wait to hear this ...BS44325 said:
"Watch interviews of Assad"? Wow.polaris_x said:
if he's fighting al qaeda and isis - the last thing he needs is having his people turn on him ... gassing his own people is not only impossible because he has no chemical weapons - it is totally illogical ... watch interviews of assad - he is not some raging dictator lunatic trope ...Jason P said:
Once the body count goes past 400K, I don't think being endeared by your people is near the top of your to-do list. He has Russia backing him, ready to lie. Just tell the people he has under control that terrorist did it (like he is), so he isn't losing any shame to them.polaris_x said:
you got to be kidding me ...Jason P said:
Assad was testing a new leader and how Trump would respond. One week after Trump Administration say hands off and we have a chemical weapons attack. It makes sense. Water held.polaris_x said:
uhhh ... this doesn't make any sense ... chemical attack just happened = US intervention ... so, your theory holds absolutely no water ...Jason P said:If all the past chemical attacks were done by the terrorists / rebels in hopes of pullling the west into action and the all failed .... why would the terrorists / rebels try doing it again after the White House indicated they were not going to interfere with Syria.
You would have to be a pretty stupid terrorist / rebel to think that would work.
But if your a brutal dictator that maybe didn't turn over all of your chemical weapons and just heard the White House say they were going to be hands off, I'd think that would be a good time to go shooting some chemical weapons.
syria is finally winning the war, they even have a US congresswoman supporting them, trump has stated that they don't want to intervene ... so, the smart thing to do is then gas your own people!?? ... c'mon ... this is not thinking critically ... what does assad gain? ... does he endear himself to his people - no ... does he garner more international support - no ... international support he desperately needs because he is fighting fucking al qaeda AND ISIS ...0 -
I agree with this: i believe in peace for all ... not just people who are lucky to be born into western nationspolaris_x said:
no ... i simply do not believe in blind faith ... i believe in peace for all ... not just people who are lucky to be born into western nations ... i fight for the disadvantaged and the planet ... i come on here because i hope that besides people who post ... there are lurkers who read ... those who read with an open mind and open heart ... because of what I know to be happening in syria is soul crushing I come here to give voice to those that cannot ... i don't come here to be popular with anyone ...HughFreakingDillon said:
jesus, do you just hate everybody?polaris_x said:
our prime minister is an asshole ... we've been arming saudis and there obliteration of yemen ... so, canada sucks in this regard as well ...cincybearcat said:Canada prime minister supports US action....Didn't expect that
in normal circumstances - it would is asking a bit much to get people to do some reading but I figured because Syria is actually at war with Al Qaeda and ISIS - people would actually make the effort ...
I HAVE an open mind. that IS why I come here. you might want to change your strategy of belittling people who don't agree with your views.By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.0 -
i believe it was a chemical weapons depot held by al qaeda ...mrussel1 said:
There is a truth of course. Who released the chemical attack? There is a truth there. I'm not sure which sources are saying it was Al Qaeda vs Assad, but there is a truth to that answer. I know the Russian Federation's position is that it was the terrorists. Western media says Assad. You believe it was the terrorists. Share with us your primary sources that lead you to your conclusion, that runs counter to the western conclusion.polaris_x said:
where did I say from my sources? ... i didn't ... in fact, I said to do research from all sources ...HughFreakingDillon said:
you didn't "strike a nerve". god I hate that passive agressive shit.polaris_x said:
i'm sorry ... but what's going on in syria are massive crimes against humanity ... so, when I ask people to do a little bit of research so that they better understand the issue - all I get is that there is no way of finding out the truth there because everyone is biased .... do you know how frustrating that is to hear? ... the fucking terrorists groups there (al qaeda, isis, etc..) are using children in propoganda campaigns ... and no one is reporting the truth in western media ...HughFreakingDillon said:
gee, thanks. have a wonderful fucking day.polaris_x said:
this is sad ...HughFreakingDillon said:
I was just about to say pretty much the same thing. everything has a source. everyone has their opinions on what sources are credible and which aren't, and it runs the gamut. everything is owned by someone, nothing is independent or non-partisan. it just doesn't exist anymore.mrussel1 said:
The problem here is that both sides will spin whatever evidence they have to make their point. There are zero publications you can read to achieve what you are advocating here. It all comes down to which sources you believe to be more accurate (which unfortunately is usually confirmation bias). The only way to know is to be on the ground. I know that I never believe jack shit about what a Russian publication says.polaris_x said:again ... why don't y'all spend the weekend and do some research and figure this thing out on your own ... read from all the sources ... see which ones have more evidence and facts to back up the claims ...
so ... there is no such thing as truth anymore to anyone because so many people are willing to distort it for their own beliefs? ...
honestly, if you don't really care what's going on there and you don't want to take the time ... just say so ... but pulling this shit is pathetic ...
so, i'm sorry if i struck a nerve with you but I say if you don't want to do a little research on a topic - then just say so ... but don't use biases as a reason for not ...
I just have zero patience for the tower-dwellers who constantly shout down to the idiots "do your research!" then say "but only my sources, yours are wrong!"
I never said I didn't want to do research. that is an incorrect assumption you made. what I said was that all sources have SOME bias, whether you want to believe that or not is your issue.
also mrussel said that there there is bias everywhere and that people ultimately will believe what they want to believe and you agreed ... so, if you believe that the truth is ultimately indiscernible then there is no point in doing any research ...
I will freely say that when the all the British and US sources say the same thing, I'm going with that. That's my bias. I don't believe anything the Russians say. Never have.
the same british and us that went into iraq on what evidence? ... the same british and us countries that have gone all over the world and instituted regime change like in iran and almost all of central america ... that is not surprising based on what you post ... all i will say is that the US and british hold no moral authority ... i will reiterate that it's not like I support the russians either ... there are sources from all sides saying different things ...0 -
you said unequivocally that western media does not report the truth. I found it amusing that not long after, you posted a link to the times.polaris_x said:
really!?? ... c'mon ... so, if I post an article from an independent news site - it gets shit on ... if i post from the times ... this is what I get ... this is why I ask people to do their own research from ALL sites ...HughFreakingDillon said:
I thought western media didn't report the truth?polaris_x said:
anyway, have a wonderful weekend.By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.0 -
No, let's be clear. There were plenty of western media who challenged the administration's conclusions on Iraq's WMD capabilities. Scott Ritter was about the most popular person interviewed leading up to the war and he was dead on from the start. You are conflating the politicians with the media, intentionally to make your point which is intellectually dishonest. I'm not saying plenty of media didn't beat the war drum, they did, but they didn't all do that. Russian media is state controlled. The message is the same all the time.polaris_x said:
i believe it was a chemical weapons depot held by al qaeda ...mrussel1 said:
There is a truth of course. Who released the chemical attack? There is a truth there. I'm not sure which sources are saying it was Al Qaeda vs Assad, but there is a truth to that answer. I know the Russian Federation's position is that it was the terrorists. Western media says Assad. You believe it was the terrorists. Share with us your primary sources that lead you to your conclusion, that runs counter to the western conclusion.polaris_x said:
where did I say from my sources? ... i didn't ... in fact, I said to do research from all sources ...HughFreakingDillon said:
you didn't "strike a nerve". god I hate that passive agressive shit.polaris_x said:
i'm sorry ... but what's going on in syria are massive crimes against humanity ... so, when I ask people to do a little bit of research so that they better understand the issue - all I get is that there is no way of finding out the truth there because everyone is biased .... do you know how frustrating that is to hear? ... the fucking terrorists groups there (al qaeda, isis, etc..) are using children in propoganda campaigns ... and no one is reporting the truth in western media ...HughFreakingDillon said:
gee, thanks. have a wonderful fucking day.polaris_x said:
this is sad ...HughFreakingDillon said:
I was just about to say pretty much the same thing. everything has a source. everyone has their opinions on what sources are credible and which aren't, and it runs the gamut. everything is owned by someone, nothing is independent or non-partisan. it just doesn't exist anymore.mrussel1 said:
The problem here is that both sides will spin whatever evidence they have to make their point. There are zero publications you can read to achieve what you are advocating here. It all comes down to which sources you believe to be more accurate (which unfortunately is usually confirmation bias). The only way to know is to be on the ground. I know that I never believe jack shit about what a Russian publication says.polaris_x said:again ... why don't y'all spend the weekend and do some research and figure this thing out on your own ... read from all the sources ... see which ones have more evidence and facts to back up the claims ...
so ... there is no such thing as truth anymore to anyone because so many people are willing to distort it for their own beliefs? ...
honestly, if you don't really care what's going on there and you don't want to take the time ... just say so ... but pulling this shit is pathetic ...
so, i'm sorry if i struck a nerve with you but I say if you don't want to do a little research on a topic - then just say so ... but don't use biases as a reason for not ...
I just have zero patience for the tower-dwellers who constantly shout down to the idiots "do your research!" then say "but only my sources, yours are wrong!"
I never said I didn't want to do research. that is an incorrect assumption you made. what I said was that all sources have SOME bias, whether you want to believe that or not is your issue.
also mrussel said that there there is bias everywhere and that people ultimately will believe what they want to believe and you agreed ... so, if you believe that the truth is ultimately indiscernible then there is no point in doing any research ...
I will freely say that when the all the British and US sources say the same thing, I'm going with that. That's my bias. I don't believe anything the Russians say. Never have.
the same british and us that went into iraq on what evidence? ... the same british and us countries that have gone all over the world and instituted regime change like in iran and almost all of central america ... that is not surprising based on what you post ... all i will say is that the US and british hold no moral authority ... i will reiterate that it's not like I support the russians either ... there are sources from all sides saying different things ...
Second, provide your source(s) that you used to conclude that it was an Al-Qaeda depot, please.0 -
-
-
listen ... just consider this for a moment ... the white helmets ... they just fucking gave an oscar to a terrorist group ... there is a plethora of evidence exposing the white helmets as frauds ... this s the organization most msm outlets get their information ... which is duly reported ...mrussel1 said:
No, let's be clear. There were plenty of western media who challenged the administration's conclusions on Iraq's WMD capabilities. Scott Ritter was about the most popular person interviewed leading up to the war and he was dead on from the start. You are conflating the politicians with the media, intentionally to make your point which is intellectually dishonest. I'm not saying plenty of media didn't beat the war drum, they did, but they didn't all do that. Russian media is state controlled. The message is the same all the time.polaris_x said:
i believe it was a chemical weapons depot held by al qaeda ...mrussel1 said:
There is a truth of course. Who released the chemical attack? There is a truth there. I'm not sure which sources are saying it was Al Qaeda vs Assad, but there is a truth to that answer. I know the Russian Federation's position is that it was the terrorists. Western media says Assad. You believe it was the terrorists. Share with us your primary sources that lead you to your conclusion, that runs counter to the western conclusion.polaris_x said:
where did I say from my sources? ... i didn't ... in fact, I said to do research from all sources ...HughFreakingDillon said:
you didn't "strike a nerve". god I hate that passive agressive shit.polaris_x said:
i'm sorry ... but what's going on in syria are massive crimes against humanity ... so, when I ask people to do a little bit of research so that they better understand the issue - all I get is that there is no way of finding out the truth there because everyone is biased .... do you know how frustrating that is to hear? ... the fucking terrorists groups there (al qaeda, isis, etc..) are using children in propoganda campaigns ... and no one is reporting the truth in western media ...HughFreakingDillon said:
gee, thanks. have a wonderful fucking day.polaris_x said:
this is sad ...HughFreakingDillon said:
I was just about to say pretty much the same thing. everything has a source. everyone has their opinions on what sources are credible and which aren't, and it runs the gamut. everything is owned by someone, nothing is independent or non-partisan. it just doesn't exist anymore.mrussel1 said:
The problem here is that both sides will spin whatever evidence they have to make their point. There are zero publications you can read to achieve what you are advocating here. It all comes down to which sources you believe to be more accurate (which unfortunately is usually confirmation bias). The only way to know is to be on the ground. I know that I never believe jack shit about what a Russian publication says.polaris_x said:again ... why don't y'all spend the weekend and do some research and figure this thing out on your own ... read from all the sources ... see which ones have more evidence and facts to back up the claims ...
so ... there is no such thing as truth anymore to anyone because so many people are willing to distort it for their own beliefs? ...
honestly, if you don't really care what's going on there and you don't want to take the time ... just say so ... but pulling this shit is pathetic ...
so, i'm sorry if i struck a nerve with you but I say if you don't want to do a little research on a topic - then just say so ... but don't use biases as a reason for not ...
I just have zero patience for the tower-dwellers who constantly shout down to the idiots "do your research!" then say "but only my sources, yours are wrong!"
I never said I didn't want to do research. that is an incorrect assumption you made. what I said was that all sources have SOME bias, whether you want to believe that or not is your issue.
also mrussel said that there there is bias everywhere and that people ultimately will believe what they want to believe and you agreed ... so, if you believe that the truth is ultimately indiscernible then there is no point in doing any research ...
I will freely say that when the all the British and US sources say the same thing, I'm going with that. That's my bias. I don't believe anything the Russians say. Never have.
the same british and us that went into iraq on what evidence? ... the same british and us countries that have gone all over the world and instituted regime change like in iran and almost all of central america ... that is not surprising based on what you post ... all i will say is that the US and british hold no moral authority ... i will reiterate that it's not like I support the russians either ... there are sources from all sides saying different things ...
Second, provide your source(s) that you used to conclude that it was an Al-Qaeda depot, please.
also - consider that without actually investigating the attack ... all the msm outlets immediated pointed to assad ... the same outlets that blamed him for a 2013 attack that was later debunked ... why not wait for an independent investigation? ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5k6hSS6xBTw
0 -
Someone please explain to me why the only military in the war room is the person watching the door?0 -
Your conclusions are achieved by:polaris_x said:
1. Pieced together circumstantial evidence, cobbled from multiple sources such as twitter and supposedlly posted and deleted smoking guns that take place over several years and now multiple administrations
2. The absence of a motive of the Assad regime, in your/the writer's opinion
3. Questions as to whether Sarin gas could be identified that quickly.
No offense, but all this does is try to counter the western conclusion. It certainly is far from conclusive itself. I'm also not sure how you hve an independent investigation in Syria. Will you send a subpoena to Assad to testify to a sub-committee?
0 -
I'm also not convinced that Polaris cares about fighting a war with Al-Qaeda. Polaris from what I understand is pro-Assad and if being pro-Assad means being against Al-Qaeda well then Polaris will be against Al-Qaeda.mrussel1 said:
No, let's be clear. There were plenty of western media who challenged the administration's conclusions on Iraq's WMD capabilities. Scott Ritter was about the most popular person interviewed leading up to the war and he was dead on from the start. You are conflating the politicians with the media, intentionally to make your point which is intellectually dishonest. I'm not saying plenty of media didn't beat the war drum, they did, but they didn't all do that. Russian media is state controlled. The message is the same all the time.polaris_x said:
i believe it was a chemical weapons depot held by al qaeda ...mrussel1 said:
There is a truth of course. Who released the chemical attack? There is a truth there. I'm not sure which sources are saying it was Al Qaeda vs Assad, but there is a truth to that answer. I know the Russian Federation's position is that it was the terrorists. Western media says Assad. You believe it was the terrorists. Share with us your primary sources that lead you to your conclusion, that runs counter to the western conclusion.polaris_x said:
where did I say from my sources? ... i didn't ... in fact, I said to do research from all sources ...HughFreakingDillon said:
you didn't "strike a nerve". god I hate that passive agressive shit.polaris_x said:
i'm sorry ... but what's going on in syria are massive crimes against humanity ... so, when I ask people to do a little bit of research so that they better understand the issue - all I get is that there is no way of finding out the truth there because everyone is biased .... do you know how frustrating that is to hear? ... the fucking terrorists groups there (al qaeda, isis, etc..) are using children in propoganda campaigns ... and no one is reporting the truth in western media ...HughFreakingDillon said:
gee, thanks. have a wonderful fucking day.polaris_x said:
this is sad ...HughFreakingDillon said:
I was just about to say pretty much the same thing. everything has a source. everyone has their opinions on what sources are credible and which aren't, and it runs the gamut. everything is owned by someone, nothing is independent or non-partisan. it just doesn't exist anymore.mrussel1 said:
The problem here is that both sides will spin whatever evidence they have to make their point. There are zero publications you can read to achieve what you are advocating here. It all comes down to which sources you believe to be more accurate (which unfortunately is usually confirmation bias). The only way to know is to be on the ground. I know that I never believe jack shit about what a Russian publication says.polaris_x said:again ... why don't y'all spend the weekend and do some research and figure this thing out on your own ... read from all the sources ... see which ones have more evidence and facts to back up the claims ...
so ... there is no such thing as truth anymore to anyone because so many people are willing to distort it for their own beliefs? ...
honestly, if you don't really care what's going on there and you don't want to take the time ... just say so ... but pulling this shit is pathetic ...
so, i'm sorry if i struck a nerve with you but I say if you don't want to do a little research on a topic - then just say so ... but don't use biases as a reason for not ...
I just have zero patience for the tower-dwellers who constantly shout down to the idiots "do your research!" then say "but only my sources, yours are wrong!"
I never said I didn't want to do research. that is an incorrect assumption you made. what I said was that all sources have SOME bias, whether you want to believe that or not is your issue.
also mrussel said that there there is bias everywhere and that people ultimately will believe what they want to believe and you agreed ... so, if you believe that the truth is ultimately indiscernible then there is no point in doing any research ...
I will freely say that when the all the British and US sources say the same thing, I'm going with that. That's my bias. I don't believe anything the Russians say. Never have.
the same british and us that went into iraq on what evidence? ... the same british and us countries that have gone all over the world and instituted regime change like in iran and almost all of central america ... that is not surprising based on what you post ... all i will say is that the US and british hold no moral authority ... i will reiterate that it's not like I support the russians either ... there are sources from all sides saying different things ...
Second, provide your source(s) that you used to conclude that it was an Al-Qaeda depot, please.0 -
The funniest thing about this meme is that the USA elected this.CM189191 said:
Someone please explain to me why the only military in the war room is the person watching the door?
0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pS6Oa_aDS6ECategories
- All Categories
- 148.8K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.1K Flea Market
- 39.1K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.7K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help