• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Tucker Carlson, Colonel Douglas Macgregor, The Ukraine War

lukethethird

unknown member
And thus, you expose yourself.

And you accuse me of being emotional.


Cool, so we agree.

So why are you running defence when OTHER countries do imperialism? Are you pro-Imperialism except when America does it?

And are you going to address the actual arguments yet? You've provided absolutely nothing to demonstrate - in any way, shape or form - that Maidan was a "US-backed coup".


I don't have a favorite imperialist regime when Ukrainian lives are on the line, that's the difference between you and me. This is a proxy war and Ukraine is the battlefield. It never should have started and it needs to end now.

Evidence of US-Backed Coup in Kiev
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
I don't have a favorite imperialist regime when Ukrainian lives are on the line, that's the difference between you and me. This is a proxy war and Ukraine is the battlefield. It never should have started and it needs to end now.'
I agree. Russia should retreat.

I love how you get all your info from pro-Russian mouthpieces rather than actual facts.

The article claims the violence was started by protesters in December 2013, which is explicitly a lie. The earliest violence was in November, when there was a massive police crackdown on Maidan reporters and protesters. The violence that followed was a direct response to that.
SOURCE: 1 December 2013 Euromaidan riots - Wikipedia

Weird how your apparently "anti-imperialist" source seems to never mention the police violence AGAINST the protesters (that lead to over 100 deaths and 1000 injuries), nor the draconian anti-protest laws that LEAD to the protests in the first place. But, hey ho.

Then he brings up an example of a Nazi group turning up at the protest, and makes this utterly and hilariously ridiculous statement:

"The violence by far-right groups was evidently condoned by Sen. John McCain who expressed his support for the uprising by addressing the Maidan crowd later that month."

Seriously. That's it. There was a group of violent Nazis who turned up at a mass protest held by HUNDREDS of thousands of people and that makes any support for the protests "condoning far-right groups". I wouldn't write that in a parody.

He then goes on to say this:

"Democratically-elected leaders are removed by electoral defeat, impeachment or votes of no confidence, not by violence."

Which seems like a very weird thing for someone who claims to be anti-authoritarian or anti-imperialist to say. I also find it bizarre that he never mentions WHY the protests started, and neglects to mention Yanukovych's attempt to pass draconian anti-protest laws and arresting of opposition. Nor does he mention Yanukovych's proven ties to Russia, which is odd for someone who cares so much about countries meddling in other country's leadership.
SOURCES: Special Report: Why Ukraine spurned the EU and embraced Russia

Seems a bit weird, that. But, again, hey ho.

Scrolling down, he utterly fails to present any actual evidence that this was a coup, or that there was any significant US involvement. Again, the Nuland call is LITERALLY ALL THEY HAVE. Two diplomats talking about their preference of leader in Ukraine. And, apparently, that proves it was a US-backed coup rather than a popular revolution that America simply supported.
Full transcript here: Ukraine crisis: Transcript of leaked Nuland-Pyatt call

Your source is a proven liar. Be more objective in future.
 
Last edited:

Sargonski

Well-Known Member
"I promise I'm not downplaying the invasion, I just think this war is a cake walk compared to others".

Gee, I wonder what the reason is for this line of argument.

The reason is to replace your spiked koolaid perspective with something better resembling reality. and why did you false quote me ? I didn't promise you anything mate .. other than enlightenment if you listen to the words of the Prophet ... for he is very wise ... but you not so good listener :)

Please explain to me how ... in your fairy tale necessary illusion .. The War in Syria was more difficult for civilians compared to this war ? your explanation should include a comparision .. one to the other .. not just crying out .. Putin did this .. "war crime" - "Putin killed civilians" without comparison to Biden's dirty deeds.

We all understand that war is bad friend .. so why do you want the war to continue so badly .. continue supporting this slaughterhouse .. along with stupid US foreign policy .. a detriment to US citizens .. are you Chinese ? -- happy to see the US gut itself ? whats your story "Gee I wonder what the reason is for your line of argument' ? how did you get priorities so mixed up .. and so lost in the propaganda kool-aid necessary illusion .. Where Propaganda comes from Russia and not CNN .. that which matters in any case ... did you that school session ? .. oh .. no wait .. 12 years of school and they don't teach the founding principle/ legitimacy of authority - the basics of Philosophy ..logic, logical fallacy - what constitutes a valid argument .. so its hard for average Joe to wade through the daily cacophony of bad argument and fallacy by politicians and the media .. not having these simple tools.

Without fair and free media .. and educated citizens .. no such thing as functional democratic process friend :)
 
Last edited:

Sargonski

Well-Known Member
A "few minutes"???? Did it hurt much? Perhaps you could have tried sampling short stretches at various points in the video to sort of get a general idea without damaging your defensive shields beyond repair. :tongueclosed:



Not if you start a logic chopping exercise in which you attribute some narrow meaning to the expression. It is usually about how likely a claim is to be true or false, given publicly available information.



That starts at roughly 6:35 in the video. There is no "actual ratio", because neither side actually releases casualty figures, as McBeth points out. He actually showed a document that cited the 3:1 ratio but did not say where that document came from. In my experience (which has involved working with security analysts like him), this kind of assumption is exactly what all intelligence analysts engage in when evaluating claims like the one MacGregor made. He simply pointed out that MacGregor's 400,000 claim would therefore result in Ukraine having only about 100,000 troops left. That's absurd.



He just said the The Guardian (not really a tabloid) is usually more accurate then other public sources on the dead-wounded ratio (actually it was 17,500 dead), but he said he thought the number too low. He came up with roughly 100,000 as a more accurate number of overall Ukrainian wounded, many of which would have gone back into battle and possibly be wounded again, inflating those numbers.



You use the Russian MOD in an RT article as a source? And you take MacGregor's "120,000 holes" claim at face value? McBeth is not the one who is a "complete idiot". :astonished: Anyway, McBeth's rating of MacGregor's 400,000 dead claim is "extremely unlikely to be true", and I think he made that case very well. And you missed a lot more analysis of MacGregor that was even more devastating by not continuing to watch, but I understand that your defensive shields must have been overheating at that point.




So now you are trying to do the kind of thing that McBeth does professionally, only with no experience and far less understanding of which sources are reliable. For, example, RT is notorious for cooking its figures, and its Russian articles sometimes differ in content from English versions because of the propaganda values for foreign versus domestic audiences.



My comments are not endorsements of everything people have said in your arguments with them, so you are the one deflecting here by making false accusations. I think MacGregor is incredibly naïve if he thinks that Ukraine has lost 400K soldiers. If he doesn't actually believe that claim, then that would make him a liar. In any case, the claim is an example of a falsehood by any reasonable calculation, as McBeth pointed out in his factchecking exercise.



You actually just proved that you don't know what an ad hominem fallacy is. I was pointing out to you that he was supporting Russia's claims about the war and was, in fact, interviewed by RT multiple times. I gave a link to support the truth of that claim. That isn't an ad hominem fallacy, which is claiming that something is false because of who made the claim.



That was sneaky. You changed what I said and put it in quotes to make it look like my words. I have boldfaced the parts you modified.

"it's fairly obvious from the McBeth critique that he does get things wrong and uses fallacious reasoning to support his claims"

As you can see, I supported my claim by referencing the video, which you admit you only watched a few minutes of. The fact is that you have no way to know what else he said, since the transcripted portion posted in this thread was only a small piece of it and you admittedly didn't watch it.



The stinger reference starts at 22:00 in the video, which you didn't watch. Again, I supported what I said. Your refutation is based on ignorance of the content of the video. Your remark here is typical of most of your criticism--ignorance based on your puzzling unwillingness to check the facts, which should have started with you watching the source that you intended to attack and criticize so vehemently. Again, it isn't McBeth or myself who is behaving in an "infantile" fashion here.

Dude .. why would I look for the stinger reference when I was fleshing out the casualty figure .. one thing at a time friend..

Macgreggors claim does not result in only 100,000 troops left .. and no this would not be absurd at all .. and probably close to the number of active soldiers at this point .. but this has nothing to do with the original 500,000 ?!

You don't understand what you are talking about .. .. and as proven previously .. McDoodle doesn't either. Ukraine may well have started with 500,000 (this too is a foggy number in the first place but let us accept it for the moment) as the war progresses they add to this number.

Do you know what conscription is mate ? .. in this case Azov SS press gangs running around the Nation forcing teenagers and old men to the front lines at gunpoint. Back in the days of the initial 500,000 .. there were volunteers rushing in to replace the loses .. not line ups these days friend .. especially hearing that the life expectency at the front line is measured 5-6 hours

This guy is a moron ... or a CIA hack .. putting out quackery to cloud the space. There is nothing to suggest the 3-1 casualty ratio holds in this war .. as per the NATO talking Head .. this is a war like no other... there are drones targeting infantry now .. the number of dead in such attacks is extremly high .. more like 1-1 not 3 to 1. pinpoint artillery strikes .. and Big FAB-500 bombs ..

This is the begining of the clone wars .. in case you hadn't notice .. never mind this moron and go watch some drone footage put out daily by the numberous folks covering the war on both sides.

and of course you include figures from the Russian MOD in your assessment .. it would stupid not to ? ... to assess the battlefield one must get all sides of the story... This is the propaganda talking friend .. someone been feeding you on fallacy .. now you think Ad Hom fallacy is valid argument .. demonizing the source has nothign to do with the truth or falsehood of the number.. and only someone completely unaware of propaganda believes that a propaganda outlet puts out lies 100% of the time .. They would have to be a really stupid propaganda outlet to do such a thing .. as a lie is not very effective if you know its a lie.

Further .. in the Fog of War .. where we know both sides are going to lie .. but, they will also be putting out a whole lot of Truth .. When one side wins a battle .. they want the world to know .. and so one side is often telling the truth ..

Your implied assumption is that USA media is going to be the side telling the truth 100% of the time .. and this is preposterous nonsense. and YES despite your protestations .. this is your implied assumption when you cry out "Russian Propaganda" such that you would never use that source. This is the cry of the duped friend .. who trained you to believe in this illogical fallacy ? .. and what part of "The CIA pays people to put out misinformation" is not sinking in ?
 

lukethethird

unknown member
I agree. Russia should retreat.


I love how you get all your info from pro-Russian mouthpieces rather than actual facts.

The article claims the violence was started by protesters in December 2013, which is explicitly a lie. The earliest violence was in November, when there was a massive police crackdown on Maidan reporters and protesters. The violence that followed was a direct response to that.
SOURCE: 1 December 2013 Euromaidan riots - Wikipedia

Weird how your apparently "anti-imperialist" source seems to never mention the police violence AGAINST the protesters (that lead to over 100 deaths and 1000 injuries), nor the draconian anti-protest laws that LEAD to the protests in the first place. But, hey ho.

Then he brings up an example of a Nazi group turning up at the protest, and makes this utterly and hilariously ridiculous statement:

"The violence by far-right groups was evidently condoned by Sen. John McCain who expressed his support for the uprising by addressing the Maidan crowd later that month."

Seriously. That's it. There was a group of violent Nazis who turned up at a mass protest held by HUNDREDS of thousands of people and that makes any support for the protests "condoning far-right groups". I wouldn't write that in a parody.

He then goes on to say this:

"Democratically-elected leaders are removed by electoral defeat, impeachment or votes of no confidence, not by violence."

Which seems like a very weird thing for someone who claims to be anti-authoritarian or anti-imperialist to say. I also find it bizarre that he never mentions WHY the protests started, and neglects to mention Yanukovych's attempt to pass draconian anti-protest laws and arresting of opposition. Nor does he mention Yanukovych's proven ties to Russia, which is odd for someone who cares so much about countries meddling in other country's leadership.
SOURCES: Special Report: Why Ukraine spurned the EU and embraced Russia

Seems a bit weird, that. But, again, hey ho.

Scrolling down, he utterly fails to present any actual evidence that this was a coup, or that there was any significant US involvement. Again, the Nuland call is LITERALLY ALL THEY HAVE. Two diplomats talking about their preference of leader in Ukraine. And, apparently, that proves it was a US-backed coup rather than a popular revolution that America simply supported.
Full transcript here: Ukraine crisis: Transcript of leaked Nuland-Pyatt call

Your source is a proven liar. Be more objective in future.



You can call them liars all day long, I don't value your opinion.

Consortium News holds strong anti-war positions, which has resulted in media credibility rater Newsguard rating them with a Red Shield, indicating they are not credible. Newsguard cites the publication of false or misleading information regarding Ukraine. However, our review indicates that most information is factual and evidence-based. They are clearly biased, but the opinions presented are anchored in fact and perhaps exaggerated.

Failed Fact Checks

  • None in the Last 5 years
You searched for consortium news - Media Bias/Fact Check
 
Last edited:

Copernicus

Industrial Strength Linguist
Dude .. why would I look for the stinger reference when I was fleshing out the casualty figure .. one thing at a time friend..

Macgreggors claim does not result in only 100,000 troops left .. and no this would not be absurd at all .. and probably close to the number of active soldiers at this point .. but this has nothing to do with the original 500,000 ?!

You don't understand what you are talking about .. .. and as proven previously .. McDoodle doesn't either. Ukraine may well have started with 500,000 (this too is a foggy number in the first place but let us accept it for the moment) as the war progresses they add to this number.

Do you know what conscription is mate ? .. in this case Azov SS press gangs running around the Nation forcing teenagers and old men to the front lines at gunpoint. Back in the days of the initial 500,000 .. there were volunteers rushing in to replace the loses .. not line ups these days friend .. especially hearing that the life expectency at the front line is measured 5-6 hours

This guy is a moron ... or a CIA hack .. putting out quackery to cloud the space. There is nothing to suggest the 3-1 casualty ratio holds in this war .. as per the NATO talking Head .. this is a war like no other... there are drones targeting infantry now .. the number of dead in such attacks is extremly high .. more like 1-1 not 3 to 1. pinpoint artillery strikes .. and Big FAB-500 bombs ..

This is the begining of the clone wars .. in case you hadn't notice .. never mind this moron and go watch some drone footage put out daily by the numberous folks covering the war on both sides.

and of course you include figures from the Russian MOD in your assessment .. it would stupid not to ? ... to assess the battlefield one must get all sides of the story... This is the propaganda talking friend .. someone been feeding you on fallacy .. now you think Ad Hom fallacy is valid argument .. demonizing the source has nothign to do with the truth or falsehood of the number.. and only someone completely unaware of propaganda believes that a propaganda outlet puts out lies 100% of the time .. They would have to be a really stupid propaganda outlet to do such a thing .. as a lie is not very effective if you know its a lie.

Further .. in the Fog of War .. where we know both sides are going to lie .. but, they will also be putting out a whole lot of Truth .. When one side wins a battle .. they want the world to know .. and so one side is often telling the truth ..

Your implied assumption is that USA media is going to be the side telling the truth 100% of the time .. and this is preposterous nonsense. and YES despite your protestations .. this is your implied assumption when you cry out "Russian Propaganda" such that you would never use that source. This is the cry of the duped friend .. who trained you to believe in this illogical fallacy ? .. and what part of "The CIA pays people to put out misinformation" is not sinking in ?

Fellow dude. I really don't see the point in continuing to discuss a video with you that you won't even watch but carry on as if you knew all about it and had some idea of what you are talking about. You are simply repeating what you've said before, attributing straw man positions to me, dismissing everything I say contemptuously, and calling McBeth a moron. Got it. Argumentum ad nauseam. I'm going to move on.
 

Sargonski

Well-Known Member
Fellow dude. I really don't see the point in continuing to discuss a video with you that you won't even watch but carry on as if you knew all about it and had some idea of what you are talking about. You are simply repeating what you've said before, attributing straw man positions to me, dismissing everything I say contemptuously, and calling McBeth a moron. Got it. Argumentum ad nauseam. I'm going to move on.

I did watch ? -- up to the point where I had seen enough .. his claim of falsehood was false .. having no legitimate support for his claim .. and actually citing the 17 K dead figure .. showing he has completely no idea what he is talking about .. no one would post such nonsense with a straight face .. without qualifying .. prior to saying it .. and commenting on how ridiculously low it is .. obvious propaganda .. then moving on onto other studies..

and you want me to wast another 25 minutes .. listing to someone who has falsified himself in the first few minutes of the video .. his 3-1 ratio was dumb .. idiotic .. showed again no understanding .. and his 500K number used in his calculation was completely wrong .. as it doesn't account for people signing up after the fact.

OK ?? .. its too much dumb already to continue .. don't need any more information to prove this fellow is either a moron or CIA paid propagandist .. that his claim to be a "Fact Checker" is whack a doodle .. and so on.

I watched your Video .. Saw enough -- Magreggor the one telling you whats happening on the geopolitical Chessboard .. you are way out in necessary illusion la la land - vision clouded from the spiked kool-aid false narrative .. no concept of whats happening on the board.. don't understand the moves being made .. nor why .. just running around with that Blue Kankle Trope "Bad Russia .. Bad Russia .. Bad Trump .. BAd Trump" got some Meuller investigation hang over .. turn those Cop City Protesters ... Domestic Terrorists theywere .. according to cancel culture Lable land .. Patriot in the Protest on Capitol got 10 years for breaking a window .. Sounds like a court system even Putin could love.

Here is one of the many Military Summary Channels that give daily summaries of the main battles .. often complete with Video footage from Drones.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Speaking of videos, I came across this other video. It's a month old, but it seems to give a realistic scenario of what the end game might look like.

 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
You can call them liars all day long, I don't value your opinion.

Consortium News holds strong anti-war positions, which has resulted in media credibility rater Newsguard rating them with a Red Shield, indicating they are not credible. Newsguard cites the publication of false or misleading information regarding Ukraine. However, our review indicates that most information is factual and evidence-based. They are clearly biased, but the opinions presented are anchored in fact and perhaps exaggerated.

Failed Fact Checks

  • None in the Last 5 years
You searched for consortium news - Media Bias/Fact Check
Are you serious?

I presented a point-by-point breakdown of the article pointing out explicit lies, fallacious arguments and omissions of fact WITH SOURCES, and your response is to present a media bias fact check and to insinuate that EVERYTHING IN THE ARTICLE MUST BE TRUE BECAUSE THIS ONE WEBSITE HASN'T FACT-CHECKED THEM ENOUGH.

Wow.

I mean, seriously. The guy claims the violence started in December 2013, and I provide a SOURCE which proves that police violence initiated a month earlier that year, and you just accept his claims anyway because... Who cares about facts, right? I even presented a source direct from Ukraine, published in November of that year, which details - WITH VIDEOS - police and state violence against the protestors. But no. The violence "started in December when protesters attacked police". You've accepted this, uncritically, and you'll never change your mind about it regardless of facts.

Are you SO incapable of responding to actual arguments or forming ideas on your own? Do you even READ the articles you post as evidence of your position?

I can't believe the level of dishonesty you're willing to engage in. It's unbelievable that people can't see it.

Also, you're an imperialist.
 
Last edited:

Sargonski

Well-Known Member
I've presented facts. You've presented nothing.


I have not "false quoted" you, that's a lie. I just don't respond to the bulk of your posts because about 80% of what you write is factless rhetoric.

You are the Liar .. as 100% you false quoted me .. I never said - "I promise I'm not downplaying the invasion"

Never said what you claimed above.. never promised you nothing .. and you have not presented any facts that support your false claims of laughable nonsense .. another lie on your part .. one that was demonstrated to you when you put forth your laughable war crimes comment - yet now you want to project your failing onto me .. calling me a liar and claiming you are the one who presented facts .. when has been me presenting you with the facts.

This war is a cake walk for civilians by comparison with the Biden Clown wars .. thats just a statement of fact . Don't blame me that you were duped by the Propaganda .. not my fault you can't understand the difference between 10,000 dead civilians and 500,000 dead civilians.

This is what a fact is u understand ? 10,000 Dead civilians vs 500,000 Dead civilians. The FACT.. that you are desperate to deny .. is that one is a whole lot worse than the other.
 
Last edited:

Sargonski

Well-Known Member
You can call them liars all day long, I don't value your opinion.

Consortium News holds strong anti-war positions, which has resulted in media credibility rater Newsguard rating them with a Red Shield, indicating they are not credible. Newsguard cites the publication of false or misleading information regarding Ukraine. However, our review indicates that most information is factual and evidence-based. They are clearly biased, but the opinions presented are anchored in fact and perhaps exaggerated.

Failed Fact Checks

  • None in the Last 5 years
You searched for consortium news - Media Bias/Fact Check

This is an interesting factoid that I have noticed myself in searches... .. "A Google News search of Russian-Ukrainian casualties today will result in the top eight article headlines all speculating on why Russian fatalities and injuries are so high" Riddle this: How many casualties are there, truly, on both sides of Ukraine war?

and this is the most disturbing things about this war .. watching the propaganda machine grind .. along with the meat grinder. watching how they herd the sheep .. and literally hurded a generation of Ukrainian lads towards suicidal slaughter ... rediculously high casualty ratio's 5-1,, 10 to 1 in some cases and sometimes more. In the words of the NATO talking head .. "war like we never seen before" pinpoint accuracy of artillery targeted in by Drones above .. .. the clone wars have begun.

but, in this little experiment - and this is by Western Sources .. so no one disputes .. in this artillery - Trench war of attrition .. Russia fires 10 times the artillery ..somtimes firing Russia 40,000 per day .. Ukraine 2-3000 day .. because Ukraine is running out of Ammo .. already below what they used to be firing around 6000/day .. to get them into the game in terms of suppression of enemy fire to form a bridgehead .. also running out of "wonder weapons" which work good when they are available but they are not .. gone .. and none comming anytime soon .. cause we don't produce many .. Total NATO production of Artillery is 36,000 per MONTH and this is with the US doubling production from 16,000 to 32,000 .. the rest of NATO managing the other 4K

Russia is producing something like 200,000 .. going up to 400,000/month .. but have huge stockpiles. US stockpile has run out so are sending 155 mm cluster munitions

The Russians are firing 40,000 shells per day, said Ustinova, who serves on Ukraine’s wartime oversight committee.

and from here we discuss Casualty Ratio .. which in an artillery war .. favors the one firing 10 times the number of shells. and who now control the skies for the most partalong the hundreds of mile front line. ... it is very assymetric .. the life expectency of a Ukrainian soldier on the front line measured in hours ..in some battles.
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
Then why did you have quotes around a paraphrased content you were responding to.
When I quote people on the forum, it's in a quote box. When I am writing a logical analogy in the style of a statement, I put it in quotation marks and - importantly - don't attribute it to anyone.

Do you understand?

For example, I could sum up your current argument this way:

"Hello. I don't have any facts or logic, so I am going to deliberately misunderstand a very common and very easily identifiable form of rhetorical flair and use it to go off on a tangent because I know that to debate facts will be extremely embarrassing for me, so I resort to baseless personal attacks".

See?

Perhaps it is confusing to you because, unlike you, when I make factual claims - particularly ones requiring specific quotation - I will generally show where that information or quotation came from. It's this new thing the kids are calling "citation". Try it sometime.
 
Last edited:

Sargonski

Well-Known Member
When I quote people on the forum, it's in a quote box. When I am writing a logical analogy in the style of a statement, I put it in quotation marks and - importantly - don't attribute it to anyone.

Do you understand?

For example, I could sum up your current argument this way:

"Hello. I don't have any facts or logic, so I am going to deliberately misunderstand a very common and very easily identifiable form of rhetorical flair and use it to go off on a tangent because I know that to debate facts will be extremely embarrassing for me, so I resort to baseless personal attacks".

See?

projecting again .. you cried out Liar Liar .. when it was obvious this was not the case .. .. now you claim "Oh I was being sarcastic" .. and cry out again that was me who was misunderstanding ..

Playground antics from the decepticon -- desperate to avoid the topic .. on which his position was crucified . unable to bear the facts .. can't understand the difference between 10,000 civilians dead .. and 500,000 civilians dead .. pertending to misunderstand the facts - the land of disingenuous oblivion.

can't figure out that 10,000 civilians dead is a walk in the park compared to 500,000 civilians dead .. and so resort to baseless personal attacks and falsehood in an effort to dismiss the facts .. while presenting none of your own in defense of position.

Whats the trouble friend .. don't understand the metric ? 10,000 dead civilians .. 500,000 civilians dead. One is worst than the other right ? How about you compare life and times for the Christians cities of Syria under the Islamic State .. daily executions - rape - forced marriage .. State sponsored .. was 4 years until liberation by Russia .. Strict Sharia -- dark age style . in addition to 500,000 civilians dead.

Something wrong paddy ? the facts not sitting well with that necessary illusion bubble ? can't seem to understand .. how Beloved Biden would be a worse Terror Monger than Beloved Vlad ... but hey .. one dictator is as Good as the next for the neocon cancel crowd
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
projecting again .. you cried out Liar Liar .. when it was obvious this was not the case .. .. now you claim "Oh I was being sarcastic" .. and cry out again that was me who was misunderstanding ..

Playground antics from the decepticon -- desperate to avoid the topic .. on which his position was crucified . unable to bear the facts .. can't understand the difference between 10,000 civilians dead .. and 500,000 civilians dead .. pertending to misunderstand the facts - the land of disingenuous oblivion.

can't figure out that 10,000 civilians dead is a walk in the park compared to 500,000 civilians dead .. and so resort to baseless personal attacks and falsehood in an effort to dismiss the facts .. while presenting none of your own in defense of position.

Whats the trouble friend .. don't understand the metric ? 10,000 dead civilians .. 500,000 civilians dead. One is worst than the other right ? How about you compare life and times for the Christians cities of Syria under the Islamic State .. daily executions - rape - forced marriage .. State sponsored .. was 4 years until liberation by Russia .. Strict Sharia -- dark age style . in addition to 500,000 civilians dead.

Something wrong paddy ? the facts not sitting well with that necessary illusion bubble ? can't seem to understand .. how Beloved Biden would be a worse Terror Monger than Beloved Vlad ... but hey .. one dictator is as Good as the next for the neocon cancel crowd
Still nothing of substance? And even less reading comprehension?

Cool.

You're on ignore.
 

Sargonski

Well-Known Member
Still nothing of substance? And even less reading comprehension?

Cool.

You're on ignore.

running from the playground - name calling what you been doing for last 3 posts .. and other assorted fallacy falsehood and deception ... not gonna change the fact that your position was crucified .. pretending not to be able to distinguish between 10,000 civilians dead .. and 500,000 dead civilians at the feet of your beloved Biden and the latest neocon woke trope .. cheering those green Ukrainian Teens into the meat grinder .. send box-loads of Ukrainian Sausage home to Grandma this winter ..

Thats the nice thing about proxy war's .. its not your own Lads getting killed - at levels the good citizens of the USA would not put up with .. would have negotiated the Peace long ago .. but Zelensky he a neocon hoe .. don't ya know :)
 

Sargonski

Well-Known Member
Source for these numbers, please.
Source for 10,000 dead civilians in Ukrain war ... this site has it at 9500 - Ukraine civilian war casualties 2023 | Statista

source for 500,000 dead in Syria
--On 28 June 2022, the United Nations Human Rights Office (OHCHR) said that at least 306,887 civilians had been killed in Syria during the conflict between March 2011 and March 2021, representing about 1.5% of its pre-war population. This figure did not include indirect and non-civilian deaths.[6][7] As of December 2022, according to the GCR2P NGO, a minimum of 580,000 people is estimated to have been killed; with 13 million Syrians being displaced and 6.7 million refugees forced to flee Syria.

Casualties of the Syrian civil war - Wikipedia

"At Least 300K civilians .. .. not 500K but makes no difference to the argument 10,000 civilians dead vs 300,000 civilians dead ..
 
Top