Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
There are always differences.....but these creeps always end up working together. They all are Muslims, with their tribal alliences, but when it comes down to fighting a common foe....they stick together. Not to mention the fact that trading assets for weapons goes on constantly among these assholes. Most of the weapons ISIS uses are made in America. The rest are stolen....Camp does have a point. There is a difference between the rebels and ISIS. While Russia is working for Iran in Syria we are working for Saudi Arabia. In a practical sense. I doubt there is any written contract, although there might be. We are in Syria to help the Sunni rebels overthrow Assad. We are not there to defeat ISIS.Where is the evidence bro =)No they aren't. How can you be that misinformed?The Syrian rebels are ISIS.Told you so.
bbc.com/news/world/-middle-east-34399164
Russia will not go after ISIS unless or until they become a direct threat to Assad. They will concentrate on killing the enemies of ISIS because they are also enemies of Assad. Plus innocents. Russia will kill lots of innocents as proven with today's attack.
What you are giving in relation to who and what we are doing is an opinion and open for debate. We, along with others, including the Saudi's, Jordanians and Arab states have provided all kinds of various support for fighting the civil war between Assad and the Syrian population, or rebels. At the same time, Russia has been providing support for Assad, who is still recognized as representing the legitimate ruler of the Syrian government. The fight with ISIS/ISIL/IS is a separate issue.Camp does have a point. There is a difference between the rebels and ISIS. While Russia is working for Iran in Syria we are working for Saudi Arabia. In a practical sense. I doubt there is any written contract, although there might be. We are in Syria to help the Sunni rebels overthrow Assad. We are not there to defeat ISIS.Where is the evidence bro =)No they aren't. How can you be that misinformed?The Syrian rebels are ISIS.Told you so.
bbc.com/news/world/-middle-east-34399164
Russia will not go after ISIS unless or until they become a direct threat to Assad. They will concentrate on killing the enemies of ISIS because they are also enemies of Assad. Plus innocents. Russia will kill lots of innocents as proven with today's attack.
Very much agree. As fights turn to battles turn to wars one much look at the common denomination the war will be fought on. This is a Shia/Sunni war. A paragraph from the NYT about the recent Taliban offensive sums up the entire U.S. effort since the overthrow of Saddam.There are always differences.....but these creeps always end up working together. They all are Muslims, with their tribal alliences, but when it comes down to fighting a common foe....they stick together. Not to mention the fact that trading assets for weapons goes on constantly among these assholes. Most of the weapons ISIS uses are made in America. The rest are stolen....Camp does have a point. There is a difference between the rebels and ISIS. While Russia is working for Iran in Syria we are working for Saudi Arabia. In a practical sense. I doubt there is any written contract, although there might be. We are in Syria to help the Sunni rebels overthrow Assad. We are not there to defeat ISIS.Where is the evidence bro =)No they aren't. How can you be that misinformed?The Syrian rebels are ISIS.Told you so.
bbc.com/news/world/-middle-east-34399164
Russia will not go after ISIS unless or until they become a direct threat to Assad. They will concentrate on killing the enemies of ISIS because they are also enemies of Assad. Plus innocents. Russia will kill lots of innocents as proven with today's attack.
Meaning just about all of them are stolen.
Latest news indicate the Afghans have kicked the Taliban's ass and forced them out of Kunduz. The Taliban are however taking control of smaller villages and areas as they are fleeing the Afghan forces. Back and forth, whoever can get the most bullets to the battlefield the quickest wins for a little while. When they run low on bullets, both sides run until they can get some more. Basic stuff.Very much agree. As fights turn to battles turn to wars one much look at the common denomination the war will be fought on. This is a Shia/Sunni war. A paragraph from the NYT about the recent Taliban offensive sums up the entire U.S. effort since the overthrow of Saddam.There are always differences.....but these creeps always end up working together. They all are Muslims, with their tribal alliences, but when it comes down to fighting a common foe....they stick together. Not to mention the fact that trading assets for weapons goes on constantly among these assholes. Most of the weapons ISIS uses are made in America. The rest are stolen....Camp does have a point. There is a difference between the rebels and ISIS. While Russia is working for Iran in Syria we are working for Saudi Arabia. In a practical sense. I doubt there is any written contract, although there might be. We are in Syria to help the Sunni rebels overthrow Assad. We are not there to defeat ISIS.Where is the evidence bro =)No they aren't. How can you be that misinformed?The Syrian rebels are ISIS.
Meaning just about all of them are stolen.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/03/world/asia/taliban-kunduz-afghanistan.html
But the Taliban broke the stalemate early Monday, when hundreds of their fighters marched into Kunduz, a city of 300,000 people not far from the border with Tajikistan. Most of the city’s defenders quickly retreated or disappeared in a defeat that the Afghan government has since struggled to explain.
America is fighting in a Sunni coalition against the Assad government and using ISIS as a cover. And if one blows away all chaff from you post you admit as much. This is not about ISIS.What you are giving in relation to who and what we are doing is an opinion and open for debate. We, along with others, including the Saudi's, Jordanians and Arab states have provided all kinds of various support for fighting the civil war between Assad and the Syrian population, or rebels. At the same time, Russia has been providing support for Assad, who is still recognized as representing the legitimate ruler of the Syrian government. The fight with ISIS/ISIL/IS is a separate issue.Camp does have a point. There is a difference between the rebels and ISIS. While Russia is working for Iran in Syria we are working for Saudi Arabia. In a practical sense. I doubt there is any written contract, although there might be. We are in Syria to help the Sunni rebels overthrow Assad. We are not there to defeat ISIS.Where is the evidence bro =)No they aren't. How can you be that misinformed?The Syrian rebels are ISIS.Told you so.
bbc.com/news/world/-middle-east-34399164
Russia will not go after ISIS unless or until they become a direct threat to Assad. They will concentrate on killing the enemies of ISIS because they are also enemies of Assad. Plus innocents. Russia will kill lots of innocents as proven with today's attack.
The forces being attacked by Russia are not the forces that swept through Syria and Iraq in a binge of be-headings, murders, kidnappings of young girls for sex slaves, etc. They are not part of the Islamic State that is made up of many non Syrian's. Some of them are terror groups, but some are not.
If Russia wants to come to the aid of the Syrian government under Assad and wage war on his enemies, they have the legal right to do so. Unless and until the international community disavows the legitimacy of the Assad government, the Russian's are within their rights to go after whoever they want in coordination with Syria. What they don't have a right to do is lie about targeting ISIS to gain global public support for taking on ISIS when they are not doing so. They can not expect support for killing civilians in collateral damage and targeting rebels who are fighting for democracy or freedom from totalitarian rule while they claim they are taking on the ISIS monsters the world hates and detest. Russia is attempting to use the cover of ISIS to wage a war against the civilian side of a civil war that is fighting a long standing corrupt totalitarian dictator who has a long history of supporting global terrorism, producing chemical weapons and committing crimes against humanity. That is who the Russians are protecting. Their actions have nothing to do with defeating ISIS, at least not yet and little indication they will do anything more than talk about it.
Much of what I learned from working with Arabs is they have a lousy organizational structure. Most of the time they're poorly trained. ISIS seems to be different. Years of training under Republican Guard officers made them pretty efficient....which is rare. They usually talk a big game , but drop their weapons and run in the face of a formidable opponent.....which is what Saddam' s vaunted Republican Guard did both times we faced them.Very much agree. As fights turn to battles turn to wars one much look at the common denomination the war will be fought on. This is a Shia/Sunni war. A paragraph from the NYT about the recent Taliban offensive sums up the entire U.S. effort since the overthrow of Saddam.There are always differences.....but these creeps always end up working together. They all are Muslims, with their tribal alliences, but when it comes down to fighting a common foe....they stick together. Not to mention the fact that trading assets for weapons goes on constantly among these assholes. Most of the weapons ISIS uses are made in America. The rest are stolen....Camp does have a point. There is a difference between the rebels and ISIS. While Russia is working for Iran in Syria we are working for Saudi Arabia. In a practical sense. I doubt there is any written contract, although there might be. We are in Syria to help the Sunni rebels overthrow Assad. We are not there to defeat ISIS.Where is the evidence bro =)No they aren't. How can you be that misinformed?The Syrian rebels are ISIS.
Meaning just about all of them are stolen.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/03/world/asia/taliban-kunduz-afghanistan.html
But the Taliban broke the stalemate early Monday, when hundreds of their fighters marched into Kunduz, a city of 300,000 people not far from the border with Tajikistan. Most of the city’s defenders quickly retreated or disappeared in a defeat that the Afghan government has since struggled to explain.
Someone claimed you are not American. You definitely are. Your arrogance gives you away.Latest news indicate the Afghans have kicked the Taliban's ass and forced them out of Kunduz. The Taliban are however taking control of smaller villages and areas as they are fleeing the Afghan forces. Back and forth, whoever can get the most bullets to the battlefield the quickest wins for a little while. When they run low on bullets, both sides run until they can get some more. Basic stuff.Very much agree. As fights turn to battles turn to wars one much look at the common denomination the war will be fought on. This is a Shia/Sunni war. A paragraph from the NYT about the recent Taliban offensive sums up the entire U.S. effort since the overthrow of Saddam.There are always differences.....but these creeps always end up working together. They all are Muslims, with their tribal alliences, but when it comes down to fighting a common foe....they stick together. Not to mention the fact that trading assets for weapons goes on constantly among these assholes. Most of the weapons ISIS uses are made in America. The rest are stolen....Camp does have a point. There is a difference between the rebels and ISIS. While Russia is working for Iran in Syria we are working for Saudi Arabia. In a practical sense. I doubt there is any written contract, although there might be. We are in Syria to help the Sunni rebels overthrow Assad. We are not there to defeat ISIS.Where is the evidence bro =)No they aren't. How can you be that misinformed?
Meaning just about all of them are stolen.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/03/world/asia/taliban-kunduz-afghanistan.html
But the Taliban broke the stalemate early Monday, when hundreds of their fighters marched into Kunduz, a city of 300,000 people not far from the border with Tajikistan. Most of the city’s defenders quickly retreated or disappeared in a defeat that the Afghan government has since struggled to explain.
America and the coalition are not bombing Assad or the Syrian military. The US led coalition is only bombing ISIS and protecting Iraqi interest. ISIS invaded Iraq. They use Syria as a sanctuary, and claim large portions of it as part of their territory. If ISIS left Iraq territory there would be no reason for the US and the coalition to use air strikes in Syria and the strikes would stop. The Kurds in Iraq are part of Iraq and under attack.Their territory is occupied by ISIS. There is not one example of a US or coalition strike against Assad or his government forces. Supplying equipment is not the same as "fighting" when assets from both sides are in active combat. That is called supporting from the sidelines, not fighting. Words make a difference.America is fighting in a Sunni coalition against the Assad government and using ISIS as a cover. And if one blows away all chaff from you post you admit as much. This is not about ISIS.What you are giving in relation to who and what we are doing is an opinion and open for debate. We, along with others, including the Saudi's, Jordanians and Arab states have provided all kinds of various support for fighting the civil war between Assad and the Syrian population, or rebels. At the same time, Russia has been providing support for Assad, who is still recognized as representing the legitimate ruler of the Syrian government. The fight with ISIS/ISIL/IS is a separate issue.Camp does have a point. There is a difference between the rebels and ISIS. While Russia is working for Iran in Syria we are working for Saudi Arabia. In a practical sense. I doubt there is any written contract, although there might be. We are in Syria to help the Sunni rebels overthrow Assad. We are not there to defeat ISIS.Where is the evidence bro =)No they aren't. How can you be that misinformed?The Syrian rebels are ISIS.
The forces being attacked by Russia are not the forces that swept through Syria and Iraq in a binge of be-headings, murders, kidnappings of young girls for sex slaves, etc. They are not part of the Islamic State that is made up of many non Syrian's. Some of them are terror groups, but some are not.
If Russia wants to come to the aid of the Syrian government under Assad and wage war on his enemies, they have the legal right to do so. Unless and until the international community disavows the legitimacy of the Assad government, the Russian's are within their rights to go after whoever they want in coordination with Syria. What they don't have a right to do is lie about targeting ISIS to gain global public support for taking on ISIS when they are not doing so. They can not expect support for killing civilians in collateral damage and targeting rebels who are fighting for democracy or freedom from totalitarian rule while they claim they are taking on the ISIS monsters the world hates and detest. Russia is attempting to use the cover of ISIS to wage a war against the civilian side of a civil war that is fighting a long standing corrupt totalitarian dictator who has a long history of supporting global terrorism, producing chemical weapons and committing crimes against humanity. That is who the Russians are protecting. Their actions have nothing to do with defeating ISIS, at least not yet and little indication they will do anything more than talk about it.
I am afraid that truth of Arab fighters is quickly becoming a thing of the past. The way things are going pretty soon the majority of the Arab fighters in the Middle East will be highly skilled killers. Militias sure aren't what they used to be.Much of what I learned from working with Arabs is they have a lousy organizational structure. Most of the time they're poorly trained. ISIS seems to be different. Years of training under Republican Guard officers made them pretty efficient....which is rare. They usually talk a big game , but drop their weapons and run in the face of a formidable opponent.....which is what Saddam' s vaunted Republican Guard did both times we faced them.Very much agree. As fights turn to battles turn to wars one much look at the common denomination the war will be fought on. This is a Shia/Sunni war. A paragraph from the NYT about the recent Taliban offensive sums up the entire U.S. effort since the overthrow of Saddam.There are always differences.....but these creeps always end up working together. They all are Muslims, with their tribal alliences, but when it comes down to fighting a common foe....they stick together. Not to mention the fact that trading assets for weapons goes on constantly among these assholes. Most of the weapons ISIS uses are made in America. The rest are stolen....Camp does have a point. There is a difference between the rebels and ISIS. While Russia is working for Iran in Syria we are working for Saudi Arabia. In a practical sense. I doubt there is any written contract, although there might be. We are in Syria to help the Sunni rebels overthrow Assad. We are not there to defeat ISIS.Where is the evidence bro =)No they aren't. How can you be that misinformed?
Meaning just about all of them are stolen.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/03/world/asia/taliban-kunduz-afghanistan.html
But the Taliban broke the stalemate early Monday, when hundreds of their fighters marched into Kunduz, a city of 300,000 people not far from the border with Tajikistan. Most of the city’s defenders quickly retreated or disappeared in a defeat that the Afghan government has since struggled to explain.
I wonder about these reports. Putin said they were claiming civilian casualties before his aircraft took off for their missions. Also, they claim they hit dozens of Syrian Rebel positions.....but can only account for 4 or 5 trained rebels ready to fight after spending $160 million training them.
WTF???
Wow. You actually brought up the Kurds. Do you really want to go there?America and the coalition are not bombing Assad or the Syrian military. The US led coalition is only bombing ISIS and protecting Iraqi interest. ISIS invaded Iraq. They use Syria as a sanctuary, and claim large portions of it as part of their territory. If ISIS left Iraq territory there would be no reason for the US and the coalition to use air strikes in Syria and the strikes would stop. The Kurds in Iraq are part of Iraq and under attack.Their territory is occupied by ISIS. There is not one example of a US or coalition strike against Assad or his government forces. Supplying equipment is not the same as "fighting" when assets from both sides are in active combat. That is called supporting from the sidelines, not fighting. Words make a difference.America is fighting in a Sunni coalition against the Assad government and using ISIS as a cover. And if one blows away all chaff from you post you admit as much. This is not about ISIS.What you are giving in relation to who and what we are doing is an opinion and open for debate. We, along with others, including the Saudi's, Jordanians and Arab states have provided all kinds of various support for fighting the civil war between Assad and the Syrian population, or rebels. At the same time, Russia has been providing support for Assad, who is still recognized as representing the legitimate ruler of the Syrian government. The fight with ISIS/ISIL/IS is a separate issue.Camp does have a point. There is a difference between the rebels and ISIS. While Russia is working for Iran in Syria we are working for Saudi Arabia. In a practical sense. I doubt there is any written contract, although there might be. We are in Syria to help the Sunni rebels overthrow Assad. We are not there to defeat ISIS.Where is the evidence bro =)No they aren't. How can you be that misinformed?
The forces being attacked by Russia are not the forces that swept through Syria and Iraq in a binge of be-headings, murders, kidnappings of young girls for sex slaves, etc. They are not part of the Islamic State that is made up of many non Syrian's. Some of them are terror groups, but some are not.
If Russia wants to come to the aid of the Syrian government under Assad and wage war on his enemies, they have the legal right to do so. Unless and until the international community disavows the legitimacy of the Assad government, the Russian's are within their rights to go after whoever they want in coordination with Syria. What they don't have a right to do is lie about targeting ISIS to gain global public support for taking on ISIS when they are not doing so. They can not expect support for killing civilians in collateral damage and targeting rebels who are fighting for democracy or freedom from totalitarian rule while they claim they are taking on the ISIS monsters the world hates and detest. Russia is attempting to use the cover of ISIS to wage a war against the civilian side of a civil war that is fighting a long standing corrupt totalitarian dictator who has a long history of supporting global terrorism, producing chemical weapons and committing crimes against humanity. That is who the Russians are protecting. Their actions have nothing to do with defeating ISIS, at least not yet and little indication they will do anything more than talk about it.
Listening to you speak reminds me of watching John Kerry yesterday. I wonder if Obama tells him everything. Susan Rice sure was clueless as to what as going on when that shit with Benghazi went down.America and the coalition are not bombing Assad or the Syrian military. The US led coalition is only bombing ISIS and protecting Iraqi interest. ISIS invaded Iraq. They use Syria as a sanctuary, and claim large portions of it as part of their territory. If ISIS left Iraq territory there would be no reason for the US and the coalition to use air strikes in Syria and the strikes would stop. The Kurds in Iraq are part of Iraq and under attack.Their territory is occupied by ISIS. There is not one example of a US or coalition strike against Assad or his government forces. Supplying equipment is not the same as "fighting" when assets from both sides are in active combat. That is called supporting from the sidelines, not fighting. Words make a difference.America is fighting in a Sunni coalition against the Assad government and using ISIS as a cover. And if one blows away all chaff from you post you admit as much. This is not about ISIS.What you are giving in relation to who and what we are doing is an opinion and open for debate. We, along with others, including the Saudi's, Jordanians and Arab states have provided all kinds of various support for fighting the civil war between Assad and the Syrian population, or rebels. At the same time, Russia has been providing support for Assad, who is still recognized as representing the legitimate ruler of the Syrian government. The fight with ISIS/ISIL/IS is a separate issue.Camp does have a point. There is a difference between the rebels and ISIS. While Russia is working for Iran in Syria we are working for Saudi Arabia. In a practical sense. I doubt there is any written contract, although there might be. We are in Syria to help the Sunni rebels overthrow Assad. We are not there to defeat ISIS.Where is the evidence bro =)No they aren't. How can you be that misinformed?
The forces being attacked by Russia are not the forces that swept through Syria and Iraq in a binge of be-headings, murders, kidnappings of young girls for sex slaves, etc. They are not part of the Islamic State that is made up of many non Syrian's. Some of them are terror groups, but some are not.
If Russia wants to come to the aid of the Syrian government under Assad and wage war on his enemies, they have the legal right to do so. Unless and until the international community disavows the legitimacy of the Assad government, the Russian's are within their rights to go after whoever they want in coordination with Syria. What they don't have a right to do is lie about targeting ISIS to gain global public support for taking on ISIS when they are not doing so. They can not expect support for killing civilians in collateral damage and targeting rebels who are fighting for democracy or freedom from totalitarian rule while they claim they are taking on the ISIS monsters the world hates and detest. Russia is attempting to use the cover of ISIS to wage a war against the civilian side of a civil war that is fighting a long standing corrupt totalitarian dictator who has a long history of supporting global terrorism, producing chemical weapons and committing crimes against humanity. That is who the Russians are protecting. Their actions have nothing to do with defeating ISIS, at least not yet and little indication they will do anything more than talk about it.
I have not heard Kerry talk lately. I have been listening to Putin.Listening to you speak reminds me of watching John Kerry yesterday. I wonder if Obama tells him everything. Susan Rice sure was clueless as to what as going on when that shit with Benghazi went down.America and the coalition are not bombing Assad or the Syrian military. The US led coalition is only bombing ISIS and protecting Iraqi interest. ISIS invaded Iraq. They use Syria as a sanctuary, and claim large portions of it as part of their territory. If ISIS left Iraq territory there would be no reason for the US and the coalition to use air strikes in Syria and the strikes would stop. The Kurds in Iraq are part of Iraq and under attack.Their territory is occupied by ISIS. There is not one example of a US or coalition strike against Assad or his government forces. Supplying equipment is not the same as "fighting" when assets from both sides are in active combat. That is called supporting from the sidelines, not fighting. Words make a difference.America is fighting in a Sunni coalition against the Assad government and using ISIS as a cover. And if one blows away all chaff from you post you admit as much. This is not about ISIS.What you are giving in relation to who and what we are doing is an opinion and open for debate. We, along with others, including the Saudi's, Jordanians and Arab states have provided all kinds of various support for fighting the civil war between Assad and the Syrian population, or rebels. At the same time, Russia has been providing support for Assad, who is still recognized as representing the legitimate ruler of the Syrian government. The fight with ISIS/ISIL/IS is a separate issue.Camp does have a point. There is a difference between the rebels and ISIS. While Russia is working for Iran in Syria we are working for Saudi Arabia. In a practical sense. I doubt there is any written contract, although there might be. We are in Syria to help the Sunni rebels overthrow Assad. We are not there to defeat ISIS.Where is the evidence bro =)
The forces being attacked by Russia are not the forces that swept through Syria and Iraq in a binge of be-headings, murders, kidnappings of young girls for sex slaves, etc. They are not part of the Islamic State that is made up of many non Syrian's. Some of them are terror groups, but some are not.
If Russia wants to come to the aid of the Syrian government under Assad and wage war on his enemies, they have the legal right to do so. Unless and until the international community disavows the legitimacy of the Assad government, the Russian's are within their rights to go after whoever they want in coordination with Syria. What they don't have a right to do is lie about targeting ISIS to gain global public support for taking on ISIS when they are not doing so. They can not expect support for killing civilians in collateral damage and targeting rebels who are fighting for democracy or freedom from totalitarian rule while they claim they are taking on the ISIS monsters the world hates and detest. Russia is attempting to use the cover of ISIS to wage a war against the civilian side of a civil war that is fighting a long standing corrupt totalitarian dictator who has a long history of supporting global terrorism, producing chemical weapons and committing crimes against humanity. That is who the Russians are protecting. Their actions have nothing to do with defeating ISIS, at least not yet and little indication they will do anything more than talk about it.
Watch...
Watch...
ISIS is a manifestation of Islam. Putin's assertion that ISIS is a band of mercenaries is self-serving, but no more than ours is.
Watch...
ISIS is a manifestation of Islam. Putin's assertion that ISIS is a band of mercenaries is self-serving, but no more than ours is.
Putin doesn't distinguish. He knows there are no 'moderates' in Syria. CIA connected anti-Assad rebels turn most of their weapons over to Al-Qaeda which end up in the hands of Isis.
Hope I clarified things..........
Watch...
ISIS is a manifestation of Islam. Putin's assertion that ISIS is a band of mercenaries is self-serving, but no more than ours is.
Putin doesn't distinguish. He knows there are no 'moderates' in Syria. CIA connected anti-Assad rebels turn most of their weapons over to Al-Qaeda which end up in the hands of Isis.
Hope I clarified things..........
If you knew what you were talking about and could show some evidence that you are not just spouting off talking point propaganda, ya, that might clarify things. As it stands, not so much.
Is anyone listening to obama muse about Syria? He hasn't got a clue. Not an iota of thought. He has no idea he's lost and the situation has moved miles beyond him.
