Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Analysts have looked at the map showing the Russians' account of how the jet was shot down, and conclude the Russian map is a lie, because the SU-24 could not have possibly made the sharp right turn shown on the map.



Dishonesty piled on dishonesty, all looking to provoke. Question is, who is foolish enough to take the bait?

No, no. You are wrong about the SU. How can you make this assumption?
The SU-24 could make a maneuver like that. I've seen it do that and more.
If it flies up straight (vertically) and then rolls to the side, the flight path on a map -two dimensional- could look like that. Easily.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Analysts have looked at the map showing the Russians' account of how the jet was shot down, and conclude the Russian map is a lie, because the SU-24 could not have possibly made the sharp right turn shown on the map.



Dishonesty piled on dishonesty, all looking to provoke. Question is, who is foolish enough to take the bait?

No, no. You are wrong about the SU. How can you make this assumption?
The SU-24 could make a maneuver like that. I've seen it do that and more.
If it flies up straight (vertically) and then rolls to the side, the flight path on a map -two dimensional- could look like that. Easily.

Fine, then provide the complete data to prove it. Until then, it looks like someone just unthinkingly scribbled a line on a map.

Provide complete data?? I hope you are not talking to me, the PP, because I'm not Russian intelligence. LOL.
I was just talking about the abilities of the jet. And that can fly any scribbled line on a map. What it looks like, and what is possible, are two very different things.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Analysts have looked at the map showing the Russians' account of how the jet was shot down, and conclude the Russian map is a lie, because the SU-24 could not have possibly made the sharp right turn shown on the map.



Dishonesty piled on dishonesty, all looking to provoke. Question is, who is foolish enough to take the bait?

No, no. You are wrong about the SU. How can you make this assumption?
The SU-24 could make a maneuver like that. I've seen it do that and more.
If it flies up straight (vertically) and then rolls to the side, the flight path on a map -two dimensional- could look like that. Easily.

Fine, then provide the complete data to prove it. Until then, it looks like someone just unthinkingly scribbled a line on a map.

Provide complete data?? I hope you are not talking to me, the PP, because I'm not Russian intelligence. LOL.
I was just talking about the abilities of the jet. And that can fly any scribbled line on a map. What it looks like, and what is possible, are two very different things.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Analysts have looked at the map showing the Russians' account of how the jet was shot down, and conclude the Russian map is a lie, because the SU-24 could not have possibly made the sharp right turn shown on the map.



Dishonesty piled on dishonesty, all looking to provoke. Question is, who is foolish enough to take the bait?

No, no. You are wrong about the SU. How can you make this assumption?
The SU-24 could make a maneuver like that. I've seen it do that and more.
If it flies up straight (vertically) and then rolls to the side, the flight path on a map -two dimensional- could look like that. Easily.

Fine, then provide the complete data to prove it. Until then, it looks like someone just unthinkingly scribbled a line on a map.

jsteele wrote:Today the Russians claimed that ISIS has been exporting its oil through Turkey and that Erdogan and his family are involved in the trade. Turkey is the only border Syria has to the north, so it makes sense that's where their oil would go.

Al-Araby Al-Jadeed, which publishes a widely read newspaper in Arabic and English and is linked to accused former Knesset member Azmi Bishara, claims Kurdish and Turkish smugglers transport the oil out of Syria and Iraq before selling it at rock bottom prices. According to the report, which was denied by Jerusalem, Israel is the primary buyer of the oil, with “several brokers” involved in purchase and transport.


Most of the oil comes from two fields in Iraq and the Deir el-Zour site in Syria, where production runs from sunset to sunrise supervised by workers and engineers kept on in their jobs by IS after it captured the territory, according to the report.

It is then transported to the Kurdish city of Zakhu in a triangle of land near the borders of Syria, Iraq and Turkey where Israeli and Turkish mediators bid on the shipments.

Once a price is agreed upon, the oil is transported to the Turkish city of Silop and

jsteele
Site Admin

Joined: 11/12/2007 23:38
Messages: 21146
Online
Today the Russians claimed that ISIS has been exporting its oil through Turkey and that Erdogan and his family are involved in the trade. Turkey is the only border Syria has to the north, so it makes sense that's where their oil would go.

terrorist group Isis (Islamic State) is so desperate to fund its military activities in Iraq and Syria that it is secretly selling oil to its mortal enemy: the regime of President Bashar Assad.

Islamic State has become the world's best-funded terror group by seizing oil fields across Syria and northern Iraq, selling it to brokers in Turkey from where it has been traced to other countries in the Middle East – and apparently even to Israel.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was recently going around FB.


If in case it was all too confusing for you, here's a summary:

President Assad (who is bad) is a nasty guy who got so nasty his people rebelled and the Rebels (who are good) started winning (hurrah!).

But then some of the rebels turned a bit nasty and are now called Islamic State (who are definitely bad!) while some continued to support democracy (who are still good.)

So the Americans (who are good ) started bombing Islamic State (who are bad ) and giving arms to the Syrian Rebels (who are good ) so they could fight Assad (who is still bad) which was good.

There is a breakaway state in the north run by the Kurds who want to fight IS (which is good) but the Turkish authorities think they are bad, so the U.S. says they are bad while secretly thinking they're good and giving them guns to fight IS (which is good) but that is another matter.

Getting back to Syria.

So President Putin (who is bad because he invaded Crimea and the Ukraine and killed lots of folks, including that nice Russian man in London with polonium poisoned sushi, has decided to back Assad (who is still bad) by attacking IS (who are also bad ) which is sort of a good thing (!?).

But Putin (still bad) thinks the Syrian Rebels (who are good) are also bad, and so he bombs them too, much to the annoyance of the Americans (who are good) who are busy backing and arming the rebels (who are also good).

Now Iran (who used to be bad, but now they have agreed not to build any nuclear weapons with which to bomb Israel are now good) are going to provide ground troops to support Assad (still bad) as are the Russians (bad) who now have ground troops and aircraft in Syria.

So a Coalition of Assad (still bad) Putin (extra bad) and the Iranians (good, but in a bad sort of way) are going to attack IS (who are bad which is good, but also the Syrian Rebels (who are good) which is bad.

Now the British (obviously good, except that silly anti-Semite who leads the Labor Party, Mr. Corbyn in the corduroy jacket, who is bad) and the Americans (also good) cannot attack Assad (still bad) for fear of upsetting Putin (bad) and Iran (good/bad) and now they have to accept that Assad might not be that bad after all compared to IS (super bad -- see Paris, November 2015).

So Assad (bad) is now probably good, being better than IS and, because Putin and Iran are also fighting IS, that may now make them good. America (still good) will find it hard to arm a group of rebels being attacked by the Russians for fear of upsetting Mr. Putin (now good) and that nice mad Ayatollah in Iran (also good?) and so they may be forced to say that the Rebels are now bad, or at the very least abandon them to their fate. This will lead most of them to flee to Turkey and on to Europe or join IS (still the only consistently bad).

To Sunni Muslims an attack by Shia Muslims (Assad and Iran) backed by Russians will be seen as something of a Holy War. Therefore, the ranks of IS will now be seen by the Sunnis as the only Jihadis fighting in the Holy War and hence many Muslims will now see IS as good (duh).

Sunni Muslims will also see the lack of action by Britain and America in support of their Sunni rebel brothers as something of a betrayal (might have a point?) and hence we will be seen as bad.

So now we have America (now bad) and Britain (also bad) providing limited support to Sunni Rebels (bad ) many of whom are looking to IS (good/bad ) for support against Assad (now good) who, along with Iran (also good) and Putin (now, straining credulity, good ) are attempting to retake the country Assad used to run before all this started.

Got it?

It's scary to think that millions who subscribe to FB will read this and come away thinking they know the facts.

It is nonsense such as this that defines ignorance.

The author could have saved himself the trouble by writing:

The crisis in Syria was caused by the US trying to destroy Syria to the US' own geopolitical and strategic advantage by creating and fueling a civil war to oust another democratically elected president unwilling to bend to Washington's will.

End of story.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Analysts have looked at the map showing the Russians' account of how the jet was shot down, and conclude the Russian map is a lie, because the SU-24 could not have possibly made the sharp right turn shown on the map.



Dishonesty piled on dishonesty, all looking to provoke. Question is, who is foolish enough to take the bait?

No, no. You are wrong about the SU. How can you make this assumption?
The SU-24 could make a maneuver like that. I've seen it do that and more.
If it flies up straight (vertically) and then rolls to the side, the flight path on a map -two dimensional- could look like that. Easily.

jsteele wrote:Today the Russians claimed that ISIS has been exporting its oil through Turkey and that Erdogan and his family are involved in the trade. Turkey is the only border Syria has to the north, so it makes sense that's where their oil would go.

jsteele wrote:Today the Russians claimed that ISIS has been exporting its oil through Turkey and that Erdogan and his family are involved in the trade. Turkey is the only border Syria has to the north, so it makes sense that's where their oil would go.

Anonymous wrote:Analysts have looked at the map showing the Russians' account of how the jet was shot down, and conclude the Russian map is a lie, because the SU-24 could not have possibly made the sharp right turn shown on the map.



Dishonesty piled on dishonesty, all looking to provoke. Question is, who is foolish enough to take the bait?