Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ABC News : Taliban video showing attack on Camp Salerno,which killed or wounded 150+

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 5
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 template Next
  • #46
    The Washington Post are reporting it using the same sources that confirmed the attack. If you accept that as proof then you have to accept their casualty claim too. No cherry picking sources allowed. Taliban cited Washington Post, therefore Taliban are using them as proof Washington Post proves Taliban only killed two soldiers, therefore Taliban prove their failure.

    [QUOTE=Afghanistan2010;658085][B]He is no different [COLOR="Red"]than us[/COLOR][/B],[B]he[COLOR="Red"] blindly believes [/COLOR]in the words [COLOR="Red"]of other men[/COLOR][/B],:[/QUOTE]

    2010 Admitting he's a blind believer not in God, but what other men says.

    Comment

    • #47
      Originally posted by RevolutionThroughReason View Post
      The Washington Post are reporting it using the same sources that confirmed the attack. If you accept that as proof then you have to accept their casualty claim too. No cherry picking sources allowed. Taliban cited Washington Post, therefore Taliban are using them as proof Washington Post proves Taliban only killed two soldiers, therefore Taliban prove their failure.

      What does the Taliban have to do with you believing everything the US military says?

      Where did the Taliban cite the Washington Post in regards to this incident?

      Back to the POINT, basically you believe the US military press releases as the truth, whether their press releases are cited by the WaPo, Times, Reuters, or CNN.

      Typically, all news media pick up their press releases and the official version. Thats beside the point, a non-issue as I am not questioning the validity of the US military official press release since it is not relevant to my central point which is this>>>

      >>The point is you hold the US military official versions of events as the truth.

      Regards.

      Comment

      • #48
        apparently you didn't bother watching the whole video. They're using the Washington Post as evidence right? The Washington Post sources are verify it was only two soldiers dead right? Then by using this s evidence Taliban confirm they didn't kill 150.

        do you need it broken down further?
        [QUOTE=Afghanistan2010;658085][B]He is no different [COLOR="Red"]than us[/COLOR][/B],[B]he[COLOR="Red"] blindly believes [/COLOR]in the words [COLOR="Red"]of other men[/COLOR][/B],:[/QUOTE]

        2010 Admitting he's a blind believer not in God, but what other men says.

        Comment

        • #49
          Originally posted by RevolutionThroughReason View Post
          The Washington Post are reporting it using the same sources that confirmed the attack. If you accept that as proof then you have to accept their casualty claim too. No cherry picking sources allowed. Taliban cited Washington Post, therefore Taliban are using them as proof Washington Post proves Taliban only killed two soldiers, therefore Taliban prove their failure.

          The point being made is that you hold the US military official press releases as the truth irrespective of what News source cites it, a non-issue (CNN, WaPo, Times>>its all the same since they a relaying the US military press release). They are all restating the US military press release.

          You holding the US military press release as truth. Thats not a debate .

          Comment

          • #50
            So do the Taliban, hence they put up the Washington Post article as evidence. So your point was pointless.
            [QUOTE=Afghanistan2010;658085][B]He is no different [COLOR="Red"]than us[/COLOR][/B],[B]he[COLOR="Red"] blindly believes [/COLOR]in the words [COLOR="Red"]of other men[/COLOR][/B],:[/QUOTE]

            2010 Admitting he's a blind believer not in God, but what other men says.

            Comment

            • #51
              Originally posted by RevolutionThroughReason View Post
              apparently you didn't bother watching the whole video. They're using the Washington Post as evidence right? The Washington Post sources are verify it was only two soldiers dead right? Then by using this s evidence Taliban confirm they didn't kill 150.

              do you need it broken down further?
              I am stating that you hold the US military press release as truth. The Taliban are not stating that there were 2 US casualties, and nor is that part of this supposed debate at all since according to you the Taliban are full of lies, so lets leave that aside.


              The Washington Post is writing an article talking about the inconsistencies of the US military press releases (the 2 ones they cite). The WaPo themselves are not stating what is fact and what is not fact nor are they playing judge.

              I will say it one last time for it to sink - The WaPo is relaying the two different US press releases. You find the US military press releases to be the truth.

              Obviously (if this is even true since I dont have the time to watch a full length video of this) the Taliban would pick up on the WaPo reporting the inconsistency of US military press releases.


              It doesnt mean a thing. The WaPo isnt even stating that the US military press release of 2 casualties is the truth. Journalists rarely do that dude.


              But its A OK for you to believe the US military press releases (which is what you are doing). Im just pointing it out.
              Last edited by Shah-i-Kot; 07-25-2012, 04:21 PM.

              Comment

              • #52
                Im just pointing out that you beleive the US military press releases to be the truth.


                There is nothing else to this issue since according to you, the Taliban distort and exaggerate. Hence, that issue is not a part of this supposed debate. What exactly are you doing? Arguing with yourself?


                Its fine for you to believe the US military press releases, and I am just pointing it out.

                Comment

                • #53
                  and I'm just pointing out that the Taliban use the same evidence you accuse me of favoring as their evidence of their bogus successes.

                  why are you focusing on me and not ridiculing the Taliban? seems like you're drawing attention away from the topic.
                  [QUOTE=Afghanistan2010;658085][B]He is no different [COLOR="Red"]than us[/COLOR][/B],[B]he[COLOR="Red"] blindly believes [/COLOR]in the words [COLOR="Red"]of other men[/COLOR][/B],:[/QUOTE]

                  2010 Admitting he's a blind believer not in God, but what other men says.

                  Comment

                  • #54
                    Originally posted by RevolutionThroughReason View Post
                    and I'm just pointing out that the Taliban use the same evidence you accuse me of favoring as their evidence of their bogus successes.

                    why are you focusing on me and not ridiculing the Taliban? seems like you're drawing attention away from the topic.
                    What do the Taliban have to do with this?

                    WaPo is a news source that relays news. They wrote an article on the inconsistency of the US military press release.

                    Excuse me buddy, but I cited that news source refuting your earlier retarded claims that this event did not even happen at this specific base.

                    That source does nothing to back up your claims of 2 US casualties since all they are doing is reporting on the 2 different US military press release on the same event.


                    BUt its fine for you to believe the US military press releases. Im not saying you should not, Im just pointing it out.

                    BTW, the WaPo source does not work in your favor at all, and ripped all your other stupid and retarded claims (event did not happen) and threw it out the window.

                    In fact, it leaves the question lingering as to how much distortions and cover up the US military is involved in regards to casualties.

                    Dont worry, you did not lose anything since there was no debate/ "argument" of yours to begin with.

                    Comment

                    • #55
                      Originally posted by RevolutionThroughReason View Post
                      and I'm just pointing out that the Taliban use the same evidence you accuse me of favoring as their evidence of their bogus successes.

                      why are you focusing on me and not ridiculing the Taliban? seems like you're drawing attention away from the topic.
                      Does it suprise you that the Taliban would pick up on the WaPo article which talks about US military press releases inconsistencies? The US military would do that same too. This is a non-issue and beside the point being made.

                      How do you even extrapolate that WaPo is backing the second US military press release to be the truth (about 2 US deaths)? They did not do that at all.

                      In fact you are drawing attention away from your own retarded claims (first that the event did not happen at all). Im simply stating that you believe the US military press releases to be the truth. Only after you realized that the US military confirmed the event, did you accept it, and then you spined nearly word for word their next story, stating that it is all an exaggeration!!

                      The WaPo is not doing what you are doing at all. These two have nothing to do with the issue at hand which is me pointing out that you hold the official US military versions of events to be true.

                      Comment

                      • #56
                        watch the video in its entirety; you'll see the Taliban are citing the Washington Post article as confirmation. The source relays the statements of the U.S. Military, regardless of whether or not the U.S changed earlier statements. writing an extra long post to make a nonsensical theory make sense won't succeed in doing so. They didn't rip up my clams; I self- modified my claims when more information was available to me, you can't "rip up" what I agree on. You're just relying on previous statements, not modified statements. The Taliban failed ....their video shows it, the Talliban used this source, and thus veriffy they only killed two soldiers. Whether you can cope with it or not doesn't change it.

                        The "questions" you're lingering are just conspiracy theoristic nonsense; if you want to explore that route, say good bye to having logical assessment of reality. Only evidence counts. Not delusional imaginations who are mulling over "possibilities" that's your expertise.

                        till your next ten line attempt to over compensate for failed argument as you would say "regards"
                        [QUOTE=Afghanistan2010;658085][B]He is no different [COLOR="Red"]than us[/COLOR][/B],[B]he[COLOR="Red"] blindly believes [/COLOR]in the words [COLOR="Red"]of other men[/COLOR][/B],:[/QUOTE]

                        2010 Admitting he's a blind believer not in God, but what other men says.

                        Comment

                        • #57
                          Originally posted by RevolutionThroughReason
                          watch the video in its entirety; you'll see the Taliban are citing the Washington Post article as confirmation. The source relays the statements of the U.S. Military, regardless of whether or not the U.S changed earlier statements. writing an extra long post to make a nonsensical theory make sense won't succeed in doing so. They didn't rip up my clams; I self- modified my claims when more information was available to me, you can't "rip up" what I agree on. You're just relying on previous statements, not modified statements. The Taliban failed ....their video shows it

                          The "questions" you're lingering are just conspiracy theoristic nonsense; if you want to explore that route, say good bye to having logical assessment of reality. Only evidence counts. Not delusional imaginations who are mulling over "possibilities" that's your expertise.


                          First of all buddy, the WaPo article I cited does not help your supposed non-existent "argument" (there is none) in any way. They are not backing either of the US military press releases and neither are the Taliban, and nor is the WaPo backing the Taliban version of events. They are just pointing out the inconsistency of the US military press releases, not lending credence to either of the press releases.

                          Please increase your reading comprehension. Resorting to childish talk about conspiracy theories is your game, not mine.

                          Recall you are the one that said that this attack on this base did not even happen in the first place.


                          LOL buddy,
                          Last edited by Shah-i-Kot; 07-25-2012, 04:51 PM.

                          Comment

                          • #58
                            Originally posted by lynx View Post
                            Does it suprise you that the Taliban would pick up on the WaPo article which talks about US military press releases inconsistencies? The US military would do that same too. This is a non-issue and beside the point being made.

                            How do you even extrapolate that WaPo is backing the second US military press release to be the truth (about 2 US deaths)? They did not do that at all.

                            In fact you are drawing attention away from your own retarded claims (first that the event did not happen at all). Im simply stating that you believe the US military press releases to be the truth. Only after you realized that the US military confirmed the event, did you accept it, and then you spined nearly word for word their next story, stating that it is all an exaggeration!!

                            The WaPo is not doing what you are doing at all. These two have nothing to do with the issue at hand which is me pointing out that you hold the official US military versions of events to be true.


                            That's the thing though, the Washington Post article just says that the U.S. Military gave more information later. That happens all the time when investigations are done, Doesn't really prove anything about "changing" stories. Unless you can prove they had full information. By embracing this article , the Taliban verify they did not kill 150 soldiers
                            [QUOTE=Afghanistan2010;658085][B]He is no different [COLOR="Red"]than us[/COLOR][/B],[B]he[COLOR="Red"] blindly believes [/COLOR]in the words [COLOR="Red"]of other men[/COLOR][/B],:[/QUOTE]

                            2010 Admitting he's a blind believer not in God, but what other men says.

                            Comment

                            • #59
                              Originally posted by lynx View Post
                              First of all buddy, the WaPo article I cited does not help your supposed non-existent "argument" (there is none) in any way. They are not backing either of the US military press releases and neither are the Taliban, and nor is the WaPo backing the Taliban version of events. They are just pointing out the inconsistency of the US military press releases, not lending credence to either of the press releases.

                              Please increase your reading comprehension. Resorting to childish talk about conspiracy theories is your game, not mine.

                              Recall you are the one that said that this attack on this base did not even happen in the first place.


                              LOL buddy,

                              No you delude yourself into believing it doesn't but it does, it corroborates that only two soldiers were killed, doesn't sound like they're claiming that the U.S. Military changed their story

                              The Defense Department did later identify a soldier who died three days after the attack as Pfc. Vincent J. Ellis, 22, a member of the 4th Airborne Brigade Combat Team, 25th Infantry Division.
                              The Taliban endorse this, you're arguing for nothing. You're the one grasping for stuff I already self corrected.
                              [QUOTE=Afghanistan2010;658085][B]He is no different [COLOR="Red"]than us[/COLOR][/B],[B]he[COLOR="Red"] blindly believes [/COLOR]in the words [COLOR="Red"]of other men[/COLOR][/B],:[/QUOTE]

                              2010 Admitting he's a blind believer not in God, but what other men says.

                              Comment

                              • #60
                                Originally posted by RevolutionThroughReason View Post
                                That's the thing though, the Washington Post article just says that the U.S. Military gave more information later.
                                The Washington Post did not say that, they just relayed what the US military said. Here it is below

                                http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/attack-on-us-outpost-in-afghanistan-worse-than-originally-reported/2012/06/16/gJQAlyaihV_story.html

                                "U.S. military officials said they did not try to play down the severity of the attack on the Salerno base. They said it is their long-standing policy to withhold information about wounded or injured troops. At Salerno, many of the service members listed as casualties went to the base clinic as a precaution to be tested for traumatic brain injury, the officials said.
                                “When you do look at the number of wounded . . . it looks like ‘oh my goodness,’ ” said a senior NATO official who spoke on the condition of anonymity, citing the policy against discussing non-lethal casualties. “It’s not a coverup. It is what it is.”
                                ^Thats not the Washington Post saying it, but a US official. You understand journalism and reporting.

                                That happens all the time when investigations are done, Doesn't really prove anything about "changing" stories. Unless you can prove they had full information. By embracing this article , the Taliban verify they did not kill 150 soldiers
                                This is my point, you regurgitate exactly what the US military says, nearly word for word.


                                "U.S. military officials said they did not try to play down the severity of the attack on the Salerno base. They said it is their long-standing policy to withhold information about wounded or injured troops. At Salerno, many of the service members listed as casualties went to the base clinic as a precaution to be tested for traumatic brain injury, the officials said.
                                “When you do look at the number of wounded . . . it looks like ‘oh my goodness,’ ” said a senior NATO official who spoke on the condition of anonymity, citing the policy against discussing non-lethal casualties. “It’s not a coverup. It is what it is.”


                                LOL, the WaPo article does not work in the US military's favor or yours.

                                Its shows that they are distorting and covering things up. Look at the title.
                                Last edited by Shah-i-Kot; 07-25-2012, 05:03 PM.

                                Comment

                                Previous 1 2 3 4 5 template Next
                                Working...
                                X