Military Events in Syria and Iraq thread #3

[sculptor]

......................
2) Aliens did it (obviously the most plausible answer).

OK

 

[Schmelzer]

Time to return to the topic of the thread, given that there are other threads where the same chemical weapons question is discussed.

First, the fighting in Northern Hama continues, the Tiger forces have retaken Maardes. This does not mean much yet, this town/village is difficult to defend if Souran is not taken short time after this, we will see.

An interesting development is that near Aleppo, new fighting has started.

Today, Khirbet Anadan has been taken, North-West of Anadan. Already yesterday some advances have been made directly West of Aleppo, in the region visible below at the upper map. Above attacks, combined, make a lot of sense as an attempt to encircle Anandan as well as everything East of it, in other words, the aim of finally securing the North-West of Aleppo.

The Syrian army has also attacked and reached some progress in the East of Damask.

So, the Syrians seem unimpressed and continue to fight those they name terrorists - joepistoles beloved rebels - on several fronts.

 

[iceaura]

The claim that you have given some arguments which I haven't been reading is your claim

I made no such claim. Why did you change the subject like that? Do you do that on purpose, or are you unaware of the way your mind alters what you read to match you presumptions?

You name it BS (without any arguments)

As I said, long ago: I get bored repeating the same obvious arguments in the face of your repetition of American fascist propaganda. You post it, I call you on it. Saves useless trouble.

Hm. If "politically correct" is a rightwing propaganda meme, and nothing more, then, of course, your postings will be politically correct. Because you make leftwing political propaganda, and if "politically correct" is only a rightwing meme, they can apply it to your postings too

I don't make propaganda, of any kind. "Politically correct" is not applied to leftwing anything, in particular. And rightwing propaganda memes do not create their own reality - they remain (in the real world) lies, slanders, deceptions, various forms of bs (things only accurate by chance), etc.

So of course you can apply such memes as the rightwing propagandists you emulate do. At which point you verify my observation of your posting - you have immersed your mind in a virtual reality headset of American fascist propaganda, rightwing corporate authoritarian developed memes and terms, and you are posting from that world.

Wow, 04/12/2017
iceaura agrees with Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin!?!

Old news. I have also agreed with him about US deployment of military force worldwide, the US incarceration rate and drug war prosecutions, and several other matters that don't come to mind off hand.
I also agreed with Donald Trump about several matters, btw. And you. It's quite a collection, these people who have said things I agree with.

The other possibilities are:
1) Assad is losing his country to Russian and Iranian occupiers, and his army has almost ceased to exist except on paper, thus he feels compelled to use chemical weapons in order to win battles and stay relevant.
2) Aliens did it (obviously the most plausible answer).

There's yet another: Assad did it to prove he could, despite outside disapproval - that there was no help coming from the UN, Americans, or anyone else. The classic State terrorist motive.

 

[Schmelzer]

"Politically correct" is not applied to leftwing anything, in particular.

Let's compare this with:

None of my posting here is politically correct, in any meaningful sense.

I would say, in this sentence "politically correct" was applied in some way to iceauras postings. So, we have to conclude that they are not leftwing anything? LOL.

 

[spidergoat]

First, the fighting in Northern Hama continues, the Tiger forces have retaken Maardes.

How do you know? Where do you get your news?

 

[Schmelzer]

Actually I prefer https://glav.su but check also with other sources. Given that it is Russian, and I think nobody reads here Russian, I do not give links to it.

 

[iceaura]

I would say, in this sentence "politically correct" was applied in some way to iceauras postings.

You would be wrong.

(You are also wrong in your interpretation of the first sentence, which does not mean that "politically correct" is never applied to leftwing stuff. Instead, it means that it is not applied to stuff because of, or in reaction to, its being leftwing, with the implication that people who use the term are just slapping it on anything they don't like - without rhyme or reason, as they say. It would be applied to leftwing stuff by chance, but not "in particular".

That's a point of English usage. You get a pass, not being a native speaker.

That is also, however, a description of your use of "politically correct" here - random, essentially. Tone deaf. Nothing I post here is "politically correct". You don't get a pass on that because you claim to be expert at dealing with propaganda, and that's pretty basic stuff in the US.)

Meanwhile, the various versions of what happened in Khan Sheikhoun are all getting more parts and auxiliaries: http://thehill.com/policy/defense/3...emical-weapons-communications-in-syria-report
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...rication-us-russia-donald-trump-a7682046.html

 

[Schmelzer]

(You are also wrong in your interpretation of the first sentence, which does not mean that "politically correct" is never applied to leftwing stuff. Instead, it means that it is not applied to stuff because of, or in reaction to, its being leftwing, with the implication that people who use the term are just slapping it on anything they don't like - without rhyme or reason, as they say. It would be applied to leftwing stuff by chance, but not "in particular".
That's a point of English usage. You get a pass, not being a native speaker.

Ok, thanks for the explanation.

That is also, however, a description of your use of "politically correct" here - random, essentially. Tone deaf. Nothing I post here is "politically correct". You don't get a pass on that because you claim to be expert at dealing with propaganda, and that's pretty basic stuff in the US.)

No, my use is not random. Even if I admit that I don't know the complexities of the actual version of what is "politically correct" and what is not, it is quite easy to get negatives - that Trump's talk is not politically correct is easy to find out without knowing these details. To get out something positive - that you care about being politically correct - is, of course, more difficult. But we have communicated a lot, and I don't remember anything which, in my incomplete knowledge, was clearly politically incorrect.

Which was the base of my assumption that, with some probability, that you care about this. And, let's note, you have not provided any counterexample. So I yet have no evidence that you have really violated political correctness in some of your postings. (Just for information - this is, indeed, not really important.)

I do not use "politically correct" just for everything from the left. If you would ask me if, say, Chomsky follows political correctness, I would simply say I don't know.

Meanwhile, the various versions of what happened in Khan Sheikhoun are all getting more parts and auxiliaries: http://thehill.com/policy/defense/3...emical-weapons-communications-in-syria-report

We will hear about the content of these communications (if not, forget about it). My bet is that this will be some out of context quotes of cynical joking about this. At least, one has to have in mind this possibility. Simply, I know how people react on permanent media lies about what one thinks, and to use such "evil" language in cynical/satirical ways, as if one would be really that evil, is quite common. I have done this too, with friends, in completely different context (and joking about completely different lies). So, if they have enough conversation, they will find such things. Quote them without the context, without the laughing around, and you will have "evidence". Whatever, we will see what is really presented.

 

[iceaura]

No, my use is not random

Yes, it is.

I do not use "politically correct" just for everything from the left

You don't use it meaningfully at all. You seem to have some kind of confused notion that it refers to agreement with official stances or establishment politics.

Which was the base of my assumption that, with some probability, that you care about this.

Errors of perception make a poor basis for assumptions. And vice versa.

But we have communicated a lot, and I don't remember anything which, in my incomplete knowledge, was clearly politically incorrect.

Have we now. If so, you also cannot remember anything I posted that was clearly politically correct. Neither term applies, to any of my posting.

Your use of the terms, on the other hand, does carry information about you - what you find plausible, what kinds of "arguments" you have accepted and incorporated into your view.

We will hear about the content of these communications (if not, forget about it). My bet is that this will be some out of context quotes of cynical joking about this. At least, one has to have in mind this possibility.

And also the possibility - given the alleged timing and specificity of reference - that even if joking they were joking about an upcoming event, something they knew was going to happen.

 

[Schmelzer]

Yes, it is.

An accusation without evidence. So who cares.

You don't use it meaningfully at all. You seem to have some kind of confused notion that it refers to agreement with official stances or establishment politics.

Nice fantasy but wrong.

And also the possibility - given the alleged timing and specificity of reference - that even if joking they were joking about an upcoming event, something they knew was going to happen.

That's easy - joepistoles comrades were losing again, their offensive has failed, and everybody expected that a hate media campaign in the West will follow. You know, with all the usual things, last hospital desctruction, chemical weapons and all this. This is a well-known meme in the anti-American communities - if the Syrian army is successful, one has to expect a Western counterattack in the infowar. Its already so established that one starts to use it as an indication: A new Western infowar attack - means, the situation is really bad for the terrorists. Here, an example from 31.3. of this meme:

О! Прэлэстно! К нам вернулось "Россияразбомбилапоследнийгоспитальввосточномалеппо!!!!!!!"

Видать, делишки у тварей в Гуте подстухли после крайней вылазки. И общечеловеки враз озаботились страданьями 400 тысяч невинных детишечек: #КГОВАВЫЙТИРАНОСТАНОВИНАСТУПЛЕНИЕ!!!

Пожелаем сирийцам всемерно развить наметившиеся успехи

(source)

Rough translation: "Excellent! We have a return of the "RussiansbombedthelasthospitalofEastAleppo!!!!!"

Looks like the situation of the ... in Ghouta going bad after the last failure. And the ... immediately started to care about the fate of 400 thousands inncocent children: #BLOODYDICTATORSTOPATTACKING!!!

I wish the Syrians will develop their already visible success

"

 

[iceaura]

An accusation without evidence. So who cares.

You don't. Information is not something you care about.

"You don't use it meaningfully at all. You seem to have some kind of confused notion that it refers to agreement with official stances or establishment politics."
Nice fantasy but wrong.

Not according to your posts, and your explanation - that is your explanation of your use of the term, explicitly, in post 668. You remember me as never "violating" political correctness, you don't know whether Chomsky "agrees" with political correctness, etc.

That's easy - joepistoles comrades were losing again, their offensive has failed, and everybody expected that a hate media campaign in the West will follow

Which they apparently predicted, accurate to the kind, day, and location. According to the intelligence release.
So grant the possibility that they knew the kind, day, and location, eh?

Sure it could be false flag. But it looks like a real one.
.

 

[Schmelzer]

You remember me as never "violating" political correctness, you don't know whether Chomsky "agrees" with political correctness, etc.

The point being? I have explained this difference. Have you not understood it?

Which they apparently predicted, accurate to the kind, day, and location. According to the intelligence release.
So grant the possibility that they knew the kind, day, and location, eh?
Sure it could be false flag. But it looks like a real one.
.

Up to now I have not seen any details, so I cannot comment on this.