Meanwhile, In Syria

[QuantumTokoloshi]

Seems those mythical "moderate Islamic fundamentalists" in Aleppo, are only moderately targeting medical facilities and injured civilians. The lack of hysterical shouting about !!!! war crimes !!!! By the usual international suspects is rather damning in this case. Lucky those moderates are so moderate.

The Russians are not happy, and have given some pretty blunt interviews on this.

http://news.sky.com/story/russia-says-two-nurses-k...

It does look like East Aleppo will be in Syrian Government control by January, then the East and North of the country becomes the next step. Turkey and their Kurdish allies and enemies, will need some careful diplomacy.

Mr Erogan and family connections to ISIS oil gets a little clearer, thanks to Wikileaks. No wonder those long lines of ISIS oil tankers, ISIS oil wells and ISIS controlled oil storage facilities could never be found.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-05/wikileaks...

[Liokault]

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Seems those mythical "moderate Islamic fundamentalists" in Aleppo, are only moderately targeting medical facilities and injured civilians. The lack of hysterical shouting about !!!! war crimes !!!! By the usual international suspects is rather damning in this case. Lucky those moderates are so moderate.

Maybe because you spent so long arguing that bombing hospitals was just par for the course these days when Russia was accused of doing it....repeatedly.

Is bombing hospitals bad again now? Does this mean that Russia has stopped doing it now?

[QuantumTokoloshi]

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Seems those mythical "moderate Islamic fundamentalists" in Aleppo, are only moderately targeting medical facilities and injured civilians. The lack of hysterical shouting about !!!! war crimes !!!! By the usual international suspects is rather damning in this case. Lucky those moderates are so moderate.

Maybe because you spent so long arguing that bombing hospitals was just par for the course these days when Russia was accused of doing it....repeatedly.

Is bombing hospitals bad again now? Does this mean that Russia has stopped doing it now?

The bombing of the Afghan MSF hospital by the USA, the bombing of the Yemeni MSF hospital by the Saudis, the deliberate bombing of Hospitals in Fallujah in 2004 were all tragedies. I never excused any group of its responsibility.

It seems that when the Russians do it, it is a !!! war crime !!!, yet when the US or associated "allies" do it, it is merely a cost of war, so sorry, the infamous collateral damage euphemism. It is even more of an issue when US supported "moderate Islamic fundamentalist" groups are bombing hospitals, likely with US supplied weapons.

Consistency of response would be good.

Edited by QuantumTokoloshi on Wednesday 7th December 14:06

[Liokault]

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Seems those mythical "moderate Islamic fundamentalists" in Aleppo, are only moderately targeting medical facilities and injured civilians. The lack of hysterical shouting about !!!! war crimes !!!! By the usual international suspects is rather damning in this case. Lucky those moderates are so moderate.

Maybe because you spent so long arguing that bombing hospitals was just par for the course these days when Russia was accused of doing it....repeatedly.

Is bombing hospitals bad again now? Does this mean that Russia has stopped doing it now?

The bombing of the Afghan MSF hospital by the USA, the bombing of the Yemeni MSF hospital by the Saudis, the deliberate bombing of Hospitals in Fallujah in 2004 were all tragedies. I never excused any group of its responsibility.

It seems that when the Russians do it, it is a !!! war crime !!!, yet when the US or associated "allies" do it, it is merely a cost of war, so sorry, the infamous collateral damage euphemism.

Consistency of response would be good.

You still haven’t told us if hospital bombing is back to being bad, now Russia has apparently not hit any in the last few days.

It’s almost like you want to say it’s bad, but don’t want to say it’s bad when Russia does it.

[QuantumTokoloshi]

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Seems those mythical "moderate Islamic fundamentalists" in Aleppo, are only moderately targeting medical facilities and injured civilians. The lack of hysterical shouting about !!!! war crimes !!!! By the usual international suspects is rather damning in this case. Lucky those moderates are so moderate.

Maybe because you spent so long arguing that bombing hospitals was just par for the course these days when Russia was accused of doing it....repeatedly.

Is bombing hospitals bad again now? Does this mean that Russia has stopped doing it now?

The bombing of the Afghan MSF hospital by the USA, the bombing of the Yemeni MSF hospital by the Saudis, the deliberate bombing of Hospitals in Fallujah in 2004 were all tragedies. I never excused any group of its responsibility.

It seems that when the Russians do it, it is a !!! war crime !!!, yet when the US or associated "allies" do it, it is merely a cost of war, so sorry, the infamous collateral damage euphemism.

Consistency of response would be good.

You still haven’t told us if hospital bombing is back to being bad, now Russia has apparently not hit any in the last few days.

It’s almost like you want to say it’s bad, but don’t want to say it’s bad when Russia does it.

Perhaps you need to reread my response once or twice, actually read what I wrote, not what you would like to me to imply, to support your view.

[Liokault]

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Seems those mythical "moderate Islamic fundamentalists" in Aleppo, are only moderately targeting medical facilities and injured civilians. The lack of hysterical shouting about !!!! war crimes !!!! By the usual international suspects is rather damning in this case. Lucky those moderates are so moderate.

Maybe because you spent so long arguing that bombing hospitals was just par for the course these days when Russia was accused of doing it....repeatedly.

Is bombing hospitals bad again now? Does this mean that Russia has stopped doing it now?

The bombing of the Afghan MSF hospital by the USA, the bombing of the Yemeni MSF hospital by the Saudis, the deliberate bombing of Hospitals in Fallujah in 2004 were all tragedies. I never excused any group of its responsibility.

It seems that when the Russians do it, it is a !!! war crime !!!, yet when the US or associated "allies" do it, it is merely a cost of war, so sorry, the infamous collateral damage euphemism.

Consistency of response would be good.

You still haven’t told us if hospital bombing is back to being bad, now Russia has apparently not hit any in the last few days.

It’s almost like you want to say it’s bad, but don’t want to say it’s bad when Russia does it.

Perhaps you need to reread my response once or twice, actually read what I wrote, not what you would like to me to imply, to support your view.

I have read and re read your response. I’m confused.

You want to call it a war crime when it’s done by anyone other than Putin, but if anyone refers to any hospital attack actually done by Putin, you can't bring yourself to criticise it, you actually try to defend it by immediately pointing out that "everyone" attacks hospitals.

Hence my repeated question re are attacks on hospitals bad again in your mind, just like they weren’t when Putin was repeatedly bombing them?

[Liokault]

Let’s get a bit of clarity here:

Do you condemn this as a Russian led (or at least facilitated) atrocity? I'm looking for a yes/no, but I'm expecting a "well America once did..."


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/nov/19/alep...

"Another four hospitals were hit and forced to close on Friday, before the Omar bin Abdul Aziz facility was struck just after 8.30pm, capping the most deadly day yet for the medical system in Syria’s second city, which has been systematically targeted by Russian and regime jets over the past year"

[QuantumTokoloshi]

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Seems those mythical "moderate Islamic fundamentalists" in Aleppo, are only moderately targeting medical facilities and injured civilians. The lack of hysterical shouting about !!!! war crimes !!!! By the usual international suspects is rather damning in this case. Lucky those moderates are so moderate.

Maybe because you spent so long arguing that bombing hospitals was just par for the course these days when Russia was accused of doing it....repeatedly.

Is bombing hospitals bad again now? Does this mean that Russia has stopped doing it now?

The bombing of the Afghan MSF hospital by the USA, the bombing of the Yemeni MSF hospital by the Saudis, the deliberate bombing of Hospitals in Fallujah in 2004 were all tragedies. I never excused any group of its responsibility.

It seems that when the Russians do it, it is a !!! war crime !!!, yet when the US or associated "allies" do it, it is merely a cost of war, so sorry, the infamous collateral damage euphemism.

Consistency of response would be good.

You still haven’t told us if hospital bombing is back to being bad, now Russia has apparently not hit any in the last few days.

It’s almost like you want to say it’s bad, but don’t want to say it’s bad when Russia does it.

Perhaps you need to reread my response once or twice, actually read what I wrote, not what you would like to me to imply, to support your view.

I have read and re read your response. I’m confused.

You want to call it a war crime when it’s done by anyone other than Putin, but if anyone refers to any hospital attack actually done by Putin, you can't bring yourself to criticise it, you actually try to defend it by immediately pointing out that "everyone" attacks hospitals.

Hence my repeated question re are attacks on hospitals bad again in your mind, just like they weren’t when Putin was repeatedly bombing them?

Again, read what I have written, hospitals are not, and should not be targets, But when Russia does it, you have a chorus of usual suspects calling for war crimes. Yet, when US or "allies" do exactly the same, it is merely a cost of war, the old collateral damage.

The next question is, who is reporting these "hospitals"? Is it the infamous white hats, who seems to have a great ability in finding "hospitals" under every bomb dropped. The stories of the "moderates" using medical facilities as cover for military activities.

These are the UK and US allies, those mythical moderate Islamic fundamentalist in action.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a6b_1462402912

Now, perhaps you would like to give your view on the "moderates" in Aleppo, using civilians as human shields, to ensure civilian casualties, the same groups the USA is supporting with weapons and the UK is supporting with logistics? and who have directly targeted a medical facility, with no military connection ?

Edited by QuantumTokoloshi on Thursday 8th December 09:58

[Liokault]

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Seems those mythical "moderate Islamic fundamentalists" in Aleppo, are only moderately targeting medical facilities and injured civilians. The lack of hysterical shouting about !!!! war crimes !!!! By the usual international suspects is rather damning in this case. Lucky those moderates are so moderate.

Maybe because you spent so long arguing that bombing hospitals was just par for the course these days when Russia was accused of doing it....repeatedly.

Is bombing hospitals bad again now? Does this mean that Russia has stopped doing it now?

The bombing of the Afghan MSF hospital by the USA, the bombing of the Yemeni MSF hospital by the Saudis, the deliberate bombing of Hospitals in Fallujah in 2004 were all tragedies. I never excused any group of its responsibility.

It seems that when the Russians do it, it is a !!! war crime !!!, yet when the US or associated "allies" do it, it is merely a cost of war, so sorry, the infamous collateral damage euphemism.

Consistency of response would be good.

You still haven’t told us if hospital bombing is back to being bad, now Russia has apparently not hit any in the last few days.

It’s almost like you want to say it’s bad, but don’t want to say it’s bad when Russia does it.

Perhaps you need to reread my response once or twice, actually read what I wrote, not what you would like to me to imply, to support your view.

I have read and re read your response. I’m confused.

You want to call it a war crime when it’s done by anyone other than Putin, but if anyone refers to any hospital attack actually done by Putin, you can't bring yourself to criticise it, you actually try to defend it by immediately pointing out that "everyone" attacks hospitals.

Hence my repeated question re are attacks on hospitals bad again in your mind, just like they weren’t when Putin was repeatedly bombing them?

Again, read what I have written, hospitals are not, and should not be targets, But when Russia does it, you have a chorus of usual suspects calling for war crimes. Yet, when US or "allies" do exactly the same, it is merely a cost of war, the old collateral damage.

The next question is, who is reporting these "hospitals"? Is it the infamous white hats, who seems to have a great ability in finding "hospitals" under every bomb dropped.

Now, perhaps you would like to give your view on the "moderates" in Aleppo, using civilians as human shields, to ensure civilian casualties, the same groups the USA is supporting with weapons and the UK is supporting with logistics.

Ah, nice damage mitigation. So we have gotten as far as "it is bad but...". At least you are now admitting that Russia is bombing hospitals.


Human shields, yes despicable. But putting the QT filter on:


"Human sheilds are not, and should not be targets, But when The west does it, you have a chorus of usual suspects calling for war crimes. Yet, when Russia or "Syria" do exactly the same, it is merely a cost of war, the old collateral damage."

Am I doing this right?

[QuantumTokoloshi]

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Seems those mythical "moderate Islamic fundamentalists" in Aleppo, are only moderately targeting medical facilities and injured civilians. The lack of hysterical shouting about !!!! war crimes !!!! By the usual international suspects is rather damning in this case. Lucky those moderates are so moderate.

Maybe because you spent so long arguing that bombing hospitals was just par for the course these days when Russia was accused of doing it....repeatedly.

Is bombing hospitals bad again now? Does this mean that Russia has stopped doing it now?

The bombing of the Afghan MSF hospital by the USA, the bombing of the Yemeni MSF hospital by the Saudis, the deliberate bombing of Hospitals in Fallujah in 2004 were all tragedies. I never excused any group of its responsibility.

It seems that when the Russians do it, it is a !!! war crime !!!, yet when the US or associated "allies" do it, it is merely a cost of war, so sorry, the infamous collateral damage euphemism.

Consistency of response would be good.

You still haven’t told us if hospital bombing is back to being bad, now Russia has apparently not hit any in the last few days.

It’s almost like you want to say it’s bad, but don’t want to say it’s bad when Russia does it.

Perhaps you need to reread my response once or twice, actually read what I wrote, not what you would like to me to imply, to support your view.

I have read and re read your response. I’m confused.

You want to call it a war crime when it’s done by anyone other than Putin, but if anyone refers to any hospital attack actually done by Putin, you can't bring yourself to criticise it, you actually try to defend it by immediately pointing out that "everyone" attacks hospitals.

Hence my repeated question re are attacks on hospitals bad again in your mind, just like they weren’t when Putin was repeatedly bombing them?

Again, read what I have written, hospitals are not, and should not be targets, But when Russia does it, you have a chorus of usual suspects calling for war crimes. Yet, when US or "allies" do exactly the same, it is merely a cost of war, the old collateral damage.

The next question is, who is reporting these "hospitals"? Is it the infamous white hats, who seems to have a great ability in finding "hospitals" under every bomb dropped.

Now, perhaps you would like to give your view on the "moderates" in Aleppo, using civilians as human shields, to ensure civilian casualties, the same groups the USA is supporting with weapons and the UK is supporting with logistics.

Ah, nice damage mitigation. So we have gotten as far as "it is bad but...". At least you are now admitting that Russia is bombing hospitals.


Human shields, yes despicable. But putting the QT filter on:


"Human sheilds are not, and should not be targets, But when The west does it, you have a chorus of usual suspects calling for war crimes. Yet, when Russia or "Syria" do exactly the same, it is merely a cost of war, the old collateral damage."

Am I doing this right?

So the UK and US are enabling and supplying organisations that are using civilians as human shields in a conflict zone, and you support this ?

Next question is Russia the only country which has bombed hospitals ?

Let try these for a start.

[scherzkeks]

Liokault said:

Let’s get a bit of clarity here:

Do you condemn this as a Russian led (or at least facilitated) atrocity? I'm looking for a yes/no, but I'm expecting a "well America once did..."


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/nov/19/alep...

"Another four hospitals were hit and forced to close on Friday, before the Omar bin Abdul Aziz facility was struck just after 8.30pm, capping the most deadly day yet for the medical system in Syria’s second city, which has been systematically targeted by Russian and regime jets over the past year"

Your propaganda isn't even logical. Why would Russia and the Syrian govt. be targeting Syrian hospitals?

The last sentence in that Guardian prop piece reminds me of the "pulling babies from incubators" fairytale we heard during our illustrious campaign to free Iraq of its oil.

Edited by scherzkeks on Thursday 8th December 10:33

[Liokault]

scherzkeks said:

Your propaganda isn't even logical. Why would Russia and the Syrian govt. be targeting Syrian hospitals?

The last sentence in that Guardian prop piece reminds me of the "pulling babies from incubators" fairytale we heard during our illustrious campaign to free Iraq of its oil.

Edited by scherzkeks on Thursday 8th December 10:33

So were back to denying it? Maybe you should have a talk with QT and get the line straight as his position is off message

"hospitals are not, and should not be targets, But when Russia does it" (quoting QT)

[QuantumTokoloshi]

Liokault said:

scherzkeks said:

Your propaganda isn't even logical. Why would Russia and the Syrian govt. be targeting Syrian hospitals?

The last sentence in that Guardian prop piece reminds me of the "pulling babies from incubators" fairytale we heard during our illustrious campaign to free Iraq of its oil.

Edited by scherzkeks on Thursday 8th December 10:33

So were back to denying it? Maybe you should have a talk with QT and get the line straight as his position is off message

"hospitals are not, and should not be targets, But when Russia does it" (quoting QT)

You asked me questions, how about responding to mine ?

[Liokault]

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Seems those mythical "moderate Islamic fundamentalists" in Aleppo, are only moderately targeting medical facilities and injured civilians. The lack of hysterical shouting about !!!! war crimes !!!! By the usual international suspects is rather damning in this case. Lucky those moderates are so moderate.

Maybe because you spent so long arguing that bombing hospitals was just par for the course these days when Russia was accused of doing it....repeatedly.

Is bombing hospitals bad again now? Does this mean that Russia has stopped doing it now?

The bombing of the Afghan MSF hospital by the USA, the bombing of the Yemeni MSF hospital by the Saudis, the deliberate bombing of Hospitals in Fallujah in 2004 were all tragedies. I never excused any group of its responsibility.

It seems that when the Russians do it, it is a !!! war crime !!!, yet when the US or associated "allies" do it, it is merely a cost of war, so sorry, the infamous collateral damage euphemism.

Consistency of response would be good.

You still haven’t told us if hospital bombing is back to being bad, now Russia has apparently not hit any in the last few days.

It’s almost like you want to say it’s bad, but don’t want to say it’s bad when Russia does it.

Perhaps you need to reread my response once or twice, actually read what I wrote, not what you would like to me to imply, to support your view.

I have read and re read your response. I’m confused.

You want to call it a war crime when it’s done by anyone other than Putin, but if anyone refers to any hospital attack actually done by Putin, you can't bring yourself to criticise it, you actually try to defend it by immediately pointing out that "everyone" attacks hospitals.

Hence my repeated question re are attacks on hospitals bad again in your mind, just like they weren’t when Putin was repeatedly bombing them?

Again, read what I have written, hospitals are not, and should not be targets, But when Russia does it, you have a chorus of usual suspects calling for war crimes. Yet, when US or "allies" do exactly the same, it is merely a cost of war, the old collateral damage.

The next question is, who is reporting these "hospitals"? Is it the infamous white hats, who seems to have a great ability in finding "hospitals" under every bomb dropped.

Now, perhaps you would like to give your view on the "moderates" in Aleppo, using civilians as human shields, to ensure civilian casualties, the same groups the USA is supporting with weapons and the UK is supporting with logistics.

Ah, nice damage mitigation. So we have gotten as far as "it is bad but...". At least you are now admitting that Russia is bombing hospitals.


Human shields, yes despicable. But putting the QT filter on:


"Human sheilds are not, and should not be targets, But when The west does it, you have a chorus of usual suspects calling for war crimes. Yet, when Russia or "Syria" do exactly the same, it is merely a cost of war, the old collateral damage."

Am I doing this right?

So the UK and US are enabling and supplying organisations that are using civilians as human shields in a conflict zone, and you support this ?

Next question is Russia the only country which has bombed hospitals ?

Let try these for a start.

No and no.

[QuantumTokoloshi]

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Seems those mythical "moderate Islamic fundamentalists" in Aleppo, are only moderately targeting medical facilities and injured civilians. The lack of hysterical shouting about !!!! war crimes !!!! By the usual international suspects is rather damning in this case. Lucky those moderates are so moderate.

Maybe because you spent so long arguing that bombing hospitals was just par for the course these days when Russia was accused of doing it....repeatedly.

Is bombing hospitals bad again now? Does this mean that Russia has stopped doing it now?

The bombing of the Afghan MSF hospital by the USA, the bombing of the Yemeni MSF hospital by the Saudis, the deliberate bombing of Hospitals in Fallujah in 2004 were all tragedies. I never excused any group of its responsibility.

It seems that when the Russians do it, it is a !!! war crime !!!, yet when the US or associated "allies" do it, it is merely a cost of war, so sorry, the infamous collateral damage euphemism.

Consistency of response would be good.

You still haven’t told us if hospital bombing is back to being bad, now Russia has apparently not hit any in the last few days.

It’s almost like you want to say it’s bad, but don’t want to say it’s bad when Russia does it.

Perhaps you need to reread my response once or twice, actually read what I wrote, not what you would like to me to imply, to support your view.

I have read and re read your response. I’m confused.

You want to call it a war crime when it’s done by anyone other than Putin, but if anyone refers to any hospital attack actually done by Putin, you can't bring yourself to criticise it, you actually try to defend it by immediately pointing out that "everyone" attacks hospitals.

Hence my repeated question re are attacks on hospitals bad again in your mind, just like they weren’t when Putin was repeatedly bombing them?

Again, read what I have written, hospitals are not, and should not be targets, But when Russia does it, you have a chorus of usual suspects calling for war crimes. Yet, when US or "allies" do exactly the same, it is merely a cost of war, the old collateral damage.

The next question is, who is reporting these "hospitals"? Is it the infamous white hats, who seems to have a great ability in finding "hospitals" under every bomb dropped.

Now, perhaps you would like to give your view on the "moderates" in Aleppo, using civilians as human shields, to ensure civilian casualties, the same groups the USA is supporting with weapons and the UK is supporting with logistics.

Ah, nice damage mitigation. So we have gotten as far as "it is bad but...". At least you are now admitting that Russia is bombing hospitals.


Human shields, yes despicable. But putting the QT filter on:


"Human sheilds are not, and should not be targets, But when The west does it, you have a chorus of usual suspects calling for war crimes. Yet, when Russia or "Syria" do exactly the same, it is merely a cost of war, the old collateral damage."

Am I doing this right?

So the UK and US are enabling and supplying organisations that are using civilians as human shields in a conflict zone, and you support this ?

Next question is Russia the only country which has bombed hospitals ?

Let try these for a start.

No and no.

Thank you. Now is the UK complicit in the deaths of the current estimated 9000 civilian casaulties in Mosul, since the assault on the city began? Should they be providing air assets to the Iraqi government, when they are assaulting a city, with the strong possibility of civilian casualties, much like the support provided on the assault on Fallujah in 2004.

As your view is that the Russians are committing war crimes in Aleppo, by bombing a city, in support of the legitimate government, is the UK doing the same in Mosul and Nineveh? or is that "different"?

Edited by QuantumTokoloshi on Thursday 8th December 11:35

[Liokault]

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Seems those mythical "moderate Islamic fundamentalists" in Aleppo, are only moderately targeting medical facilities and injured civilians. The lack of hysterical shouting about !!!! war crimes !!!! By the usual international suspects is rather damning in this case. Lucky those moderates are so moderate.

Maybe because you spent so long arguing that bombing hospitals was just par for the course these days when Russia was accused of doing it....repeatedly.

Is bombing hospitals bad again now? Does this mean that Russia has stopped doing it now?

The bombing of the Afghan MSF hospital by the USA, the bombing of the Yemeni MSF hospital by the Saudis, the deliberate bombing of Hospitals in Fallujah in 2004 were all tragedies. I never excused any group of its responsibility.

It seems that when the Russians do it, it is a !!! war crime !!!, yet when the US or associated "allies" do it, it is merely a cost of war, so sorry, the infamous collateral damage euphemism.

Consistency of response would be good.

You still haven’t told us if hospital bombing is back to being bad, now Russia has apparently not hit any in the last few days.

It’s almost like you want to say it’s bad, but don’t want to say it’s bad when Russia does it.

Perhaps you need to reread my response once or twice, actually read what I wrote, not what you would like to me to imply, to support your view.

I have read and re read your response. I’m confused.

You want to call it a war crime when it’s done by anyone other than Putin, but if anyone refers to any hospital attack actually done by Putin, you can't bring yourself to criticise it, you actually try to defend it by immediately pointing out that "everyone" attacks hospitals.

Hence my repeated question re are attacks on hospitals bad again in your mind, just like they weren’t when Putin was repeatedly bombing them?

Again, read what I have written, hospitals are not, and should not be targets, But when Russia does it, you have a chorus of usual suspects calling for war crimes. Yet, when US or "allies" do exactly the same, it is merely a cost of war, the old collateral damage.

The next question is, who is reporting these "hospitals"? Is it the infamous white hats, who seems to have a great ability in finding "hospitals" under every bomb dropped.

Now, perhaps you would like to give your view on the "moderates" in Aleppo, using civilians as human shields, to ensure civilian casualties, the same groups the USA is supporting with weapons and the UK is supporting with logistics.

Ah, nice damage mitigation. So we have gotten as far as "it is bad but...". At least you are now admitting that Russia is bombing hospitals.


Human shields, yes despicable. But putting the QT filter on:


"Human sheilds are not, and should not be targets, But when The west does it, you have a chorus of usual suspects calling for war crimes. Yet, when Russia or "Syria" do exactly the same, it is merely a cost of war, the old collateral damage."

Am I doing this right?

So the UK and US are enabling and supplying organisations that are using civilians as human shields in a conflict zone, and you support this ?

Next question is Russia the only country which has bombed hospitals ?

Let try these for a start.

No and no.

Thank you. Now is the UK complicit in the deaths of the current estimated 9000 civilian casaulties in Mosul, since the assault on the city began? Should they be providing air assets to the Iraqi government, when they are assaulting a city, with the strong possibility of civilian casualties, much like the support provided on the assault on Fallujah in 2004.

As your view is that the Russians are committing war crimes in Aleppo, by bombing a city, in support of the legitimate government, is the UK doing the same in Mosul and Nineveh? or is that "different"?

Edited by QuantumTokoloshi on Thursday 8th December 11:35

"As your view is that the Russians are committing war crimes in Aleppo, by bombing a city, in support of the legitimate government, is the UK doing the same in Mosul and Nineveh? or is that "different"?"

Please point out to me where I have tried to defend the position of the UK.

Saying that current government of Syria is legitimate is like saying that the Tzar is the legitimate ruler of Russia.

I'm sad to see you have relapsed to a position of "it’s OK as long as I can point out another group that did it".

[QuantumTokoloshi]

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Seems those mythical "moderate Islamic fundamentalists" in Aleppo, are only moderately targeting medical facilities and injured civilians. The lack of hysterical shouting about !!!! war crimes !!!! By the usual international suspects is rather damning in this case. Lucky those moderates are so moderate.

Maybe because you spent so long arguing that bombing hospitals was just par for the course these days when Russia was accused of doing it....repeatedly.

Is bombing hospitals bad again now? Does this mean that Russia has stopped doing it now?

The bombing of the Afghan MSF hospital by the USA, the bombing of the Yemeni MSF hospital by the Saudis, the deliberate bombing of Hospitals in Fallujah in 2004 were all tragedies. I never excused any group of its responsibility.

It seems that when the Russians do it, it is a !!! war crime !!!, yet when the US or associated "allies" do it, it is merely a cost of war, so sorry, the infamous collateral damage euphemism.

Consistency of response would be good.

You still haven’t told us if hospital bombing is back to being bad, now Russia has apparently not hit any in the last few days.

It’s almost like you want to say it’s bad, but don’t want to say it’s bad when Russia does it.

Perhaps you need to reread my response once or twice, actually read what I wrote, not what you would like to me to imply, to support your view.

I have read and re read your response. I’m confused.

You want to call it a war crime when it’s done by anyone other than Putin, but if anyone refers to any hospital attack actually done by Putin, you can't bring yourself to criticise it, you actually try to defend it by immediately pointing out that "everyone" attacks hospitals.

Hence my repeated question re are attacks on hospitals bad again in your mind, just like they weren’t when Putin was repeatedly bombing them?

Again, read what I have written, hospitals are not, and should not be targets, But when Russia does it, you have a chorus of usual suspects calling for war crimes. Yet, when US or "allies" do exactly the same, it is merely a cost of war, the old collateral damage.

The next question is, who is reporting these "hospitals"? Is it the infamous white hats, who seems to have a great ability in finding "hospitals" under every bomb dropped.

Now, perhaps you would like to give your view on the "moderates" in Aleppo, using civilians as human shields, to ensure civilian casualties, the same groups the USA is supporting with weapons and the UK is supporting with logistics.

Ah, nice damage mitigation. So we have gotten as far as "it is bad but...". At least you are now admitting that Russia is bombing hospitals.


Human shields, yes despicable. But putting the QT filter on:


"Human sheilds are not, and should not be targets, But when The west does it, you have a chorus of usual suspects calling for war crimes. Yet, when Russia or "Syria" do exactly the same, it is merely a cost of war, the old collateral damage."

Am I doing this right?

So the UK and US are enabling and supplying organisations that are using civilians as human shields in a conflict zone, and you support this ?

Next question is Russia the only country which has bombed hospitals ?

Let try these for a start.

No and no.

Thank you. Now is the UK complicit in the deaths of the current estimated 9000 civilian casaulties in Mosul, since the assault on the city began? Should they be providing air assets to the Iraqi government, when they are assaulting a city, with the strong possibility of civilian casualties, much like the support provided on the assault on Fallujah in 2004.

As your view is that the Russians are committing war crimes in Aleppo, by bombing a city, in support of the legitimate government, is the UK doing the same in Mosul and Nineveh? or is that "different"?

Edited by QuantumTokoloshi on Thursday 8th December 11:35

"As your view is that the Russians are committing war crimes in Aleppo, by bombing a city, in support of the legitimate government, is the UK doing the same in Mosul and Nineveh? or is that "different"?"

Please point out to me where I have tried to defend the position of the UK.

Saying that current government of Syria is legitimate is like saying that the Tzar is the legitimate ruler of Russia.

I'm sad to see you have relapsed to a position of "it’s OK as long as I can point out another group that did it".

No trying to clarify your position, as it is unclear. So you disagree with the UK bombing Mosul etc. So you will then be in support of war crimes investigations into the Mosul and Nineveh assaults? As civilians are being killed in large numbers there, with UK and US support, much like the Russian / Aleppo situation.

Assad has a strong democratic mandate, as confirmed by international observers, or does that not fit with the "evil dictator Syrian Regime" narrative so beloved of the BBC and Co, likewise the "moderate Islamic fundamentalists" seems very hard to find, Al Qaeda and Co are very easy to find however. Odd that. Funny how the narrative "Islamic terrorists" in Mosul vs the "brave moderate freedom fighters" in Aleppo happens.

http://orientalreview.org/2014/06/03/international...

Edited by QuantumTokoloshi on Thursday 8th December 12:07

[scherzkeks]

Liokault said:

scherzkeks said:

Your propaganda isn't even logical. Why would Russia and the Syrian govt. be targeting Syrian hospitals?

The last sentence in that Guardian prop piece reminds me of the "pulling babies from incubators" fairytale we heard during our illustrious campaign to free Iraq of its oil.

Edited by scherzkeks on Thursday 8th December 10:33

So were back to denying it? Maybe you should have a talk with QT and get the line straight as his position is off message

"hospitals are not, and should not be targets, But when Russia does it" (quoting QT)

No message, just basic critical thinking.

[Transmitter Man]

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Seems those mythical "moderate Islamic fundamentalists" in Aleppo, are only moderately targeting medical facilities and injured civilians. The lack of hysterical shouting about !!!! war crimes !!!! By the usual international suspects is rather damning in this case. Lucky those moderates are so moderate.

Maybe because you spent so long arguing that bombing hospitals was just par for the course these days when Russia was accused of doing it....repeatedly.

Is bombing hospitals bad again now? Does this mean that Russia has stopped doing it now?

The bombing of the Afghan MSF hospital by the USA, the bombing of the Yemeni MSF hospital by the Saudis, the deliberate bombing of Hospitals in Fallujah in 2004 were all tragedies. I never excused any group of its responsibility.

It seems that when the Russians do it, it is a !!! war crime !!!, yet when the US or associated "allies" do it, it is merely a cost of war, so sorry, the infamous collateral damage euphemism.

Consistency of response would be good.

You still haven’t told us if hospital bombing is back to being bad, now Russia has apparently not hit any in the last few days.

It’s almost like you want to say it’s bad, but don’t want to say it’s bad when Russia does it.

Perhaps you need to reread my response once or twice, actually read what I wrote, not what you would like to me to imply, to support your view.

I have read and re read your response. I’m confused.

You want to call it a war crime when it’s done by anyone other than Putin, but if anyone refers to any hospital attack actually done by Putin, you can't bring yourself to criticise it, you actually try to defend it by immediately pointing out that "everyone" attacks hospitals.

Hence my repeated question re are attacks on hospitals bad again in your mind, just like they weren’t when Putin was repeatedly bombing them?

Again, read what I have written, hospitals are not, and should not be targets, But when Russia does it, you have a chorus of usual suspects calling for war crimes. Yet, when US or "allies" do exactly the same, it is merely a cost of war, the old collateral damage.

The next question is, who is reporting these "hospitals"? Is it the infamous white hats, who seems to have a great ability in finding "hospitals" under every bomb dropped. The stories of the "moderates" using medical facilities as cover for military activities.

These are the UK and US allies, those mythical moderate Islamic fundamentalist in action.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a6b_1462402912

Now, perhaps you would like to give your view on the "moderates" in Aleppo, using civilians as human shields, to ensure civilian casualties, the same groups the USA is supporting with weapons and the UK is supporting with logistics? and who have directly targeted a medical facility, with no military connection ?

Edited by QuantumTokoloshi on Thursday 8th December 09:58

Quantum,

You forget one important point.

When the US hits a hospital, they admit it, albeit sometime with several days delay but they still own up to it.

Putin & Assad do not admit to hitting a civilian hospital or clinic..

They will state it's a terrorist hideout.

Phil

[Transmitter Man]

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Liokault said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

Seems those mythical "moderate Islamic fundamentalists" in Aleppo, are only moderately targeting medical facilities and injured civilians. The lack of hysterical shouting about !!!! war crimes !!!! By the usual international suspects is rather damning in this case. Lucky those moderates are so moderate.

Maybe because you spent so long arguing that bombing hospitals was just par for the course these days when Russia was accused of doing it....repeatedly.

Is bombing hospitals bad again now? Does this mean that Russia has stopped doing it now?

The bombing of the Afghan MSF hospital by the USA, the bombing of the Yemeni MSF hospital by the Saudis, the deliberate bombing of Hospitals in Fallujah in 2004 were all tragedies. I never excused any group of its responsibility.

It seems that when the Russians do it, it is a !!! war crime !!!, yet when the US or associated "allies" do it, it is merely a cost of war, so sorry, the infamous collateral damage euphemism.

Consistency of response would be good.

You still haven’t told us if hospital bombing is back to being bad, now Russia has apparently not hit any in the last few days.

It’s almost like you want to say it’s bad, but don’t want to say it’s bad when Russia does it.

Perhaps you need to reread my response once or twice, actually read what I wrote, not what you would like to me to imply, to support your view.

I have read and re read your response. I’m confused.

You want to call it a war crime when it’s done by anyone other than Putin, but if anyone refers to any hospital attack actually done by Putin, you can't bring yourself to criticise it, you actually try to defend it by immediately pointing out that "everyone" attacks hospitals.

Hence my repeated question re are attacks on hospitals bad again in your mind, just like they weren’t when Putin was repeatedly bombing them?

Again, read what I have written, hospitals are not, and should not be targets, But when Russia does it, you have a chorus of usual suspects calling for war crimes. Yet, when US or "allies" do exactly the same, it is merely a cost of war, the old collateral damage.

The next question is, who is reporting these "hospitals"? Is it the infamous white hats, who seems to have a great ability in finding "hospitals" under every bomb dropped.

Now, perhaps you would like to give your view on the "moderates" in Aleppo, using civilians as human shields, to ensure civilian casualties, the same groups the USA is supporting with weapons and the UK is supporting with logistics.

Ah, nice damage mitigation. So we have gotten as far as "it is bad but...". At least you are now admitting that Russia is bombing hospitals.


Human shields, yes despicable. But putting the QT filter on:


"Human sheilds are not, and should not be targets, But when The west does it, you have a chorus of usual suspects calling for war crimes. Yet, when Russia or "Syria" do exactly the same, it is merely a cost of war, the old collateral damage."

Am I doing this right?

Lio,

Not forgetting the forced recruiting of able young men (who are fleeing with other familiy member from the many war zones) into the regime and immediately sending them to the front line to put Sunni against Sunni thereby killing them at double the normal rate.

Phil