Metanoia
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2014
- Messages
- 1,815
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
I write based on footage evidence. SOHR numbers were always crap, but they used to be reliable in terms of territory control. Now they lost that credibility too.
The hell do you mean by "footage-evidence"? Stop making up jargon to augment your flailing facade of arguments.
So let me get this right....they used to be reliable in terms of territory control....but now all of a sudden since SAA and it's allies started regaining the lost territories they (SOHR) started losing credibility as they reported as to what is ACTUALLY has happened...until very few moments ago they've become completely non-credible due to them reporting, again, as to what is ACTUALLY happening in Aleppo. Basically as per you (or your employer)....if the rebels regain a good chunk of lost territories and the SOHR reports as such....they'll all of a sudden become credible once more!
What the rest of the pupils would dub objective reporting....i.e. SOHR reporting territories being lost or gained by both rebels or the government....you dub it as non-credible BS because it doesn't suit your employers narrative. Pathetic.
These invasions were doomed to fail, just like current Shia/Alawi invasion in 99% Sunni Aleppo. Its no different from Algeria and Afghanistan.
Beating around the bush....I asked you a simple question. Were the Yank/Euro invasions in the past few decades or so wrong? Is that what you're saying when you're constantly bringing up Afghanistan or Algeria?