What the fuck was their problem? What happened?
Other urls found in this thread:
The absolute boy Tito was the last hope for socialism in the Balkans
Reagan funded and supported a bunch of nationalists in Yugo causing them to slowly creep into the state and completely rip apart the country.
The worst part is Croats unironically making accusations of fascism against Milosevic
Wasn't Milosevic responsible for many of the ethnic cleansing campaigns that took place during the war?
Yes, just like Assad was responsible for gassing 50 gorillion innocent Syrians.
vulgar anti-imperialism is cancer
But he literally didn't do shit and yes in fact is a good boy
But he literally fucking didn't
assad is literally a neoliberal you dumbass
At most Assad is literally just a succdem
He is a nepotistic neoliberal despot who used to be on perfectly good terms with the West. But I'm sure you're first and foremost very proud of how triggering your claim is to liberals.
The Telegraph telegraph.co.uk
The Guardian theguardian.com
The Independent independent.co.uk
The Hill thehill.com
I think the UN even took it back months later when the damage was done.
This reminds me of that user on /k/ who gassed himself because he wore only a gas mask and no skin protection.
Press F to pay respects.
d for disrespect
This is Holocaust denial-tier garbage. Fuck off you meme-loving fuck.
Fuck off liberal
But you aren't thinking. You're just repeating shit you've been told that makes no sense because you don't think the source would lie to you, which isn't just not thinking critically, it's being thick as pig shit.
He is. But him merely "casting doubt" over events pales in comparison to multiple journalists presenting much more solid and decisive evidence. Why should I trust that one guy specifically over the others?
This sort of infograph is indistinguishable from denialist memes. There is no source, no evidence, no elaboration — just a bunch of unsubstantiated statements and a handful of MS Paint arrows. Even if it proved to be factually correct, it is methodologically crass and shouldn't be taken seriously by anyone who isn't a braindead retard.
And you aren't? I haven't personally investigated the issue and neither have you, so we need to rely on secondary sources — that much is obvious. What makes you believe your conclusions are more solid than mine? You just sound like an Infowar enthusiast pissed off that the sheeple won't heed his advice.
What the fuck are you even talking about? Are you telling me you're just googling shit as people tell you to fuck off to back up your original feelings on the matter? There was zero political or strategic benefit to using chemical weapons, these jpgs you're bawling your eyes out over are more evidence than anything the UN can shit out. Your entire argument is
When presented with evidence the UN is wrong, you continue to cry about the presentation the evidence is presented in, like you're impressing anyone and not looking like a dumb newfag by insisting that something is inherently false because it's presented in "le jpg" when that's not even comparable to the material that is derided as jpg artifact infographics.
No, it's been a while since I consider it probable that Assad could have gassed rebels and the report seems to confirm it. I don't even believe it to be 100% confirmed beyond any doubt, just a likely case. What I can't stand is vulgar anti-imperialists going out of their way to blindly defend their current despot of choice.
There was — especially if Assad then denies responsibility and blames it on his enemies, whoever they might be.
Sorry, but for all their faults I tend to trust accountable public officials over anonymous kooks on the Internet.
I haven't seen any evidence proving the report wrong beyond one journalist "casting doubts" and a handful of meme-tier musings.
That's rich — the very first argument I was faced with when presenting evidence was that my sources somehow weren't valid because "muh neoliberal rags".
But it is. Just because the cause you're defending is arguably more subtle than Holocaust denial doesn't mean you suddenly can do away with proper methodology. In the end, a JPG meme is just that, a JPG meme — and into the trash can it goes.
Look, I'm not going to repeat myself one hundred times. If you think the only problem with the meme that was posted on is the amount of JPG artifacts, then you're a moron. What's the source for the photograph? What's the context of the situation being depicted? Where are all those scientific claims from? Has it been confronted with contradiction? That's methodologically indistinguishable from (in fact, arguably even worse than) pic related.
You got decisive evidence that Assad didn't gas civilians? Fantastic! Then mount a case against it like an individual with a functioning brain. Dumb Holla Forums-tier memes don't qualify.