Biden secretly gave Ukraine permission to strike inside Russia with US weapons

a reply to: andy06shake

Still waiting for you to post my words stating:

"The Houthis struck the Eisenhower"
or
"The Eisenhower has been hit"

Or something along that line. It's weird that you won't do it considering your entire argument over the last 3 days has been built entirely on that premise

a reply to: cherokeetroy

What's weird is after all this time you cannot provide a shred of tangible evidence the ship was struck with a cruise missile.

As to your words, those were rather clear.

Now do we need to remind you of the fact that you just got caught posting fake tweets with the wrong ship being struck?

Clown shoes!

Anyhoo I'm away for my dinner have fun.

a reply to: andy06shake

What's weird is after all this time you cannot provide a shred of tangible evidence the ship was struck with a cruise missile.

I will gladly provide that tangible evidence when you provide the tangible evidence that I claimed the ship was struck.

As to your words, those were rather clear.

Yes, they are clear. This is what I originally stated back on page 4:
"Houthis claim they struck the Eisenhower.

I can't substantiate this but if it's true, this should move things right along..."

Now do we need to remind you of the fact that you just got caught posting fake tweets with the wrong ship being struck?

The image in that tweet was falsified. However, the announcement made by the Houthis was true:
x.com...

You claimed there was ZERO engagement and you were wrong.

a reply to: cherokeetroy

the announcement made by the Houthis was true

Undoubtedly so.

As to the image in that tweet you chose to post that was falsified.

Indeed it was.

a reply to: andy06shake

No, it wasn't an accurate image. It doesn't change the fact that Houthis made an official announcement claiming to hit the Eisenhower. I made a post reiterating their claim without validating the veracity of that claim one way or the other.

You argued that I stated the Eisenhower was struck. You were wrong.

You also argued that there was no engagement, no interception of launched missiles, no posed threat. You were wrong on that account as well.

a reply to: cherokeetroy

Twice no less if you read the link i posted.

Your wrong cherokeetroy, just accept the fact that the carrier is just fine.

The story is fake, and that's all she wrote.

Houthis are terrorist scum that tell porky pies you see.

a reply to: cherokeetroy

When it comes to world leadership, I wholeheartedly disagree.

Entirely up to you.

You are the one who responded to my post with a condescending tone.

Sarcasm.
That you took it as me being condescending says far more about you and how you see people who disagree with you than it does me.

Evidently, I'm the one who's in the wrong because my opinion differs from yours?

Who said anything about 'being in the wrong'?
If you mean that I voiced an opinion different to your's then yes, I did.....that is sort of one of the main points of ATS, isn't it?

a reply to: Freeborn

Sarcasm is a form of patronizing or condescending behavior...have you been using sarcasm this whole time being unaware of that fact?

a reply to: andy06shake

It's ridiculous how you keep attempting to frame your argument as if I, myself claimed the Eisenhower was hit. All the while, ignoring the fact that you weren't aware of or disbelieve the Houthis have been launching missile & drone attacks in the Red Sea fairly regularly over the last 7 months, now.

a reply to: cherokeetroy

It's ridiculous how you keep attempting to frame your argument as if I, myself claimed the Eisenhower was hit.

Back peddle all you please cherokeetroy, the carrier is just fine and the Houthis lies nothing more than unsubstantiated claims from known terrorist scum.

All the while, ignoring the fact that you weren't aware of or disbelieve the Houthis have been launching missile & drone attacks in the Red Sea fairly regularly over the last 7 months, now.

Yeah i had my head in the sand thanks for making me aware of that unheard of before news. LoL

As to the mental gymnastics, 6 out of 10.

a reply to: cherokeetroy

I'd describe it more as the use of irony to convey a point....but each to their own.

a reply to: Freeborn

a reply to: andy06shake

the Houthis lies nothing more than unsubstantiated claims from known terrorist scum.

What does that have to do with you refuting my nonevident claim that the Eisenhower was hit?

You're aware of the repeated missile launches in the Red Sea yet, you post a headline calling the strike a "Wild Claim" as if there is zero possibility of an attack. You scoff at me for "seriously entertaining the idea" that a missile finally made contact with one of its intended targets and you demanded I post links to prove there had been any engagement at all.

a reply to: cherokeetroy

Whatever it is it seems to have upset you.
I'll make a mental note of your heightened sensitivity and try not to upset you again with some nasty words.

a reply to: cherokeetroy

We've seen the links you posted aka fake misleading pictures and even screenshots from the likes of Twitter.

They were your downfall really.

As to what I'm aware of.

Well, that would be that the carrier in question is just fine and dandy.

And that you are willing to entertain the likes of clear Houthi propaganda as evidence of an actual missile strike.

On one of the most heavily defended naval targets on the high sea.

And the NEWS has been telling us all about the situation in the area in question for the past few months its not like something you made anyone aware of.

Anyhoo its my bed time soon, but you keep on dancing till the music stops.

President Vladimir Putin considers suppling weapons to others who would than use them Western Targets

Putin warns that Russia could provide long-range weapons to others to strike Western targets

ST. PETERSBURG, Russia (AP) — President Vladimir Putin warned Wednesday that Russia could provide long-range weapons to others to strike Western targets in response to NATO allies allowing Ukraine to use their arms to attack Russian territory.

“That would mark their direct involvement in the war against the Russian Federation, and we reserve the right to act the same way,” Putin added.

link

a reply to: andy06shake

You were not aware of the ongoing conflict in that region. Which is made evident by your language i.e. "fake news", "propaganda", "Houthis lies", etc...

You weren't aware that an ASBM was fired in the direction of USS Gravely and had to be destroyed in self-defense...a ship that came dangerously close to being hit just a few months ago.

Your argument is there was NO attack. You are wrong.
There was an attack. According to the US, it was a failed attack.

a reply to: Freeborn

a reply to: cherokeetroy

If this is true it is VILE....I agree.
But it hasn't been proven, not by any stretch of the imagination.
All there is is Kremlin propaganda which you seem to blindly believe.

a reply to: cherokeetroy

Yeah, you let me know i did not have a clue the Houthis were skelping shipping with cruise missiles for the past few months.

The news people decided to hide it from us all and just tell you.

So you could bring it to our attention.

And you still dont have a US carrier with a scratch or any sort of proof bar fake memes with fake pictures and fake claims from terrorist scum.

I think you may have taken a few Houthi cruise missile strikes to the napper if I'm honest.

Clown shoes x 10.