Syrian air defenses repel Israeli aggression, intercept several hostile missiles over Damascus

[Philosopher]

Bro 90% of your argument is asking for proof while giving none.

Proof is provided by those that make the claims, agreed? I asked him for the proof of his claims.

 

[Beny Karachun]

Proof is provided by those that make the claims, agreed? I asked him for the proof of his claims.

For example,you're asking for proof that Iranians were killed in attacks, as if hard evidence is possible when talking about people bombed to shreds in a hostile country. Israeli intelligence says they are Iranian.

And I take it you can prove that this did not happen, right?

You're asking for proof for the fact that a major CIA, along with dozens of American troops *weren't* killed in the BM attack by Iran, seems illogical.

Because there is no way dozens of troops were killed with the targets that were hit.

 

[Philosopher]

For example,you're asking for proof that Iranians were killed in attacks, as if hard evidence is possible when talking about people bombed to shreds in a hostile country. Israeli intelligence says they are Iranian.

Israeli intelligence is not a full proof form of source. Basically the claim so far is, Iranian hardware were destroyed so Iranians must have been killed too. This is not enough of a reason. And yes, if the Israeli knew Iranians were killed, then why could they not provide more details? It's you intelligence at the end of the day, right?

You're asking for proof for the fact that a major CIA, along with dozens of American troops *weren't* killed in the BM attack by Iran, seems illogical.

He is claiming it did not happen, once again, he made the claim, thus why I asked for his proof. If the standard if proof is high, then he should not be making such statements to begin with because clearly he cannot back his assertion.

Because there is no way dozens of troops were killed with the targets that were hit.

Completely inaccurate. Literally sleeping barracks were targeted, had they not been emptied due to pre-warning, many, and I mean many Americans would have died. Just go listen to the Americans themselves. I have no evidence Americans were killed. I just posted the statement from an Iranian official stating he believed soldiers were killed.

 

[Beny Karachun]

Israeli intelligence is not a full proof form of source. Basically the claim so far is, Iranian hardware were destroyed so Iranians must have been killed too. This is not enough of a reason. And yes, if the Israeli knew Iranians were killed, then why could they not provide more details? It's you intelligence at the end of the day, right?

Lmao Israeli intelligence doesn't need to prove anything to anyone its sole purpose is to hunt enemies down. Right now Israel is a thousand times more credible than Syria and Iran combined, with your foolish claims of shooting down dozens of Israeli jets already, "intercepting missiles" with their designated targets, etc etc.
The claim isn't *because* Iranian equipment was bombed thus the people carrying it are Iranian, the claim is that those carrying that equipment are in fact Iranian.

He is claiming it did not happen, once again, he made the claim, thus why I asked for his proof. If the standard if proof is high, then he should not be making such statements to begin with because clearly he cannot back his assertion.

Because it didn't happen. Iran claims 80 people died, do you agree with that?

Completely inaccurate. Literally sleeping barracks were targeted, had they not been emptied due to pre-warning, many, and I mean many Americans would have died. Just go listen to the Americans themselves. I have no evidence Americans were killed. I just posted the statement from an Iranian official stating he believed soldiers were killed.

"David Schmerler, an analyst with the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, which evaluated the photos, said the attacks seem to have hit buildings that store aircraft, while buildings used for housing staff were not hit.[48] Two defense officials told Newsweek that 18 missiles, which used on-board guidance systems, landed in Al Asad airbase, three of them on the runway, while another hit and damaged an air control tower. One Black Hawk helicopter was destroyed, ten tents were "destroyed", and an MQ-1 Predator drone was claimed to have been damaged,[49] although Al Asad hosts only U.S. Air Force MQ-9 Reapers and Army MQ-1C Gray Eagles.[50] (MQ-1 Predators were phased out from USAF service in March 2018.)[51] Damaged structures also reportedly included a special forces compound, and two hangars, in addition to the U.S. drone operators' housing unit.[36]"

No sleeping barracks was hit. Iranian claim of 80 dead is obviously a lie, which they spread amongst uninformed locals.

 

[Philosopher]

Lmao Israeli intelligence doesn't need to prove anything to anyone its sole purpose is to hunt enemies down.

It "does not need to prove anything" for its own internal audience perhaps. But don't expect the rest of us to buy into their claims.

Right now Israel is a thousand times more credible than Syria and Iran combined, with your foolish claims of shooting down dozens of Israeli jets already, "intercepting missiles" with their designated targets, etc etc.

You mean like when Israel claimed it's F-35 downed due to birds?

the claim is that those carrying that equipment are in fact Iranian.

There is not proof for that, hence why I stated the only connection you're making is the fact the equipment were Iranian.

Because it didn't happen. Iran claims 80 people died, do you agree with that?

Whether I agree with it or not is not the point. The actual important part is whether he can back his claim that it did not happen. Unless you can actually prove an incident happened or did not happen, then you should not be making such claims.

"David Schmerler, an analyst with the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, which evaluated the photos, said the attacks seem to have hit buildings that store aircraft, while buildings used for housing staff were not hit.[48] Two defense officials told Newsweek that 18 missiles, which used on-board guidance systems, landed in Al Asad airbase, three of them on the runway, while another hit and damaged an air control tower. One Black Hawk helicopter was destroyed, ten tents were "destroyed", and an MQ-1 Predator drone was claimed to have been damaged,[49] although Al Asad hosts only U.S. Air Force MQ-9 Reapers and Army MQ-1C Gray Eagles.[50] (MQ-1 Predators were phased out from USAF service in March 2018.)[51] Damaged structures also reportedly included a special forces compound, and two hangars, in addition to the U.S. drone operators' housing unit.[36]"

You're trying to spread disinformation here. Just beacuse he did not state specifically they were hit, it does not mean they were not. How about you listen to what an actual soldier on the ground stated:

Iran hit their living quarters.

No sleeping barracks was hit.

Yes they were.

Iranian claim of 80 dead is obviously a lie, which they spread amongst uninformed locals.

"obviously" a lie yet you cannot provide a single proof for that statement.

 

[T-123456]

Syrian missile defenses have responded to an attack by Israeli warplanes, intercepting several missiles over Damascus launched from the Lebanese airspace, Syria’s SANA news agency reported.

https://www.rt.com/news/486945-syria-missile-attack-israel/

Several means not all?
So,how many did hit their targets?

 

[Beny Karachun]

Several means not all?
So,how many did hit their targets?

All of them, as usual. Syria always reports about intercepted missiles while all they do is fire blindly into the air, probably because of electronic warfare that hit their radars.

You mean like when Israel claimed it's F-35 downed due to birds?

A bird hit an F-35, and it wasn't downed, it was returned to base and repaired, returned to fly the next few days.
Syria then claimed it actually shot it down, along with an F-16, even though the F-35 wasn't operational yet.

It "does not need to prove anything" for its own internal audience perhaps. But don't expect the rest of us to buy into their claims.

It's purpose isn't to make you believe it, for all I care don't, Iranians were killed and that's all that matters.

There is not proof for that, hence why I stated the only connection you're making is the fact the equipment were Iranian.

If you would read my statement you would understand that I never claimed the fact that the equipment bombed was Iranian must mean that the people killed were Iranian, I said Israeli intelligence did their analysis, if they could find the weapon shipment they also knew who was carrying them, and they claimed those were Iranians. It isn't the first time the Israeli military killed Iranians so I don't even know what you're trying to prove.

 

[Philosopher]

A bird hit an F-35, and it wasn't downed, it was returned to base and repaired, returned to fly the next few days.
Syria then claimed it actually shot it down, along with an F-16, even though the F-35 wasn't operational yet.

Yes, sure. If you believe such a story, then please do not question the credibility of others.

Iranians were killed and that's all that matters.

It's not what I believe or not, it's about the fact you cannot provide an iota of evidence for the statement above.

If you would read my statement you would understand that I never claimed the fact that the equipment bombed was Iranian must mean that the people killed were Iranian, I said Israeli intelligence did their analysis, if they could find the weapon shipment they also knew who was carrying them, and they claimed those were Iranians. It isn't the first time the Israeli military killed Iranians so I don't even know what you're trying to prove.

Like I said, these is no proof for these claims. When Iranians die in Syria, their pictures etc are all over the place (in Iran itself). All I am hearing from Israel is mostly empty claims. I don't deny you have destroyed Iranian hardware. Iranian hardware are all over the place in Syria.

 

[Beny Karachun]

You're trying to spread disinformation here. Just beacuse he did not state specifically they were hit, it does not mean they were not. How about you listen to what an actual soldier on the ground stated:



Iran hit their living quarters.

The hit was on the Chief Warrant Officer's living quarters, and he's obviously alive, so unless 80 American soldiers were having a massive orgy in his LQ without his knowledge, no way in earth 80 people were killed.
Iran just lies about that.

 

[Philosopher]

The hit was on the Chief Warrant Officer's living quarters,

Living quarters and barracks are exactly the same thing. Go watch the rest of the videos, many such barracks were hit.

so unless 80 American soldiers were having a massive orgy in his LQ without his knowledge, no way in earth 80 people were killed.
Iran just lies about that.

Like I stated earlier to the other member, Iranian commander said Americans were killed, but he never gave a number. What he said (I am paraphrasing) " We did not aim to kill their soldiers, but they did have casualties". Did they have casualties? Maybe, maybe not. I nor anyone else here can prove or disprove that claim.

 

[Beny Karachun]

"obviously" a lie yet you cannot provide a single proof for that statement.

You just proved it yourself by sending me that video.

Yes, sure. If you believe such a story, then please do not question the credibility of others.

Bird collisions are common, what the hell are you talking about?
We're the ones claiming a common scenario happened, that a bird hit our F-35 and it returned to fly within the next days, while you're claiming it's a conspiracy theory and that Israel is just hiding the fact that somehow an S-200 from the cold war destroyed both the F-35 and an F-16 without any response from Israel, which one of these makes more sense?

Israel even began to operate the F-35 after that alleged shootdown over Syria and Lebanon, if that were to happen I believe Israel wouldn't risk losing another F-35.

 

[Philosopher]

You just proved it yourself by sending me that video.

How does that video prove no Americans were killed?

Bird collisions are common, what the hell are you talking about?

A desperate excuse like I ever heard one.

We're the ones claiming a common scenario happened, that a bird hit our F-35 and it returned to fly within the next days, while you're claiming it's a conspiracy theory and that Israel is just hiding the fact that somehow an S-200 from the cold war destroyed both the F-35 and an F-16 without any response from Israel, which one of these makes more sense?

"Common sense scenario" . A bird hitting a plane vs it being hit by Surface to air missile like the Syrians claimed. Apparently the Syrian SAM's had a bird in its warheads that hit the F-35, otherwise I am not gullible to believe it's a coincidence the F-35 was hit by a "bird" as the Syrian were trying to hit it.

Israel even began to operate the F-35 after that alleged shootdown over Syria and Lebanon, if that were to happen I believe Israel wouldn't risk losing another F-35.

Irrelevant. You learn your lessons and adapt. What we can see today is Israel taking various steps to avoid being in the eyes of the Syrian systems, for obvious reasons, not birds.

 

[Beny Karachun]

Living quarters and barracks are the same things. Go watch the rest of the videos, many such barracks were hit.

Sleeping barracks and the living quarter *of a Chief Warrant Officer* aren't the same thing, believe me.
One hosts dozens of soldiers, the second hosts one.

As I stated earlier to the other member, Iranian commander said Americans were killed, but he never gave a number. What he said (I am paraphrasing) " We did not aim to kill their soldiers, but they did have casualties". Did they have casualties? Maybe, maybe not. I nor anyone else here can prove or disprove that claim

I already talked to an Iranian and he claimed 80 were killed, that's what their TV said.
How can you claim a sleeping barracks was hit yet your Iranian commander said that they were not aiming to kill?

 

[Philosopher]

Sleeping barracks and the living quarter *of a Chief Warrant Officer* aren't the same thing, believe me.
One hosts dozens of soldiers, the second hosts one.

You're playing with semantics. Like I told you, try actually watch more clips and see what the rest of soldiers stated. This was not the only barrack that was targeted.

I already talked to an Iranian and he claimed 80 were killed, that's what their TV said.

Tell that "Iranian" to listen to the actual commander then:

How can you claim a sleeping barracks was hit yet your Iranian commander said that they were not aiming to kill?

Because common sense would tell you, that the fact they gave pre-warning hours before the attack, meant the barracks would be emptied.

 

[Beny Karachun]

"Common sense scenario" . A bird hitting a plane vs it being hit by Surface to air missile like the Syrians claimed. Apparently the Syrian SAM's had a bird in its warheads that hit the F-35, otherwise I am not gullible to believe it's a coincidence the F-35 was hit by a "bird" as the Syrian were trying to hit it.

How does that video prove no Americans were killed?

By showing the Americans themselves, alive and well, claiming they were informed about the missile attack. Psychologically speaking they don't seem sad, afraid, or anything. No American was killed, Iran lied, end of story.

"Common sense scenario" . A bird hitting a plane vs it being hit by Surface to air missile like the Syrians claimed. Apparently the Syrian SAM's had a bird in its warheads that hit the F-35, otherwise I am not gullible to believe it's a coincidence the F-35 was hit by a "bird" as the Syrian were trying to hit it.

A conspiracy theory versus a common scenario. I'll choose a common scenario.
Apparently an F-35 can survive a huge 200kg warhead of the S-200, fly back to base, and our mechanics are so good that they got it flying in less than a week.
The Syrians weren't trying to hit it because
1. The F-35 wasn't even operational yet
2. The F-35 wasn't flying over Syria
3. Even if it was, the Syrians cannot detect it.