Putin puts troops in western Russia on alert in drill 1.1

[TooMuch]

Look at his sig. He couldn't even quote me right. He clipped a pro-Russian comment to half of my comment and put my name behind it. lol

Here's one of the links listed on the wikipedia page: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...e-9701805.html

Take note of how to cite a source, TooMuch.

It is Wikipedia Iron Force, a source we can't use according to yourself. About the sig, I didn't quote you but somebody else... LOL

- - - Updated - - -

LMFAO, now that he has proof, he's mad the "proof" wasn't in the first one, whatever that means.

- - - Updated - - -

Where did I make them? Can you deflect any harder? This is extremely sad that when presented with evidence that is rather conclusive, you need to nitpick one, like it somehow is of any meaning.

Ah, the denial is great in this one. You kept referencing to the article as proof to your claim. So how about the other two claims you made, also ignoring them?

[Rukentuts]

So how about the other two claims you made, also ignoring them?

Where. Did. These. Even. Come. From?

You kept referencing to the article as proof to your claim.

I did, and three more corroborate it. Sucks to be you right now I guess.

http://www.kyivpost.com/content/kyiv...ne-376160.html
http://www.e1.ru/news/spool/news_id-416966.html
http://www.interpretermag.com/russia...s-effort-says/
http://www.newsweek.com/how-russians...ukraine-296937

So yes, we can put it to bed. Russian troops were impersonating Red Cross. Disgusting.

[TooMuch]

Where. Did. These. Even. Come. From?

Are you too lazy to even reread your posts? Do you have the memory span of a goldfish? These are claims you made yourself, so back them up. Like I am still waiting for the "proof" that was in the article you linked about 10 times...

[Rukentuts]

Are you too lazy to even reread your posts? Do you have the memory span of a goldfish? These are claims you made yourself, so back them up. Like I am still waiting for the "proof" that was in the article you linked about 10 times...

Show me.

And if I can't "show proof" by showing other proof, I don't know what your brain is even expecting.

[TooMuch]

Show me.

And if I can't "show proof" by showing other proof, I don't know what your brain is even expecting.

Ah, I expected the "show me" reply. Just answer the questions, all three because you still fail to deliver. When I ask you to link to something, you just ignore...

[Rukentuts]

Ah, I expected the "show me" reply. Just answer the questions, all three because you still fail to deliver.

Why should I attack strawman when you can't even accept:

Yefimov is now telling at least most of the truth when he said that Russians who volunteered to fight in Ukraine “went under the guise of the Red Cross.”

EO: How do volunteers get to the place of service?

VY: First time they went under pretense of being the Red Cross.

[The Iron Fist]

It is Wikipedia Iron Force, a source we can't use according to yourself. About the sig, I didn't quote you but somebody else... LOL

You can use wikipedia as a resource to find sources. Thats what makes wikipedia useful. Directly linking to a wikipedia page does nothing. You have to sift through an entire article to find a source (if there is one, seeing as wikipedia doesn't require one) of which, the source added may not even be reliable. I can provide a link to a Justin Bieber music video as a source just as easy as to Reuters. It completely relies on the internet community to police itself - something this thread proves is impossible.

[TooMuch]

Why should I attack strawman when you can't even accept:

Yefimov is now telling at least most of the truth when he said that Russians who volunteered to fight in Ukraine “went under the guise of the Red Cross.”

Bolded the important part (where is the link anyway), still waiting for your "proof" on all three claims you made?

[Rukentuts]

Yefimov is now telling at least most of the truth when he said that Russians who volunteered to fight in Ukraine “went under the guise of the Red Cross.”

Bolded the important part (where is the link anyway), still waiting for your "proof" on all three claims you made?

Shall I link the actual interview for you again?

EO: How do volunteers get to the place of service?

VY: First time they went under pretense of being the Red Cross.

And yes, I'm aware you love pulling strawmans out of your deliberately ignorant ass.

[TooMuch]

You can use wikipedia as a resource to find sources. Thats what makes wikipedia useful. Directly linking to a wikipedia page does nothing. You have to sift through an entire article to find a source (if there is one, seeing as wikipedia doesn't require one) of which, the source added may not even be reliable. I can provide a link to a Justin Bieber music video as a source just as easy as to Reuters. It completely relies on the internet community to police itself - something this thread proves is impossible.

Yes, did you read the post I made when you said all those stupid things about Wikipedia before? At least something good came out of that, because you said something totally different a few hours back.

- - - Updated - - -

Shall I link the actual interview for you again?

And yes, I'm aware you love pulling strawmans out of your deliberately ignorant ass.

Ah, back to the strawmans. But where is it in the Newsweek article? And still "likely" and "mostly the truth" are enough for you to post something as a fact. Good to know.

[Rukentuts]

But where is it in the Newsweek article?

Why does this even matter? Does it make the interview go away? Does it make the fact this guy sent troops "under the guise of Red Cross" suddenly not true?

[The Iron Fist]

Yes, did you read the post I made when you said all those stupid things about Wikipedia before? At least something good came out of that, because you said something totally different a few hours back.

Nope, I said wikipedia isn't a reliable source, because it isn't. You can use it to find reliable sources, however. Exactly the same thing I've been saying all along. I'll give you a pass though, seeing as English is one of the hardest languages to learn.

[TooMuch]

Nope, I said wikipedia isn't a reliable source, because it isn't. You can use it to find reliable sources, however. Exactly the same thing I've been saying all along. I'll give you a pass though, seeing as English is one of the hardest languages to learn.

Want me to link to what you said before? Even quote it?

Aeno, you're citing wikipedia again.
Not a reliable source. Find me the core source. The person/group/organization that wrote it.

or

Wikipedia is a site that can be edited by anyone, therefor is not reliable.

- - - Updated - - -

Why does this even matter? Does it make the interview go away? Does it make the fact this guy sent troops "under the guise of Red Cross" suddenly not true?

Haha, moving goalposts much. All along you have been referencing to Newsweek as PROOF for your claim. Btw, where is the proof to your other two claims? Ah yes, forgot they get ignored...

[Rukentuts]

Haha, moving goalposts much. All along you have been referencing to Newsweek as PROOF for your claim.

If you had the faintest clue of what you were talking about, you'd see "moving goalposts" is moving the argument, not the sources you use to prove it. So let me ask you, one more time, in diction a toddler could understand: is that interview false?

[TooMuch]

If you had the faintest clue of what you were talking about, you'd see "moving goalposts" is moving the argument, not the sources you use to prove it. So let me ask you, one more time, in diction a toddler could understand: is that interview false?

No, you kept repeating that the "proof" was in the article, it wasn't. BTW when can we expect the proof to your other two claims?

[Rukentuts]

Is the interview false then?

[TooMuch]

Is the interview false then?

Again, I am saying YOU are lying by trying to back up claims you make by linking articles that don't support your claim. I am not saying anything about reporters or interviews. It's YOU that keep bringing them up. Keep focused...

BTW where is the proof for your other two claims I have been asking for a thousand times?

[Rukentuts]

Is a question in toddler level diction really that difficult? Is that what I'm dealing with?

[The Iron Fist]

Want me to link to what you said before? Even quote it?

or

Both of those things I said are still correct. The core source is the one usually listed in reference at the bottom of a wikipedia page. For example, under http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014–15...an_involvement you can see http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...e-9701805.html is listed as the cited source is number [326]. Also note, you can write whatever you want to infront of the cite source such as corndogs started it by riding walrus' - in other words, anyone can edit what they want. What they can't edit is the core source aka [326] in this case.

[TooMuch]

Is a question in toddler level diction really that difficult? Is that what I'm dealing with?

Is reading an answer where I dismiss the question as not being relevant that difficult?
And btw, where is your proof for the other two claims you made?