18-Dec-16 World View -- Syria and Russia see 'the light at the end of the tunnel' after Aleppo victory

[josa0512]

I agree that ISIS certainly captured a significant cache of weapons and ammunition from the SAA. I wanted to contribute to the narrative and discussion on this topic and issue because it's one of the few times that I had some information to add to the forum. I've already discovered which news sites are not credible when it comes to news concerning the civil wars in Syria and Iraq. Any news site that has ties to Russia, China, or the Syrian government can't be trusted and has very little credibility in my eyes. Thus, I've compiled a list of news websites that I more or less trust to get information on the events in the Middle East. And whenever there's a claim of one side of the Syrian civil war achieving a military breakthrough or a similar significant event, I cross check the various websites on my list. If the story is reported on the majority of the news websites, then I know it's true. However, if the story is only reported on one or two news websites that I'm not as familiar with and the news sites that I trust remain silent on the story and the story is in turn refuted by comment posters on these sites, then I don't believe the reported claims. It's been an interesting hobby for me...to figure all of this out on my own. As you know, there are precious few reporters in these war zones.

[a_k]

I agree that ISIS certainly captured a significant cache of weapons and ammunition from the SAA. I wanted to contribute to the narrative and discussion on this topic and issue because it's one of the few times that I had some information to add to the forum. I've already discovered which news sites are not credible when it comes to news concerning the civil wars in Syria and Iraq. Any news site that has ties to Russia, China, or the Syrian government can't be trusted and has very little credibility in my eyes. Thus, I've compiled a list of news websites that I more or less trust to get information on the events in the Middle East. And whenever there's a claim of one side of the Syrian civil war achieving a military breakthrough or a similar significant event, I cross check the various websites on my list. If the story is reported on the majority of the news websites, then I know it's true. However, if the story is only reported on one or two news websites that I'm not as familiar with and the news sites that I trust remain silent on the story and the story is in turn refuted by comment posters on these sites, then I don't believe the reported claims. It's been an interesting hobby for me...to figure all of this out on my own. As you know, there are precious few reporters in these war zones.

The common propaganda approach is to report 60+% truth and push the rest as promoted stories.

Russian connected sites (like Annanews) will gladly push any anti-US crap, true or not, but it doesn't have to be false all the time.

People are paid to comment and refute credible stories, that's not a good approach to combat lies.

A better approach is to verify that story is genuine is to see it reported by several agencies as an original story (some sites simply use another site as a the source, which results in many sights reporting a story that has a single origin)