No, they're from the Defense Department. Anything else is #FakeNews Here's one article that has them but if believing the Gaslight Gazette makes you happy, feel free to remain ignorant Here's how much ground ISIS has lost since Trump took over https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/heres-how-much-ground-isis-has-lost-since-trump-took-over
You mean the one "Gaslight Gazette" Trump reads? They published the incorrect number and corrected it. They state the math error was made by THEM and not the DD. So Trump read their article and retweeted it... I'll leave you to figure that out. "Editor's note: The previous version of this story overstated the amount of territory liberated from the Islamic State under President Trump due to an inadvertent math error by the Washington Examiner, not the Defense Department. The number incorrectly reported — 26,800 square miles liberated under Trump — has been corrected to say 15,570 square miles."
We shall see how Smallfil's little project works out. https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/index-trading-experiment.324087/ "Seeing the huge demand for trading knowledge from a huge number of people, I asked myself, why not create a trading system simple enough to use, with huge returns to boot? So, I am conducting this experiment to trade one of the major indexes using only a small amount of monies. Not going to tell you which one it is or the parameters I will be using. If I fail then, I lost a small amount of monies. If I succeed, I will write a trading system that even the average joe out there can take and use for himself. I help a lot of people in the process and put a lot of charlatans out there out of business for good! Of course, I will make monies too in the process but, I will not be charging an arm or a leg for it. Risk management including position sizing and stop losses will be all my own. Since, I am dealing with a small amount of monies to start, I will be aggressively seeking to compound those monies in the shortest time possible. Again, that would be my method."
So what? You're just trying to obfuscate. I posted the corrected numbers from DoD which very clearly show that Trump did FAR MORE to destroy ISIS and free innocents in less than a year, with fewer U.S. KIA and bombs dropped, than Odumbo did in almost 2 1/2 years. Here they are again. And you lose once again
Trump can't do simple mental math, he sees a big number he likes and just posts it on Twitter. Important to point that out I think.It is not obfuscation in a thread about Trump's alleged victories to point out his failing in basic arithmetic. Also that you trash a source he trusted to post content from. The paper obviously used used DoD numbers in actual fact to calculate the incorrect then correct numbers You are correct in one part, I was ready to chew my own leg off at the mall. She made me to to all the stores I have zero interest in like sheets, kids clothes and then it got much worse..I lost. When we are together someday there will be none of that. I'll go to all the Hummel figurine shops you want without a grumble I'm afraid Obama would have been in the same position as Trump thereabouts when Trump was thumping his chest after killing more innocents. Same as with the stock market which was a little flat due to election uncertainty and then continued on it's way. He had a FED with a plan and a relatively healthy economy. He added a little spin, reduced volatility which is a double edge sword. He also had this happen.. http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/372403-dow-plunges-by-1179-points-shattering-record Trump inherited a working strategy against ISIS the WaPO article makes that clear. It took a few years to get the Iraqi forces up to speed etc. and he just stepped into a working plan. The difficult bit was getting ISIS out of the cities, strangling supplies etc., that was done for him. Once they lost the cities, mopping to the open spaces is a doddle. I'm afraid you are just further demonstrating your expertise from broom command my dear. Surely a man of your expertise would enjoy the challenge of ripping that WaPO's article a new one. Should be easy to pick it apart eh? Look forward to seeing it.
Oh and @vanzandt https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/index-trading-experiment.324087/ That thread by Smallfil has been deleted. As I was saying..
My Jedi instincts told me to quote the initial post. https://www.elitetrader.com/et/thre...-by-pro-life-trump.324065/page-5#post-4712317 Either he asked or it was admin deleted. No big deal of course but what is Evian spelled backwards? I'm mentally shattered, off to bed. Smell ya'll tomorrow.
Poor Slartocchio... the same infantile aversion to admitting he's wrong that prevents him from fabricating believable paper trades dominates all areas of his thinking The numbers speak for themselves. And the reasons for that improvement are: 1) Trump accelerated the campaign against ISIS and changed the strategy to annihilation (from Obama's attrition) 2) Enhanced efficiency by delegating decisions to the appropriate level Defeat-ISIS 'Annihilation' Campaign Accelerating, Mattis Says https://www.defense.gov/News/Articl...nihilation-campaign-accelerating-mattis-says/
Destriero lost a bet to a member of broom command for sure. I expect the five, count them five commendations were for doing a good job emptying the General's trash can? We do that with the building porters here, write them a special thank you note around Christmas with a little bonus. As the DoD is know for it's flagrant mis-reporting, Airwars is at least as credible. Take either with a pinch of salt however Airwars do have a "least biast" and "Highly factual" rating on Media Bias Fact check. Minimum civilians likely killed in alleged Coalition strikes across Iraq and Syria 2014 - 2018 As this Airwars chart shows, minimum likely deaths from alleged Coalition strikes in Iraq and Syria rose by 82% in 2016. However, in 2017 - under the Trump presidency - we saw an unprecedented leap of 218% in minimum likely deaths with the year marked by the simultaneous assaults on Raqqa and Mosul. The Trump Effect Prior to his election, Donald Trump had lambasted Barack Obama for what he viewed as an overcautious approach to the war. Once in office, President Trump boasted that he had changed US rules of engagement to make it easier to bomb ISIS – while his officials began publicly referring to a War of Annihilation. The intensification of fighting under Trump led to significant civilian harm and levels of destruction in urban areas, comparable at times to the Second World War. What is less clear is whether similar levels of destruction would have occurred anyway under a Hillary Clinton presidency, given the war’s focus on urban areas in 2017. Even today Raqqa is considered “unfit for human habitation” by the UN, having been 70% destroyed. West Mosul experienced similar devastation with 80% of the Old City now in ruins. Reportedly more civilians than combatants lost their lives during the Battle for Mosul because of Iraqi, Coalition and ISIS actions. To this day, bodies are still being pulled from the rubble, while in Raqqa recovery teams are even now still discovering mass graves. So intense were US-led military actions in 2017 that Coalition-linked civilian casualties far outnumbering those attributed to Russia over the year. Two of the worst military failures of the war happened during this period due to American actions. On March 17th 2017 in the Jadida neighbourhood of Mosul, between 105 and 141 civilians were confirmed killed in an American airstrike on a house. The event is the biggest confirmed incident of civilian casualties in the entire war so far.