• ImOnADiet🇵🇸 (He/Him)@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Uh… yes. It’s an opinion piece. You can disagree with the analysis from an opinion piece, but I linked mediabias checker to show it’s not just some random blog with no credibility that would just post an “AI Russian propaganda article”

    (Also quiz for the class: who founded the EPA lmao)

    • Ooops@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      You can disagree with the analysis from an opinion piece

      That would require an actual analyses existing instead of just a strong opinion with no evidence.

      • ImOnADiet🇵🇸 (He/Him)@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Did we read the same article? It’s not super deep analysis (what do you expect from libertarians) but he’s backing up his claims with actual reporting if you follow the hyper links.

        • NoiseColor@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Did you read the title of this article? Brilliantly loaded with two Russian taking points : US being the reason for the war and that Ukraine cannot win and should not even fight. No one that cares about credibility would write that.

          • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I don’t think you really appreciate how we live in different worlds now.

            I know the US provoked this war and I know that Ukraine can’t win, and you know Russia attacked for no reason and that Ukraine is on the cusp of victory, and nothing we can possibly type at each other will ever change that. Reality is dead. Choose your own adventure!

            • NoiseColor@startrek.website
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              I know for a fact you are wrong and I’m right and it’s so easy to prove it. I’m the one talking about possibilities, you are the one taking in absolutes (and conspiracy theories) . That’s the reality. Talking in absolutes is a dead giveaway. It means a big separation from reality.

              I don’t think Russia attacked for no reason and I don’t think Ukrainian victory is certain. I think it’s going to be a long and difficult conflict. What I do see is people reporting from the battles. Russian and Ukrainian and others. That’s the reality.

              • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I know for a fact you are wrong and I’m right

                followed by

                I’m the one talking about possibilities, you are the one taking in absolutes

                is 🤌

                • NoiseColor@startrek.website
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Cute, but what your are really doing is dodging.

                  Let me rephrase it, just for you: you are taking in absolutes. In no universe is that sensible, let alone when taking about wars, not to mention without even defining what victory or loss would be. This alone points that you have a flaw somewhere in your thinking. At least that, if not that you are completely indoctrinated in an illogical way of thinking.

                  • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    you are taking in absolutes. In no universe is that sensible,

                    🤌 🤌 🤌 🤌 🤌 🤌 🤌 🤌 🤌 🤌

          • freagle@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Stoltenberg, the head of NATO said that the US push to expand NATO was the key reason for Russia’s action - https://www.jeffsachs.org/newspaper-articles/nato-chief-admits-expansion-behind-russian-invasion

            Ukraine, on its own, cannot win. It is far too small. It can only win with US weapons, but it has far fewer soldiers than Russia. So if the US sends weapons, Ukrainian soldiers will die. The question is in what ratio? The evidence is that Ukraine is losing soldiers faster than Russia. So the weapons sent by the West are guaranteeing Ukrainians die in droves.

            • NoiseColor@startrek.website
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Oh, I thought Russia just wanted to protect the Sudeten? That’s what I usually hear :) Nato has nothing to do with it. I don’t know what stoltenberg said and how it was taken out of context, but NATO is an organisation to which countries apply. Nobody is forcing them to join (except the threat of Russian invasion).

              Ukraine is not that small and Ukraine would fight if it gets the weapons or not,because they are fighting for themselves. Likely less will die when they have something to fight with.

              The actual evidence shows that Ukraine is losing far less people than Russia. One of the most evident proofs is the oryx report of lost hardware. It had it’s flaws but I think it’s very relevant. The leaked US report about two months ago has Ukraine at about 70k dead and Russia at 120k.