The Putin Interview

31,739 Views | 885 Replies | Last: 25 days ago by Mothra
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I mean don't tell me you're just going to ignore the part that's inconvenient for your position.
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

I mean don't tell me you're just going to ignore the part that's inconvenient for your position.
Wait a second, are we referring to an "opinion in passing"?

In all seriousness, help me understand what you believe that statement proves.
ron.reagan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

What I got was that most schools were closed and not, as I believe you said, open. If you want sources on Ukrainian attacks, take your pick. Here's one from ten years ago and one from this year.

Anyway, I'm sure we're both happy that order is being restored and the rebel scum -- sorry, I mean civilians -- will be able to get on with their lives.
What you got is thinking you can say schools are closed without getting fact checked. Then you posted a link that you hope no one read. Now you want to argue that maybe at some point some schools were closed because Ukranians take their border control more seriously than we do.
KaiBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

ron.reagan said:

Sam Lowry said:

J.R. said:

Mothra said:

ron.reagan said:



We have some real buffoons in the party, that is for sure. There are several on this thread.
Just parroting their Furor!
If anyone is gripped by a furor these days, it would seem to be the anti-Russian zealots.
Conservatives now using the russiaphobia card as an excuse to murder hundreds of thousands of people. It really highlights the stupidity and hypocrisy is just a different flavor between our two parties.

Your not very conservative allies are murdering hundreds of thousands of people in this vicious proxy war. It's one of the most evil things the United States has ever done, and that's saying something.


Unfortunately most Americans are either too busy to connect the dots involving US manipulations ; or believe using the Ukrainian people as cannon fodder on behalf of US geopolitical interests is A-OK.

ron.reagan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
KaiBear said:

Sam Lowry said:

ron.reagan said:

Sam Lowry said:

J.R. said:

Mothra said:

ron.reagan said:



We have some real buffoons in the party, that is for sure. There are several on this thread.
Just parroting their Furor!
If anyone is gripped by a furor these days, it would seem to be the anti-Russian zealots.
Conservatives now using the russiaphobia card as an excuse to murder hundreds of thousands of people. It really highlights the stupidity and hypocrisy is just a different flavor between our two parties.

Your not very conservative allies are murdering hundreds of thousands of people in this vicious proxy war. It's one of the most evil things the United States has ever done, and that's saying something.


Unfortunately most Americans are either too busy to connect the dots involving US manipulations ; or believe using the Ukrainian people as cannon fodder on behalf of US geopolitical interests is A-OK.


Unfortunately most Americans connect whatever dots they want to
KaiBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ron.reagan said:

KaiBear said:

Sam Lowry said:

ron.reagan said:

Sam Lowry said:

J.R. said:

Mothra said:

ron.reagan said:



We have some real buffoons in the party, that is for sure. There are several on this thread.
Just parroting their Furor!
If anyone is gripped by a furor these days, it would seem to be the anti-Russian zealots.
Conservatives now using the russiaphobia card as an excuse to murder hundreds of thousands of people. It really highlights the stupidity and hypocrisy is just a different flavor between our two parties.

Your not very conservative allies are murdering hundreds of thousands of people in this vicious proxy war. It's one of the most evil things the United States has ever done, and that's saying something.


Unfortunately most Americans are either too busy to connect the dots involving US manipulations ; or believe using the Ukrainian people as cannon fodder on behalf of US geopolitical interests is A-OK.


Unfortunately most Americans connect whatever dots they want to


LOL

Can't begin to connect the dots when one can't even find the countries involved on a map.
ron.reagan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
KaiBear said:

ron.reagan said:

KaiBear said:

Sam Lowry said:

ron.reagan said:

Sam Lowry said:

J.R. said:

Mothra said:

ron.reagan said:



We have some real buffoons in the party, that is for sure. There are several on this thread.
Just parroting their Furor!
If anyone is gripped by a furor these days, it would seem to be the anti-Russian zealots.
Conservatives now using the russiaphobia card as an excuse to murder hundreds of thousands of people. It really highlights the stupidity and hypocrisy is just a different flavor between our two parties.

Your not very conservative allies are murdering hundreds of thousands of people in this vicious proxy war. It's one of the most evil things the United States has ever done, and that's saying something.


Unfortunately most Americans are either too busy to connect the dots involving US manipulations ; or believe using the Ukrainian people as cannon fodder on behalf of US geopolitical interests is A-OK.


Unfortunately most Americans connect whatever dots they want to


LOL

Can't begin to connect the dots when one can't even find the countries involved on a map.
I'm glad you are willing to admit that.
KaiBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ron.reagan said:

KaiBear said:

ron.reagan said:

KaiBear said:

Sam Lowry said:

ron.reagan said:

Sam Lowry said:

J.R. said:

Mothra said:

ron.reagan said:



We have some real buffoons in the party, that is for sure. There are several on this thread.
Just parroting their Furor!
If anyone is gripped by a furor these days, it would seem to be the anti-Russian zealots.
Conservatives now using the russiaphobia card as an excuse to murder hundreds of thousands of people. It really highlights the stupidity and hypocrisy is just a different flavor between our two parties.

Your not very conservative allies are murdering hundreds of thousands of people in this vicious proxy war. It's one of the most evil things the United States has ever done, and that's saying something.


Unfortunately most Americans are either too busy to connect the dots involving US manipulations ; or believe using the Ukrainian people as cannon fodder on behalf of US geopolitical interests is A-OK.


Unfortunately most Americans connect whatever dots they want to


LOL

Can't begin to connect the dots when one can't even find the countries involved on a map.
I'm glad you are willing to admit that.


So 'clever' yet so mediocre.

The internet clearly is the place for you .
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ron.reagan said:

Sam Lowry said:

What I got was that most schools were closed and not, as I believe you said, open. If you want sources on Ukrainian attacks, take your pick. Here's one from ten years ago and one from this year.

Anyway, I'm sure we're both happy that order is being restored and the rebel scum -- sorry, I mean civilians -- will be able to get on with their lives.
What you got is thinking you can say schools are closed without getting fact checked. Then you posted a link that you hope no one read. Now you want to argue that maybe at some point some schools were closed because Ukranians take their border control more seriously than we do.
Except they were closed. Don't feel too bad about taking the loss here. It's a small one compared to what's coming.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

I mean don't tell me you're just going to ignore the part that's inconvenient for your position.
Wait a second, are we referring to an "opinion in passing"?

In all seriousness, help me understand what you believe that statement proves.
It's the most important of several details in the article that tell a different story from the headline. When it says the violence was strategic and the orders were to kill everyone, what it really means is that the Russians were pursuing enemy combatants and they weren't taking prisoners. While it does appear the violence was excessive, that is a bit different from targeting innocent civilians.
Bear8084
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

I mean don't tell me you're just going to ignore the part that's inconvenient for your position.
Wait a second, are we referring to an "opinion in passing"?

In all seriousness, help me understand what you believe that statement proves.
It's the most important of several details in the article that tell a different story from the headline. When it says the violence was strategic and the orders were to kill everyone, what it really means is that the Russians were pursuing enemy combatants and they weren't taking prisoners. While it does appear the violence was excessive, that is a bit different from targeting innocent civilians.


Good grief....
Bear8084
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

ron.reagan said:

Sam Lowry said:

What I got was that most schools were closed and not, as I believe you said, open. If you want sources on Ukrainian attacks, take your pick. Here's one from ten years ago and one from this year.

Anyway, I'm sure we're both happy that order is being restored and the rebel scum -- sorry, I mean civilians -- will be able to get on with their lives.
What you got is thinking you can say schools are closed without getting fact checked. Then you posted a link that you hope no one read. Now you want to argue that maybe at some point some schools were closed because Ukranians take their border control more seriously than we do.
Except they were closed. Don't feel too bad about taking the loss here. It's a small one compared to what's coming.


LOL! Shill gonna shill.
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

I mean don't tell me you're just going to ignore the part that's inconvenient for your position.
Wait a second, are we referring to an "opinion in passing"?

In all seriousness, help me understand what you believe that statement proves.
It's the most important of several details in the article that tell a different story from the headline. When it says the violence was strategic and the orders were to kill everyone, what it really means is that the Russians were pursuing enemy combatants and they weren't taking prisoners. While it does appear the violence was excessive, that is a bit different from targeting innocent civilians.
So that, in your mind, proves...

And I suppose we are to ignore that Russian troops were killing Ukrainian civilians with abandon, as stated in all of the articles?

"Excessive." LOL.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

I mean don't tell me you're just going to ignore the part that's inconvenient for your position.
Wait a second, are we referring to an "opinion in passing"?

In all seriousness, help me understand what you believe that statement proves.
It's the most important of several details in the article that tell a different story from the headline. When it says the violence was strategic and the orders were to kill everyone, what it really means is that the Russians were pursuing enemy combatants and they weren't taking prisoners. While it does appear the violence was excessive, that is a bit different from targeting innocent civilians.
So that, in your mind, proves...

And I suppose we are to ignore that Russian troops were killing Ukrainian civilians with abandon, as stated in all of the articles?

"Excessive." LOL.
"Excessive incidental death" is a term from the UN reports cited in your articles. "Killing with abandon" is your own characterization. There are some facts I wasn't aware of, for example the extent to which things like electrical infrastructure were destroyed. However, the UN also states that more evidence is needed to determine whether those attacks were directed against the civilian population.
Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I guess the accounts of torture by Russian soldiers are "incidental" to your mind, Sam?
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oldbear83 said:

I guess the accounts of torture by Russian soldiers are "incidental" to your mind, Sam?
There's no excuse for that, but I haven't seen recent reports of it either. Everything in the articles is from the early months of the war.
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Oldbear83 said:

I guess the accounts of torture by Russian soldiers are "incidental" to your mind, Sam?
There's no excuse for that, but I haven't seen recent reports of it either. Everything in the articles is from the early months of the war.
No recent reports... I guess that makes it ok then.

Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

I mean don't tell me you're just going to ignore the part that's inconvenient for your position.
Wait a second, are we referring to an "opinion in passing"?

In all seriousness, help me understand what you believe that statement proves.
It's the most important of several details in the article that tell a different story from the headline. When it says the violence was strategic and the orders were to kill everyone, what it really means is that the Russians were pursuing enemy combatants and they weren't taking prisoners. While it does appear the violence was excessive, that is a bit different from targeting innocent civilians.
So that, in your mind, proves...

And I suppose we are to ignore that Russian troops were killing Ukrainian civilians with abandon, as stated in all of the articles?

"Excessive." LOL.
"Excessive incidental death" is a term from the UN reports cited in your articles. "Killing with abandon" is your own characterization. There are some facts I wasn't aware of, for example the extent to which things like electrical infrastructure were destroyed. However, the UN also states that more evidence is needed to determine whether those attacks were directed against the civilian population.


https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/video/russia-ukraine-bucha-massacre-takeaways.html

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/russian-general-troops-killed-civilians-ukraine/

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/deadliest-civilian-attacks-russias-invasion-ukraine-2023-10-05/
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Not sure this adds anything to the discussion. It's just multiplying the same or similar reports of civilian casualties, which we all agree do happen.
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Not sure this adds anything to the discussion. It's just multiplying the same or similar reports of civilian casualties, which we all agree do happen.


Providing evidence of killing with abandon - a characterization you seemed to take issue with.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Not sure this adds anything to the discussion. It's just multiplying the same or similar reports of civilian casualties, which we all agree do happen.


Providing evidence of killing with abandon - a characterization you seemed to take issue with.
One can always cherry-pick incidents for emotional effect. I take issue with the characterization because the evidence doesn't support it overall.
Bear8084
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Not sure this adds anything to the discussion. It's just multiplying the same or similar reports of civilian casualties, which we all agree do happen.


Providing evidence of killing with abandon - a characterization you seemed to take issue with.
One can always cherry-pick incidents for emotional effect. I take issue with the characterization because the evidence doesn't support it overall.


LOL just no.
Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Not sure this adds anything to the discussion. It's just multiplying the same or similar reports of civilian casualties, which we all agree do happen.


Providing evidence of killing with abandon - a characterization you seemed to take issue with.
One can always cherry-pick incidents for emotional effect. I take issue with the characterization because the evidence doesn't support it overall.
About as honest as Putin's election results.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Not sure this adds anything to the discussion. It's just multiplying the same or similar reports of civilian casualties, which we all agree do happen.


Providing evidence of killing with abandon - a characterization you seemed to take issue with.
One can always cherry-pick incidents for emotional effect. I take issue with the characterization because the evidence doesn't support it overall.
Sure it does, especially when you have multiple reports of human rights atrocities committed by Russian soldiers.

But I am not surprised in the least you attempt to downplay or minimize the ample evidence of same.
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oldbear83 said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Not sure this adds anything to the discussion. It's just multiplying the same or similar reports of civilian casualties, which we all agree do happen.


Providing evidence of killing with abandon - a characterization you seemed to take issue with.
One can always cherry-pick incidents for emotional effect. I take issue with the characterization because the evidence doesn't support it overall.
About as honest as Putin's election results.


I honestly did not know Moscow did lame "every vote matters" propaganda bs

I thought they might be honest enough to just lean into the whole idea of "yes we are an autocracy and proud of it"

Really just shows that Russia and China don't just make crappy knock off U.S. material products….they also do crappy knockoffs of our cultural products



Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Not sure this adds anything to the discussion. It's just multiplying the same or similar reports of civilian casualties, which we all agree do happen.


Providing evidence of killing with abandon - a characterization you seemed to take issue with.
One can always cherry-pick incidents for emotional effect. I take issue with the characterization because the evidence doesn't support it overall.
Sure it does, especially when you have multiple reports of human rights atrocities committed by Russian soldiers.

But I am not surprised in the least you attempt to downplay or minimize the ample evidence of same.
There are multiple reports of Ukrainian atrocities too. The question is how widespread and systematic they are.
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Not sure this adds anything to the discussion. It's just multiplying the same or similar reports of civilian casualties, which we all agree do happen.


Providing evidence of killing with abandon - a characterization you seemed to take issue with.
One can always cherry-pick incidents for emotional effect. I take issue with the characterization because the evidence doesn't support it overall.
Sure it does, especially when you have multiple reports of human rights atrocities committed by Russian soldiers.

But I am not surprised in the least you attempt to downplay or minimize the ample evidence of same.
There are multiple reports of Ukrainian atrocities too. The question is how widespread and systematic they are.


I appreciate the whataboutism.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Not sure this adds anything to the discussion. It's just multiplying the same or similar reports of civilian casualties, which we all agree do happen.


Providing evidence of killing with abandon - a characterization you seemed to take issue with.
One can always cherry-pick incidents for emotional effect. I take issue with the characterization because the evidence doesn't support it overall.
Sure it does, especially when you have multiple reports of human rights atrocities committed by Russian soldiers.

But I am not surprised in the least you attempt to downplay or minimize the ample evidence of same.
There are multiple reports of Ukrainian atrocities too. The question is how widespread and systematic they are.


I appreciate the whataboutism.
No, I was just trying to explain the difference between anecdotal and quantitative evidence.
Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Not sure this adds anything to the discussion. It's just multiplying the same or similar reports of civilian casualties, which we all agree do happen.


Providing evidence of killing with abandon - a characterization you seemed to take issue with.
One can always cherry-pick incidents for emotional effect. I take issue with the characterization because the evidence doesn't support it overall.
Sure it does, especially when you have multiple reports of human rights atrocities committed by Russian soldiers.

But I am not surprised in the least you attempt to downplay or minimize the ample evidence of same.
There are multiple reports of Ukrainian atrocities too. The question is how widespread and systematic they are.


I appreciate the whataboutism.
No, I was just trying to explain the difference between anecdotal and quantitative evidence.
... by using some very subjective "definitions", I observe.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Not sure this adds anything to the discussion. It's just multiplying the same or similar reports of civilian casualties, which we all agree do happen.


Providing evidence of killing with abandon - a characterization you seemed to take issue with.
One can always cherry-pick incidents for emotional effect. I take issue with the characterization because the evidence doesn't support it overall.
Sure it does, especially when you have multiple reports of human rights atrocities committed by Russian soldiers.

But I am not surprised in the least you attempt to downplay or minimize the ample evidence of same.
There are multiple reports of Ukrainian atrocities too. The question is how widespread and systematic they are.


I appreciate the whataboutism.
No, I was just trying to explain the difference between anecdotal and quantitative evidence.
I am sure they're all just made up stories. Mother Russia wouldn't do anything like that, since this is a completely justified and moral invasion and all...
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Not sure this adds anything to the discussion. It's just multiplying the same or similar reports of civilian casualties, which we all agree do happen.


Providing evidence of killing with abandon - a characterization you seemed to take issue with.
One can always cherry-pick incidents for emotional effect. I take issue with the characterization because the evidence doesn't support it overall.
Sure it does, especially when you have multiple reports of human rights atrocities committed by Russian soldiers.

But I am not surprised in the least you attempt to downplay or minimize the ample evidence of same.
There are multiple reports of Ukrainian atrocities too. The question is how widespread and systematic they are.


I appreciate the whataboutism.
No, I was just trying to explain the difference between anecdotal and quantitative evidence.
I am sure they're all just made up stories. Mother Russia wouldn't do anything like that, since this is a completely justified and moral invasion and all...
Again, the justification of the war and the conduct of the war are different issues.
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Not sure this adds anything to the discussion. It's just multiplying the same or similar reports of civilian casualties, which we all agree do happen.


Providing evidence of killing with abandon - a characterization you seemed to take issue with.
One can always cherry-pick incidents for emotional effect. I take issue with the characterization because the evidence doesn't support it overall.
Sure it does, especially when you have multiple reports of human rights atrocities committed by Russian soldiers.

But I am not surprised in the least you attempt to downplay or minimize the ample evidence of same.
There are multiple reports of Ukrainian atrocities too. The question is how widespread and systematic they are.


I appreciate the whataboutism.
No, I was just trying to explain the difference between anecdotal and quantitative evidence.
I am sure they're all just made up stories. Mother Russia wouldn't do anything like that, since this is a completely justified and moral invasion and all...
Again, the justification of the war and the conduct of the war are different issues.
So, invading was the morally-right decision in your mind, but you may not approve of Russia's war-time tactics?
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Not sure this adds anything to the discussion. It's just multiplying the same or similar reports of civilian casualties, which we all agree do happen.


Providing evidence of killing with abandon - a characterization you seemed to take issue with.
One can always cherry-pick incidents for emotional effect. I take issue with the characterization because the evidence doesn't support it overall.
Sure it does, especially when you have multiple reports of human rights atrocities committed by Russian soldiers.

But I am not surprised in the least you attempt to downplay or minimize the ample evidence of same.
There are multiple reports of Ukrainian atrocities too. The question is how widespread and systematic they are.


I appreciate the whataboutism.
No, I was just trying to explain the difference between anecdotal and quantitative evidence.
I am sure they're all just made up stories. Mother Russia wouldn't do anything like that, since this is a completely justified and moral invasion and all...
Again, the justification of the war and the conduct of the war are different issues.
So, invading was the morally-right decision in your mind, but you may not approve of Russia's war-time tactics?
Right.
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Not sure this adds anything to the discussion. It's just multiplying the same or similar reports of civilian casualties, which we all agree do happen.


Providing evidence of killing with abandon - a characterization you seemed to take issue with.
One can always cherry-pick incidents for emotional effect. I take issue with the characterization because the evidence doesn't support it overall.
Sure it does, especially when you have multiple reports of human rights atrocities committed by Russian soldiers.

But I am not surprised in the least you attempt to downplay or minimize the ample evidence of same.
There are multiple reports of Ukrainian atrocities too. The question is how widespread and systematic they are.


I appreciate the whataboutism.
No, I was just trying to explain the difference between anecdotal and quantitative evidence.
I am sure they're all just made up stories. Mother Russia wouldn't do anything like that, since this is a completely justified and moral invasion and all...
Again, the justification of the war and the conduct of the war are different issues.
So, invading was the morally-right decision in your mind, but you may not approve of Russia's war-time tactics?
Right.
What war-time tactics do you not approve of, exactly?

And what would you like to see happen in Russia's morally just destruction of Ukraine? Kill/imprison Ukrainian leadership and take over the country? Just incorporate it into mother Russia as another Russian state or territory, and subjugate its people? And if/when that happens, will Russia be morally just if it decides to invade other surrounding countries, given your stated justification for the war?
KaiBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Mothra said:

Sam Lowry said:

Not sure this adds anything to the discussion. It's just multiplying the same or similar reports of civilian casualties, which we all agree do happen.


Providing evidence of killing with abandon - a characterization you seemed to take issue with.
One can always cherry-pick incidents for emotional effect. I take issue with the characterization because the evidence doesn't support it overall.
Sure it does, especially when you have multiple reports of human rights atrocities committed by Russian soldiers.

But I am not surprised in the least you attempt to downplay or minimize the ample evidence of same.
There are multiple reports of Ukrainian atrocities too. The question is how widespread and systematic they are.


I appreciate the whataboutism.
No, I was just trying to explain the difference between anecdotal and quantitative evidence.
I am sure they're all just made up stories. Mother Russia wouldn't do anything like that, since this is a completely justified and moral invasion and all...
Again, the justification of the war and the conduct of the war are different issues.
So, invading was the morally-right decision in your mind, but you may not approve of Russia's war-time tactics?
Guess how many times the US has invaded Mexico.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.