“We believe the prerequisite for meaningful diplomacy and real peace is a stronger Ukraine, capable of deterring and defending against any future aggression,” Blinken said in a speech in Finland, which recently became NATO’s newest member and shares a long border with Russia.

  • BrooklynMan@lemmy.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    “i know you are but what am I?” is the argument of a child, and pretending that the west helping Ukraine is the same as Russia bombing it to bits is treating your audience like children.

    believe it or not, not everyone is as foolish as you.

      • BrooklynMan@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The west is not helping Ukraine

        so you say, but in every demonstrable way, we are, including by every claim made by their government and the plurality of their people. and it’s pretty hilarious that you claim to be some authority to make claims to the contrary. The only ones who would claim otherwise are Russia and their supporters, of which you are clearly one.

        so, why should anyone take your positions seriously?

          • BrooklynMan@lemmy.mlOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            except it’s not-- each of those instances are very different, as is this. You can’t even accuse any one nation and have to use the nebulous “the west” because your argument isn’t even political, it’s ideological-- you just hate that anyone is opposing Russia’s imperialism, and you’re blaming the victim, using every logical fallacy, including personal insult, you can since you have no rational argument to make.

            your position is transparent, angry, and you have nothing but nonsense to spew in defense of bullying and disinformation.

            edit:

            Whataboutism or whataboutery (as in “what about…?”) denotes in a pejorative sense a procedure in which a critical question or argument is not answered or discussed, but retorted with a critical counter-question which expresses a counter-accusation. From a logical and argumentative point of view it is considered a variant of the tu-quoque pattern (Latin ‘you too’, term for a counter-accusation), which is a subtype of the ad-hominem argument.[1][2][3][4]

            The communication intent is often to distract from the content of a topic (red herring). The goal may also be to question the justification for criticism and the legitimacy, integrity, and fairness of the critic, which can take on the character of discrediting the criticism, which may or may not be justified. Common accusations include double standards, and hypocrisy, but it can also be used to relativize criticism of one’s own viewpoints or behaviors. (A: “Long-term unemployment often means poverty in Germany.” B: “And what about the starving in Africa and Asia?”).[5] Related manipulation and propaganda techniques in the sense of rhetorical evasion of the topic are the change of topic and false balance (bothsidesism).[6]

              • BrooklynMan@lemmy.mlOP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                The motivations of the west were exactly the same in each of those instances, and one has to work really hard to not understand what these motivations actually are.

                Just because others don’t agree with your imaginings (and laughably ignorant assessment) doesn’t mean we have to work hard. Acknowledging reality, in fact, requires very little “work”.

                Also, please stop projecting. The only one here who’s angry and spewing nonsense here is you.

                Criticizing you isn’t “protection” nor is pointing out the obviousness of your biases. and I already pointed out how childish the whole “I know you are but what I am?” thing is, but if you want to keep up with that, that’s on you.

                I’ve provided actual sources and detailed explanations for my position. All you’ve done was regurgitate propaganda drivel.

                posting a bunch of pictures of where ethnic Russians live doesn’t magically make an illegal invasion legal. THAT is, as you say “propaganda drivel”, but that’s for playing, lmao

                Also, whataboutism is a logical fallacy used by pseudo intellectuals to create a double standard for their own actions and those of others

                well, at least you admit what you’ve done wrong. but will you stop? i doubt you’ll do more that try to blame me for your actions while claiming to be a victim…

                  • BrooklynMan@lemmy.mlOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    I think you’ve established pretty firmly your inability to acknowledge reality here.

                    there’s that childish “I know you are put what am I?” thing again.

                    You’re not criticizing anything,

                    now who’s denying reality? lol

                    you keep regurgitating nonsense here confidently and ignoring actual facts presented to you. Couldn’t even be bothered to read the the study your own regime put out.

                    weren’t you just accusing me of projection? and it’s always fascinating to me when people on the internet claim to be psychic. i did read it-- it’s simply, as I’ve said, dubious as an objection since it’s irrelevant and also reveals your obvious bias. You clearly don’t like that someone’s standing up to Russia’s imperialistic bullying, so you blame the victim and anyone who helps them stand up to the bully. just because the US may also benefit in other ways is irrelevant, and nothing you’ve said can prove otherwise.

                    You can whine and moan all you like, but that’s all it is: whining and moaning because Russia’s bullying is meeting forceful opposition and they’re looking like fools as a result.

                    just because some Russians happen to live in Ukraine doesn’t make it ok for Russia to invade, and the fact that you would make such an absurd argument just shows that not only are you incapable of making a rational argument, you’re clearly not willing to listen to one. That’s backed up by your incessant use of an arsenal of logical fallacies from false equivalence, red herrings, whataboutisms, to ad hominem personal attacks and the constant moving of the goalposts.

                    Since I can’t reason you out of the position you didn’t reason yourself into, I don’t see the point of continuing this conversation.

          • FlowVoid@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Who said anything about altruism? All sides are motivated by self interest. Ukrainians want to kill Russian soldiers on their soil, and the US wants other people to kill Russian soldiers on foreign soil.

            They cooperate because their interests align, even if Ukrainians have a more justified motivation.