Maidan

[Gorbles]

Not baseless, you're just refusing to say what's it based on. It's on you, as maker of the claim, to provide the proof, otherwise it's nor a valid argument. Else I could simply say you're Putin trying to mess with us, and expect others to accept it and treat you as such.

I'm saying you can go and find out pretty easily. Nobody can ascertain you making what is evidently a pretty bald-faced lie, as such, they're not comparable. One has evidence if you're willing to do a bit of legwork, one is a false equivalence from the offset.

Anyhow, Akka was kind enough to call more people names:

Yeah, facts are facts. When someone claims something, gets plastered by facts that proves the exact opposite, and then go on to smugly proclaim that it proves him right, there is only three possibilities : he's blind, he's stupid or he's dishonest. I was being charitable here.

This is what I said you'd be called if you said what you said about Israel, in the Russia thread. Akka even kindly related it to blindness explicitly for you (r.e. him quoting Kyriakos).

Y'all can justify it however you want. But you're the ones making this a race to the bottom, every time. Which is fine. Just don't get things in a twist when others start being uncharitable towards you. It's really that simple.

I can't even begin to understand how one could not blame both sides actions there, but at least I now understand why you took that position in the Ukraine thread.

I'd have to post in the thread itself to do it justice. I'm keeping references very brief to do my best to keep to thread rules.

If you're alright with that, I'll tag you there?

 

[Akka]

This is what I said you'd be called if you said what you said about Israel, in the Russia thread. Akka even kindly related it to blindness explicitly for you (r.e. him quoting Kyriakos).

Y'all can justify it however you want. But you're the ones making this a race to the bottom, every time. Which is fine. Just don't get things in a twist when others start being uncharitable towards you. It's really that simple.

If I make a claim, someone gives me hard facts that flatly and undiscutably contradict this claim and I go over saying these facts prove me right while they prove me wrong, you can be as uncharitable as you want. You're welcome to show when I actually did that.
But if you just are just playing on "Akka has been mean" while ignoring the context and how it happens just to fish for a pretext to throw some snipe or to play on some sort of "I'm only doing what you", you should avoid giving lessons.

 

[Crezth]

If those votes had any relevance? More people vote with their dollars and their feet. Let’s count those votes.

Who said they or we were all magnanimous paragons of virtue? The West is the Best!

“Their” dollars = the livelihoods pillaged from their feudal followers and captive populations, but yes. Money does make one good!

Then why do you so fiercely sympathize with Russia if you only care about the value people add?

Ah. a falsis principiis proficisci as they say. I’m just saying I don’t care what the American state does for whatever state you sadly identify with.

I guess the issue is that we (eg myself as a Hungarian) are not brown enough for you and as such we cannot be victims.

Look you know I’ve played as Hungary in a couple games of civ, I love magyarorszag, all that, I don’t think that Russia is as big a threat as the western arms industry wants you to believe.

 

[Sarin]

I'm saying you can go and find out pretty easily. Nobody can ascertain you making what is evidently a pretty bald-faced lie, as such, they're not comparable. One has evidence if you're willing to do a bit of legwork, one is a false equivalence from the offset.

If it was so easy, why are you spending so much effort avoiding doing it? It's your statement and so, the burden of proof is on you.

 

[Samson]

If I make a claim, someone gives me hard facts that flatly and undiscutably contradict this claim and I go over saying these facts prove me right while they prove me wrong, you can be as uncharitable as you want. You're welcome to show when I actually did that.

That is not what has happened here. Assuming you mean indisputably, there has indisputably been dispute as to the correct interpretation of the numbers provided.

 

[keli]

Look you know I’ve played as Hungary in a couple games of civ, I love magyarorszag, all that, I don’t think that Russia is as big a threat as the western arms industry wants you to believe.

So even after Russia launching total war on the country next to mine, constantly threatening to march on Berlin and increasing war production you still don't think that Russia is that big of a threat? Not even mentioning how awful this stance is towards Ukrainians who are paying in blood and destruction for Russia's aggression.

You are just happy to see that Russia is fiddling with the West. No matter the cost of human life and destruction in Europe. While you are pandering to Gazans every chance you have. Disgusting. Then you guys wonder why are you being called out with anger. Your ideology would throw my country to the Russians and as such it is actually dangerous.

 

[Gorbles]

If I make a claim, someone gives me hard facts that flatly and undiscutably contradict this claim and I go over saying these facts prove me right while they prove me wrong, you can be as uncharitable as you want. You're welcome to show when I actually did that.
But if you just are just playing on "Akka has been mean" while ignoring the context and how it happens just to fish for a pretext to throw some snipe or to play on some sort of "I'm only doing what you", you should avoid giving lessons.

"you should avoid giving lessons" is another one of your favourite lines, and yet it never stops you.

Like I said, c'est la vie. I don't care that you were being mean; you were evidence in a greater point I was making about a general double-standards applied here

If it was so easy, why are you spending so much effort avoiding doing it? It's your statement and so, the burden of proof is on you.

Because anybody can go read forum posts, and my time isn't unlimited. I wouldn't have been able to show it if Akka hadn't chosen that exact time to double down (not that he's the only one). If you distrust me to the extent you're willing to nearly immediately claim the things I've said happen are baseless, that's on you. I can't fix that. Me running to fetch posts I've already read don't fix that.

But I've said this already, and you seemingly didn't read it then. You seem to think that Logic Bro-ing this wins all Internet points, and I'm trying to appeal to you as a human that that's not how things always work. Good faith doesn't necessarily operate on logic. People can very logically act in bad faith. Good faith acts on trust, or actions that engender trust. We're both more willing to accept that the other is trying to make a valid point (whether we agree with it or not), if both of us make the effort. Which is why I didn't react harshly to your earlier misreading, because it happens. In turn I hoped you'd treat the statements I make as someone trying to be honest. That didn't happen, sadly.

Incidentally, do you know how much of a pain it is to look up and get the URL for a single post on mobile? It's not fun!

 

[Akka]

That is not what has happened here. Assuming you mean indisputably, there has indisputably been dispute as to the correct interpretation of the numbers provided.

Quick actual FACTS :

Estebonrober:
if that were the actual case then why is the US the only real financing and arming source for Ukraine?

Evidence provided :
US military help : 43 b$
US financial & humanitarian help : 27.5 b$

Europe military help : over 48 b$
Europe financial & humanitarian help : over 100 b$

How do you find any non-absurd interpretation that the facts don't flatly prove Estebonrober claim wrong ?

You are just happy to see that Russia is fiddling with the West. No matter the cost of human life and destruction in Europe. While you are pandering to Gazans every chance you have. Disgusting.

Pretty much.

 

[Sarin]

Because anybody can go read forum posts, and my time isn't unlimited. But I've said this already, and you seemingly didn't read it then. You seem to think that Logic Bro-ing this wins all Internet points, and I'm trying to appeal to you as a human that that's not how things always work. Good faith doesn't necessarily operate on logic. People can very logically act in bad faith. It acts on trust, or actions that engender trust. We're both more willing to accept that the other is trying to make a valid point, if both of us make the effort. Which is why I didn't react harshly to your earlier misreading, because it happens. In turn I hoped you'd treat the statements I make as someone trying to be honest. That didn't happen, sadly.

Searching this forum for "ideologically blind" and "ideologically-blind" would take less time than even making one of your posts trying to excuse yourself from burden of proof. Now you're down to "trust me, bro".

 

[Gorbles]

Searching this forum for "ideologically blind" and "ideologically-blind" would take less time than even making one of your posts trying to excuse yourself from burden of proof. Now you're down to "trust me, bro".

You don't use the mobile interface much, or?

And let's take this at face value. If its so easy . . . what stopped you from doing what I asked? As the effort involved is apparently less than a post?

Again, it's a good faith thing. Well, an attempt at least. Enjoy your race to the bottom, and don't get mad when it happens to you

 

[Sarin]

You don't use the mobile interface much, or?

And let's take this at face value. If its so easy . . . what stopped you from doing what I asked? As the effort involved is apparently less than a post?

Burden of proof is on the one making the claim. That is principle. And now you are just making stuff up. Typing stuff in the search bar is just as difficult as typing stuff in the regular post.

Or maybe you already did that and see that you're just BS'ing. Now I am making the claim, so let's have a look...

Spoiler :

Oh, what a surprise...

 

[Gorbles]

Burden of proof is on the one making the claim. That is principle. And now you are just making stuff up. Typing stuff in the search bar is just as difficult as typing stuff in the regular post.

Or maybe you already did that and see that you're just BS'ing. Now I am making the claim, so let's have a look...

Spoiler :

Oh, what a surprise...

Bad faith invites bad faith. I'm under no onus to your moving of the goalposts, especially when you've answered nothing of mine in favour of more accusations. You can call it what you want, I'm going to ignore that particular hook from now on.

 

[Sarin]

Bad faith invites bad faith. I'm under no onus to your moving of the goalposts, especially when you've answered nothing of mine in favour of more accusations. You can call it what you want, I'm going to ignore that particular hook from now on.

You have entered this discussion with false claim, to which you refused to provide evidence, continued to pile more fallacies and when shown evidence against your claim, you accuse others? You're the one who is piling up bad faith with every post, and earned himself a spot in my ignore list.

 

[Gorbles]

You have entered this discussion with false claim, to which you refused to provide evidence, continued to pile more fallacies and when shown evidence against your claim, you accuse others? You're the one who is piling up bad faith with every post, and earned himself a spot in my ignore list.

The false claim that Akka made, doubled down on, and then proceeded to justify?

You see what you want to see. But I appreciate you demonstrating that even when I quote a literal post backing me up, you ignore it. Because it was never about the post. You were never going to be convinced in the first place.

 

[Akka]

The false claim that Akka made, doubled down on, and then proceeded to justify?

If you are going to ignore the context in which I say something and change it to make it implies something different, you should leave me outside your bickering.
Especially after spending so much time lamenting over "death of nuance".

That's twice now in a single page and it's becoming irritating.

 

[Sarin]

What? He tried to toss his false claim on you? At this point, it should be bannable offense.

 

[Gorbles]

If you are going to ignore the context in which I say something and change it to make it implies something different, you should leave me outside your bickering.
Especially after spending so much time lamenting over "death of nuance".

That's twice now in a single page and it's becoming irritating.

And yet, you doing it to other posters is fine. You did it to me, you did it to Estebonrober, you ignored Samson's clarifications on the statistics . . . you talk about "facts", but you're describing "opinion".

I didn't change anything. You accused a large demographic of people, as a way of singling out Este (and later on, myself) as being so far into ideology that they're blind to truth and reason. Do you deny it?

 

[Verbose]

Quick actual FACTS :

Estebonrober:
if that were the actual case then why is the US the only real financing and arming source for Ukraine?

Evidence provided :
US military help : 43 b$
US financial & humanitarian help : 27.5 b$

Europe military help : over 48 b$
Europe financial & humanitarian help : over 100 b$

How do you find any non-absurd interpretation that the facts don't flatly prove Estebonrober claim wrong ?

Pretty much.

To project some things on the basis of this:
This is a war over Europe. The European contribution should be expected to grow – how fast, if fast enough, remains to be seen.

The US political logjam in Congress might delay [I first wrote the r-term for the temporal effect of something arriving late, but the modern delicacy over language of the internet blocked it...] further US aid. Not to mention if Trumps gets reelected... But otherwise US aid would already be growing-

However, the European military aid might still runaway in the not too distant future – because if this fighter aircraft for Ukraine consortium starts delivering, while it might be US made aircraft, the providing countries are in Europe – and something that tends to cost very serious money quickly, even for small numbers, are aircraft systems.

 

[EnglishEdward]

This war seems more about artillery, drones, missiles and PBI and their counter measures than very expensive high performance aircraft.

 

[Snowygerry]

We need to streamline private and public initiative and create a continuous supply of all required items, not just announcements of large, fictional sums for political purposes.

It is working for tanks, will work for planes soon, but is needed for everything else too.

Some of the tanks would be used for spare parts while others would be repaired, he said. He estimated it could be four to six months before they were on the battlefield in Ukraine.

Deal struck to send German-made Leopard 1 tanks from Belgium to Ukraine

Dozens of second-hand Leopard 1 tanks that once belonged to Belgium have been bought by another European country for Ukrainian forces fighting Russia's invasion, the arms trader who did the deal said Tuesday.

www.reuters.com