• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Accusations Of Russian Atrocities In Ukraine Prompt Calls For Tougher Sanctions, Prosecutions


Those you oppose whataboutisms are the ones who wish to present bias and see the selective viewing of events. I'm happy that you are against it because of what it says about your own commentary
 
Whataboutism is a logical debating fallacy designed by default to show the debating weakness of he or she (they) who applies (apply) it.

Self-disqualification at its best, the only ones unable to realize that being those too dishonest or too stupid to avoid it.

Possibly both.
 
You comment on Russia and Russians all the time, you just show no balance. None of that has anything to do with me.
I don't think I commented on Russia until it threatened Ukraine. If I did it might have been in a thread about Dostoevsky because I read Crime and Punishment for the first time a few years ago or because I was studying Czech and comparing it to the Russian language. Or maybe it was a comment on the Russian Orthodox Church. But I bet you are wrong and you don't know what I posted about!
 
The BBC's Jeremy Bowen reports what he saw personally in another location.

I didn't click any of the videos since in times long past I've seen enough of that stuff in RL and really don't need any more of it.

Meanwhile let the liars on here continue their futile attempts of denial, it serves well to show what fabric they're made of.
 


No, a simple search here shows the opposite to be true

a sample that are nothing to do with your alleged interests outlined above






BTW there are no references to Abu Ghraib in a history search of your usename except for the one you just made
 


Nope, what I stated is the accurate assessment and the rest of your post is standard Chagos projection
 
No, a simple search here shows the opposite to be true
I said "I don't think I commented on Russia until it threatened Ukraine." All of my postings above were about Russia attacking Ukraine: from the annexation of Crimea in 2014 through this war.
 
Last edited:
"accurate assessment" from somebody who just now stated that we have no way of knowing.

Hilarious.
 
Meanwhile let the liars on here continue their futile attempts of denial, it serves well to show what fabric they're made of.

Which " liars" are " denying " what here ?
 
"accurate assessment" from somebody who just now stated that we have no way of knowing.

Hilarious.

Accurate assessment on those who hate whataboutism.

The only thing that's "hilarious" is your lack of the ability to understand what was being discussed
 
I can't think of a single thing Trump has done that didn't please Putin and weaken NATO.

 
The liars on here are so obvious that anyone caring to, can identify them with ease.
 
I said "I don't think I commented on Russia until it threatened Ukraine." All of my postings above were about Russiamattacking Ukraine: from the annexation of Crimea in 2014 through this war.

Okay, I am happy to accept the qualification., I thought you said since the Russian attack. Apologies for the mistake

Did you ever comment on the Ukrainian threat to Russia during the same period? You know, it's bid to join the massive/aggressive hostile military alliance called NATO ?
 
The liars on here are so obvious that anyone caring to, can identify them with ease.

I didn't think you would cite anything here nor the fact that you would acknowledge your mistake about my reference to whataboutism that you mistakenly thought was regarding alleged war crimes.

All you problems btw
 

How about we (humanity) stop dealing out warring and war weapons?
 
Last edited:
BTW there are no references to Abu Ghraib in a history search of your usename except for the one you just made
That is because I had not yet joined Debate Politics when Abu Ghraib occurred. I do not speak out only here. You will not find a reference here or anywhere on-line to a lot of things I spoke out about and marched about. That is because, blessedly, I did them in the 1960's and 1970's and if they made the "papers" of those days (which some did) (papers published by radical groups) no one has those newspapers anymore, not even me.
 

Are you saying that the two parts I highlighted are related?
 
The liars on here are so obvious that anyone caring to, can identify them with ease.

Can you properly identify the supposed lies by directly quoting them and explaining how they're lies?
 
somebody felt summoned?

No , people want you to either back your claims here or have the decency to retract them ?
 

So there is no evidence here for what you claim. Good thing is there is some for me lol
 
In the trial of Nazi criminal Klaus Barbie, the controversial lawyer Jacques Vergès tried to present what was defined as a Tu Quoque Defence—i.e., that during the Algerian War, French officers such as General Jacques Massu had committed war crimes similar to those with which Barbie was being charged, and therefore the French state had no moral right to try Barbie. This defense was rejected by the court, which convicted Barbie.

Now if the court had rejected Vergès line of defense with the argument "well, just look what a scumbag YOU are",it would have been as guilty of "tu quoque" as in its assessment of Vergès argument. But, being less silly than some of our whataboutism operators on here, it didn't.

That's why, despite possible exceptions to even that rule, courts are generally not composed of idiots. Or so one would hope.

The idea that whataboutism constitutes objectivity directed against the bias of others becomes particularly stupid when own bias is demonstrated in its appliance. Even more so in conjunction with the demonstration of own hypocrisy.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…