Gabby about Ukraine

[Antiwar]

Test yourself:
Ukraine is the Gabby Petito of wars.

 

[Nomad4Ever]

Test yourself:
Ukraine is the Gabby Petito of wars.

How so?

 

[Antiwar]

How so? "Really?"

 

[Questerr]

Antiwar, just because you haven’t been paying attention to “non-white” wars in the past, doesn’t mean others haven’t.

 

[Nomad4Ever]

How so? "Really?"

Yeah I have no idea who that is or how they relate to anything to do with a war.

 

[Questerr]

Yeah I have no idea who that is or how they relate to anything to do with a war.

Antiwar is trying to claim the media only pays attention to war when white nations are at war, a la the media only paying attention to missing women when those women are young, white, and pretty.

The problem is that there has been extensive media coverage of the wars in Syria, Yemen, and Afghanistan, not to mention the conflict with Boko Haram in Africa.

So once again, Antiwar is both ignorant and factually wrong.

 

[Antiwar]

The Left-libertarians for military-government violence are on top of things. I post a thread and the trolling begins immediately. Bam!

 

[Nomad4Ever]

Antiwar is trying to claim the media only pays attention to war when white nations are at war, a la the media only paying attention to missing women when those women are young, white, and pretty.

Ahh I see.

The problem is that there has been extensive media coverage of the wars in Syria, Yemen, and Afghanistan, not to mention the conflict with Boko Haram in Africa.

The real problem is that it's pretty clear the war in Ukraine is only getting so much coverage now because...well because it's a major war with two of the worlds strongest militaries going at each other. Obviously there is going to be a bias towards wars that effect us or our allies, but I'm pretty sure there would be some serious media coverage if Pakistan and India were started a full scale war as well.

There has been an actual war in Ukraine with thousands of casualties for almost a decade, but it wasn't particularly exciting and I doubt most Americans even knew about the Donbass war until recently. It's pretty obvious the scale, potential for escalation, and quite frankly the amount of amature videos being taken that is driving so much media coverage. Nobody gave two shits about the war in the Donbass.

 

[Questerr]

The Left-libertarians for military-government violence are on top of things. I post a thread and the trolling begins immediately. Bam!

Opportunity for you to answer the question clearly that you have consistently refused to:

Do you support Ukraine using their military to defend themselves from a militarist foreign invasion?

 

[Lloyd Christmas]

Test yourself:
Ukraine is the Gabby Petito of wars.

Yeah. nobody gives a shit when poor people of color are getting bombed and murdered. The US bombed and murdered civilians, have hit hospitals. Saudi's are slaughtering civilians in Yemen. Israel bombs the shit our of residential areas on Palestine.

But happening to white people and its such a travesty and gets so much press.

Just like how poor and people of color go missing all the time and are murdered, but he pretty blonde going missing makes national news

Antiwar is trying to claim the media only pays attention to war when white nations are at war, a la the media only paying attention to missing women when those women are young, white, and pretty.

The problem is that there has been extensive media coverage of the wars in Syria, Yemen, and Afghanistan, not to mention the conflict with Boko Haram in Africa.

So once again, Antiwar is both ignorant and factually wrong.

This is absolutely not true. Ukraine news in constant, and barely a blip on the slaughter of muslims and people of color, particularly when its the US doing it. There is very little popular press coverage but Ukraine even 6 weeks in still gets a ton of coverage. You are the one who is ignorant and wrong and its a joke you try to make that comment when what you post is complete lie. Nobody is saying there is no coverage, but you don't see people talking about hat at Oscars, constant talk on TV and media, about the slaughter of civilians done in the US

Ahh I see.


The real problem is that it's pretty clear the war in Ukraine is only getting so much coverage now because...well because it's a major war with two of the worlds strongest militaries going at each other. Obviously there is going to be a bias towards wars that effect us or our allies, but I'm pretty sure there would be some serious media coverage if Pakistan and India were started a full scale war as well.

There has been an actual war in Ukraine with thousands of casualties for almost a decade, but it wasn't particularly exciting and I doubt most Americans even knew about the Donbass war until recently. It's pretty obvious the scale, potential for escalation, and quite frankly the amount of amature videos being taken that is driving so much media coverage. Nobody gave two shits about the war in the Donbass.

Yes, but its more than that, people are disgusted by the murder of civilians, the blowing up of hospitals and maternity wards. Many don't care

it really is undeniable how little care people had to murdered civilians when it was the US doing it, or Israel doing it (maybe not as bad-I remember lots of outrage last time they bombed the shit out of them), and very little regarding Yemen

 

[Nomad4Ever]

The Left-libertarians for military-government violence

"Pacifism. Pacifism is objectively pro-Fascist. This is elementary common sense. If you hamper the war effort of one side you automatically help that of the other. Nor is there any real way of remaining outside such a war as the present one. In practice, ‘he that is not with me is against me’. The idea that you can somehow remain aloof from and superior to the struggle, while living on food which British sailors have to risk their lives to bring you, is a bourgeois illusion bred of money and security." - socialist and anti-authoritarian George Orwell

George Orwell: Pacifism and the War

Pacifism and the War, the essay of George Orwell. First published: August-September 1942 by/in Partisan Review, GB, London

orwell.ru

 

[Antiwar]

Do you support Gabby defending herself?

Yes. Plus she's very cute and likable.

 

[Questerr]

Yeah. nobody gives a shit when poor people of color are getting bombed and murdered. The US bombed and murdered civilians, have hit hospitals. Saudi's are slaughtering civilians in Yemen. Israel bombs the shit our of residential areas on Palestine.

But happening to white people and its such a travesty and gets so much press.

Just like how poor and people of color go missing all the time and are murdered, but he pretty blonde going missing makes national news

Except that’s not true. Conflicts in “brown countries” have received extensive media coverage.

War in general generates lots of clicks and views.

 

[Questerr]

Do you support Gabby defending herself?

Yes. Plus she's very cute and likable.

I absolutely would support Gabby defending herself.

The problem is that the definitions you have used against “militarism” in the past means countries are militarist if they use a military to defend themselves from aggression.

 

[Antiwar]

One of the Left-libertarians for government-military violence (LLGMV) equates being anti-war and being a pacifist. That's understandable.

 

[Questerr]

"Pacifism. Pacifism is objectively pro-Fascist. This is elementary common sense. If you hamper the war effort of one side you automatically help that of the other. Nor is there any real way of remaining outside such a war as the present one. In practice, ‘he that is not with me is against me’. The idea that you can somehow remain aloof from and superior to the struggle, while living on food which British sailors have to risk their lives to bring you, is a bourgeois illusion bred of money and security." - socialist and anti-authoritarian George Orwell

George Orwell: Pacifism and the War

Pacifism and the War, the essay of George Orwell. First published: August-September 1942 by/in Partisan Review, GB, London

orwell.ru

What I would have given to just meet Eric Blair and shake his hand.

 

[Questerr]

One of the Left-libertarians for government-military violence (LLGMV) equates being anti-war being a pacifist. That's understandable.

You aren’t anti-war though. You are pro-surrender. You don’t believe Ukraine should be fighting back because fighting back is “militarism”.

You believe the proper response to militarist aggression is to not fight back and hope you get saved by some utopian “international justice system”.

 

[Antiwar]

Someone is very pro-strawman.

 

[Questerr]

Someone is very pro-strawman.

I’ve given you every opportunity to repudiate your previous definition of militarism and clearly state you support countries using military force to defend themselves and support countries maintaining strong militaries for that purpose.

You have instead chosen to lie and refuse to clearly state any such thing.

 

[Antiwar]

Dood seems to think I'm a grunt and he's an officer in his LLGMV army.

 

[Questerr]

Dood seems to think I'm a grunt and he's an officer in his LLGMV army.

No, I seem to think you’re a troll with no interest in honest debate. You come here to preach your ridiculous utopian nonsense that has no relationship with reality and then refuse to address any criticisms of it. Your entire worldview is based around making yourself feel superior while not offering a single realistic practical solution o any problem you criticize others for.

Whether it’s warfare or climate change or neoliberal capitalism, you have no solutions. Just self-righteous criticisms.

 

[Antiwar]

Chuckle. The LLGMVs can't get over the losses they've accumulated against me.

What were the LLGMV's utopian ideas again? That's funny that they think they're more realistic than me! One says that nuclear fission has a utopian future. Did you look up uranium mining, yet? Both are socialist libertarians that are into the US military. Socialism is making a comeback!

 

[Questerr]

Chuckle. The LLGMVs can't get over the losses they've accumulated against me.

What were the LLGMV's utopian ideas again? That's funny that they think they're more realistic than me! One says that nuclear fission has a utopian future. Did you look up uranium mining, yet? Both are socialist libertarians that are into the US military. Socialism is making a comeback!

When have I ever claimed nuclear fission has a “utopian future”? I’ve rightfully claimed that nuclear fission is necessary for any long term operations in space outside of Earth’s orbit. You know who else thinks that? LITERALLY EVERY EXPERT ON SPACE OPERATIONS.

Have you looked up lithium mining? Or the rare earths used to build solar panels? Mining those creates more pollution and CO2 than mining uranium does (and that’s not even counting other fission fuels like thorium).

So clearly you oppose solar power, yes?

 

[Antiwar]

You're not the only LLGMV!

Oh yeah, this LLGMV is a "We'll use up all of nuclear fission to populate another planet" utopian! He's much more realistic than I am! Space Force!

 

[Questerr]

You're not the only LLGMV!

Oh yeah, this LLGMV is a "We'll use up all of nuclear fission to populate another planet" utopian! He's much more realistic than I am!

Where have I ever said that? Quote me as I did multiple times with your definition of militarism, that you then repeatedly lied about.

Simple fact: if your long term plan for humanity doesn’t include leaving Earth, then in the long run, humans will go extinct. Having all our eggs in the basket of Earth means we are one asteroid or comet away from having every accomplishment our species ever created wiped out.

But I guess you have rather just have the International Justice System arrest the comet, right?