“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.

  • FlowVoid@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Wow, your maps are so persuasive!

    I’m excited to report that I just looked at map of Kosovo, it shows almost the same thing! That region is full of people who consider themselves ethnic Albanians who don’t support Serbia in the slightest.

    I guess that means that you must support the annexation of Kosovo to Albania, by force if necessary, right? I mean, because otherwise that would mean that you are nothing more than a reflexive, anti-West stooge and there’s no way that could be possible.

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      If people in Kosovo actually want to join Albania then they should be able to. Last I checked though, there are plenty of Serbs living there who recently clashed with NATO troops. You want to remind me why that happened?

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Wait, but I thought you were just telling me that people in Kosovo wanted to join Albania. Can’t even keep your story straight? 🤡

          • FlowVoid@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            No, I said Albanians in Kosovo are like Russians in Ukraine. Neither is 100% homogeneous, but that doesn’t give anyone a right to annex their land.

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

                Whataboutism

                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).

                • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Whataboutism is a form of a tu quoque logical fallacy used to justify having double standards for one’s own behavior and that of others. Anybody using this term unironically can be safely dismissed.

                  • BrooklynMan@lemmy.mlOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    only by hypocrites evading the very behavior they wish not to be criticized for. you confess in your attempt at criticism, not only to your bad faith arguments, but to your own hypocrisy and inability to process criticism.

                    The Narcissist’s Dilemma: They Can Dish It Out, But…

                    Although narcissists don’t, or won’t, show it, all perceived criticism feels gravely threatening to them—the reason that their inflamed, over-the-top reactions to it can leave us so surprised and confused. Deep down, clinging desperately not simply to a positive but grandiose sense of self, they’re compelled at all costs to block out any negative feedback about themselves. Their dilemma is that the rigidity of their defenses, their inability ever to let their guard down, guarantees that they’ll never get what they most need, which they themselves are sadly oblivious of.

                    “DARVO is an acronym used to describe a common strategy of abusers. The abuser will: Deny the abuse ever took place, then Attack the victim for attempting to hold the abuser accountable; then they will lie and claim that they, the abuser, are the real victim in the situation, thus Reversing the Victim and Offender.”

                    5 Ways Narcissists Project and Attack You

                    is there no way you can’t claim victimhood for being called out for your bad behavior, lies, endless logical fallacies, and bullying?