Brasilia, Aug 2 (EFE).- The war in Ukraine proves that the world needs a new system of global governance, Brazilian president Luiz InĂĄcio Lula da Silva said Wednesday. In his first press conference with foreign journalists since he took office on January 1, Lula said the United Nations had failed to assume its âresponsibilityâ because âŠ
You tell others to âread before you writeâ but then yourself donât do it. Like you said, itâs quick google to see that âa lotâ of Russians donât speak English. But instead of doing a quick google to see if youâre full of shit you just write it out anyway. No regards to you own âread before you writeâ mantra. In fact every place where I specifically asked for proof is a place where youâre either completely wrong or partially wrong.
Then thereâs the whole âweâre here to have a discussion, why are you even here to discuss something if you donât care about it?â as if youâre open to discussion. Except when I actually push back you turn around and go âNo point in discussing, nobody else will see itâ which is entirely contradictory to US having âdiscussionâ.
Then thereâs the deliberately vague part which is how the entire thread started. Your first comment literally âmaybe this or maybe that and maybe something else wouldâve happenedâ. Could it be any more vague? I even pressed you on specifically mentioning what you mean by guarantees and your response was somehow even more vague, telling me to read Putins speech and figure them out on my own. You did something similar the second time when I asked proof of a lot of Russians speaking English and you told me to go find the data myself. Any and all attempts for any specificity out of you is met with vagueness or deflection. Which makes it pretty ironic for you to call people questioning your vagueness as vagueposting.
And then you pull out every âdebateâ lord trick in the book. You say Iâm wasting your time, Iâm moving goalposts, Iâm in bad faith. You call me names, like âdebate pervertâ. And then you pull a series of âevidence of nonsenseâ where youâre just raging.
I honestly had a good laugh over your entire comment because it epitomizes your hypocrisy.
What is that number again, I canât seem to find the wikipedia article on it. \s
Really silly of you to come back and not even look into it. If you want something even more precise, I challenge you to find something called âEnglish proficiency index,â but the entire point there is that you wasted my time asking for source on some incredibly easy to find non-politicised source for data to deflect from your baseless speculation on how âRussians fall for everythingâ of their own propaganda. I wonder what youâll think of the countries lower on that index. If you even look for it, that is.
You seem to be mistaken. Itâs not that I didnât read it, itâs that I didnât feel like adding it in the comment because itâs such easy to find info. But since you seem to be incapable of doing a basic google search to verify, and I think I should be your personal source-fetching bot, Iâm stubbornly not giving you the source because I âgave upâ on you. On the other hand you also came out with your own claim of âlots donât speak English,â with no source to contradict me, which is funny because you had a whole week to find one.
I can be petty sometimes, and if you keep pestering me Iâll only be petty from now on because youâre just a silly person with silly behaviour and I ainât got time in my life to take you seriously.
Everyone has limits, and you seem so stuck on completely failing to grasp even your own sources that I donât see why I should bother. I usually engage with silly people like you in forums because other, more curious and interested people might read it. Since youâre just being (intentionally?) silly and misreading your own sources on NATO or not remembering the official NATO name for the coup is âRevolution of Dignity,â I donât think thereâs much use to this one here and youâre free to go pester somebody else.
I like how you accuse me of âvaguepostingâ by being vague in your accusations. My very first comments were being made about they hypothetical guarantees you took so much issue with. You still havenât shown how those guarantees wouldâve not prevented the war or been sane de-escalations.
Since you always seem to forget: de-escalate war on Donnetsk and Luhansk, recognise their independence or at least do proper procedure on it, disband Azov and ban neo-nazi symbology, reinstate Russian as a co-official language, guarantee that Ukraine will not join NATO and thereâll be no nukes in Russiaâs critical neighbouring countries.
I bet each of those wouldâve been welcome there, but alas, NATO only cared about âtransparency,â from your own sources, and did not consider a single of Russiaâs complaints as valid. Now please, go off again on âwhat guarantees???â as if I havenât said that like 4 times now.
Those complaints are in the literal declaration speech ffs, but no I did not tell you to figure out on my own. Go read the comment again, I specifically quoted the specific sections. Your memory seems a bit wonky even though Iâve been apparently living rent-free in your mind for a week now. I donât live rent-free in my own home, can we switch that? Go re-read the whole thread.
As I said, I actually did put the source there, but lemmy bugged out and didnât post, which led me to realise I didnât want to bother with you anymore because youâre playing dumb. This last comment was specifically about how youâre playing dumb so hard you couldnât even search for English speaker statistics per country, as if itâs some huge gargantuan task. I bet you did that just to distract from the main point of Russians being able to critically analyse text, though you probably donât even remember that. Do you only know English, by any chance?
Ah yeah, the old debate trick of saying âfuck off, youâre being an arse, go pester somebody else.â Iâm not âdebatingâ with you anymore, nor was I ever to begin with. I just want you to find something more worthwhile to do with your life because I donât have an obligation to correct every single arrogantly ignorant person on the internet, just because theyâre feeling lonely. I do it of my own volition when I think I might change or learn something. As I said before, nobody else is watching, and you donât seem to have much interest in either learning or teaching, so this is indeed âa waste of my time.â You might find more interest if you send a letter to your congressperson.
I guess the internet is weird, people canât differentiate fun mockery from actual anger. I was mocking how incredibly ignorant you were showing yourself off to be, by either stating complete unsourced nonsense, or asking for sources for things that are literally in the links you provided, or even failing to understand how military alliances work. Obviously since I have no hope for you I wonât actually put the effort to explain why those are problems, I guess youâd just deflect to something else as always.
Yep. I stand by that.
Thatâs cool, at least something good came out of this whole interaction. I also enjoyed how you came back after the obvious bait of âcare to elaborate.â Seems like you really like me. But I donât like you, go find somebody who reciprocates.
Now, if you reply (and youâre obviously gonna reply, you just canât leave me be), before your own comment list in your own words every single demand from Russia wrt the war, and whether theyâve been conceded on or ignored. I wonder if youâll find something, but please donât come back without making it clear you understand those demands clearly.
Jesus⊠And you tell me how I misrepresent sources. But unlike you I actually take effort to explain why youâre wrong. EF EPI evaluates the English proficiency based on who took the test. It is not even an estimation of how big part of the population actually speaks english (on any level). It just states that from the russian people who chose to take test they proficiency is at B2 level. Also, you still didnât even bother to link a source.
I also didnât add any sources because most of should be an easy find, funny how you give me shit about it but then turn around and do the exact same thing. Also what the fuck? I never claimed âlots donât speak Englishâ. Youâre literally making shit up about what I supposedly said.
Anyway since you now indirectly asked for it, and it seems itâs not that easy of a search for you, I give you the source that Russians in general donât really speak English. I hope your Russian is good. Actually that wasnât a quick search, a quick search wouldâve found you an English site that actually gave a far more generous estimation (about 10%), but Iâm guessing you wouldâve taken an issue with a random English side stating the obvious so I dug a bit deeper to find a more official source, specifically to prove how fucking wrong you are.
Maybe you should considering itâs becoming more and more apparent how little you actually know about the shit youâre talking about. You might actually learn something from me.
I wasnât going to specifically address one part of your ramblings, nothing there deserved to be addressed because it was all bullshit. So donât throw out some easy gotchas like YOU getting the name wrong.
Iâve been trying to tell you for a while now, the demand of those guarantees is baseless. What is the justification for those demands? Should the rest of the world just roll over for Russia because they have concerns? Please, enlighten me how are they justified?
You say that, but then you also claim you wonât even give me the time of day. Another empty statement by you.
Well if being deliberately wrong is fun mockery then by all means, be a joke.
I do actually like you. Youâre part of my daily entertainment.
Iâm just going to stick my hand in your playbook and say every single demand is easy to google so you should know that I know what they are. I donât need to give sources to things that are easy to google. Did I get it right?
deleted by creator
Accidentally posted before writing fully, if youâre wondering about the deleted comment.
like patience⊠lots and lots of patienceâŠ
Whatâs the âcorrectâ name again, big guy? Say it in ALL CAPS like you like to do, like weâre in the 90s internet still.
Just two that are obvious, tolerating of Nazi symbology and members in Azov (your initial source on this did not go into detail on how exactly Azov doesnât allow Nazis in it anymore after being explicitly created by them 10 years ago), and de-escalating the war on Luhansk and Donnetsk and recognising their desire to be independent. Iâm not sure how somebody could be against those things, let alone deny that theyâve been happening for 10 years now. The rest are more complicated, find a friend to talk to about those. But please, donât address the important bit and go talk about random unrelated things like language levels, which is a tangent on top of a tangent on top of a tangent.
About as much as Mexico. Not a bad number at all, and nowadays we have cool tools like google translate or yandex. I canât actually read Cyrillic script but using those tools you can see that they name something like âschool languagesâ in which 20-30% of people study a foreign language at school but donât use it day-to-day. Thatâs a very big number if you compare it to other non-EU developed countries. Hopefully you yourself know Russian and can help correct if I mistranslated it. Thatâd be the first time your knowledge would contribute to the conversation.
erm, no? Arenât we on an English site?
On the other hand your other source isnât particularly âofficial,â itâs just a blog in Russian. You couldâve provided the English one instead, but I guess you preferred to obfuscate it all. The only source listed is the Russian census, which comes straight from the Russian government. Since you like those sources and clearly are fluent in Russian, you can help me translate the excel file hosted in the Russian Govt website here to check on those âstudy languages.â Iâm not the one who throws away sources because theyâre from âpropaganda outletsâ here, you are. From the very beginning of the discussion.
lol
You do know that when a person uses âwhenâ it means that they wonât do it when the âwhenâ clause isnât true? You have not shown any new info, and also donât seem willing to learn. But no, I wonât give the time of day to randos on the internet just because they demand it, get some irl friends.
Please elaborate on why every thing there was wrong, since youâre so sure of it. Do a whole a paragraph per statement. Iâll be sure to pat you on the back. The mockery was pointing out how ridiculous your statements were, if you didnât catch it.
Thatâs sad.
But although I find you incredibly annoying as a person, your silliness is also entertaining. Like an overly-aggressive Chihuahua or something. Or a Mensa teenager.
No, you didnât get it right. You got it wrong. Congrats. Here. I even hid it in the previous reply for ease of fetching later. I wonder if you can find where the easter egg was.
If you think youâre making me angry or something, and you take pleasure in that: no, you just bore me. Youâre boring, not nearly as witty as you think you are, and about as engaging as playing an idle game while on the bus or waiting for the food to boil. If youâre doing this out of some sadism, youâre probably going to be more efficient about it by frying ants. If you want to learn, go read a book or two, I recommend âBlackshirts and the Reds.â And if you want to help Ukraine, go join the foreign legion. But youâre definitely not âschoolingâ anybody here, specially since itâs literally just you and me now, and the Jigglypuff lullaby sounds like the Yellow Parenti speech next to your writing.
Come on mate, surely you have somebody who cares more about what you have to say in your life.
You do understand what justified means? You just gave me examples of the demands, not how theyâre justified.
Iâm sure you donât. I can understand being critical of those things but that is not justification. If your neighbor beats up their wife/girlfriend do you think it would be justified to kick down their door, beat the man into submission , kill their children, thrash the entire apartment and call it a job well done? Would it be more justified if you before-hand told that you would do it?
You do realize youâre the one who brought up language levels?
Because in this case the English source looks better than reality?
I guess your Russian is not that good then. Itâs a blog post that goes over the 2020 population consensus data. That numbers there are official numbers. More than 99% of Russians stated they know only Russian.
I honestly donât have anything else to say about the rest of your comment. It goes too off the tangent to really focus on any individual part there. Youâre just going on and on about how you donât care but you still keep coming back.
It is definitely justified to ask your neighbour to stop killing your other neighbours, joining Nazis and not letting the people there decide on whether they want to be independent or not. Imagine if the USA had a terrorist group called the keykeykey, and those groups went around killing people for being black or hispanic, and are waging war on the southern regions of Texas. I think youâd agree that it would be justified for Mexico to go âCould you remove keykeykey people from your government? They literally want to kill mexicans and black people in your borders.â Wouldnât be so nice for the USA to say âno fuck youâ like NATO did, would it? Before you ask me âwhen did NATO ignore the issue,â read your own initial source from nato.int you linked a while back.
Russia has been complaining about that for 10 years now, and Azov only got more entrenched in government while the Donbas war got escalated and fed supplies by NATO. I think you mistake me saying that Russia had some valid points with me thinking that theyâre perfect and above criticism. But they certainly have a point that declaring war on a separatist region after a coup is incredibly abhorrent, and to do that while glorifying Nazi collaborators like Bandera, toppling monuments to those who defeated the Nazis and having people with swastika tattoos and Nazi symbols in their paramilitary death squad just makes it too on the nose.
Now youâre talking about the subsequent war (in very inaccurate terms, I must add), instead of the guarantees that NATO couldâve done before the war to avoid it happening. But since you like individualistic and simplistic analogies, have another one. If your town has a keykeykey faction going around killing minorities and preventing them from even getting their own representation in government, toppled their preferred mayor and are doing terrorist attacks on the regions most populated by black people and mexicans, would it not be justified for bigger neighbouring city (that has a lot of mexicans) to ask for it to stop over 8 years, and after it proving fruitless to send in a swat team as requested by the local population? If it were me, Iâd be begging for that swat team after 1 year, let alone 8.
Now imagine that this bigger city has been blocked from interfering there by another bigger city on the other side, which specifically sells weapons to this keykeykey, and no matter how many pretty speeches on the
UNcongress they make, the rival city refuses to concede to even disbanding or stopping selling weapons to the keykeykey. You can complain all you want that the Russian forces have âthrashed the apartmentâ but this war has been going on for 10 years now, not just since 2021. You can probably see how your analogy fails to properly represent the death toll (thousands) and civilian displacement (more than 1 million people) of the Donbass war as âbeat their wife,â coming right after the 2014 coup, which is why I usually donât do analogies.I think you misunderstand there buddy, I donât throw away sources. I read them critically. You can give me any sources I can reliably read and we can talk about them. Problem is, when I do talk about them you change subject. Which I bet is why you chose a blog in Russian rather than a text I can read. Unlike you, I donât have Russian language proficiency, and Iâd like it if you respected that.
I guess your English is not that good then, I said itâs from the census in the reply:
Oh, I see. I guess we will never know why all those statements you threw out which I mocked were âobviously wrong.â Nor your taking issue with me paraphrasing you saying that âlots donât know Englishâ as if I made it up. Or your confusing statement that NATO doesnât call the 2014 coup the âRevolution of Dignity.â Or that the USA backing a coup doesnât implicate the defence organisation they lead. Or that Russia denies their support for the LPR and DPR. Or your myriad of other bizarre claims that you throw around and then immediately forget about in the following reply.
You throw so much bullshit at such an alarming rate, but donât even acknowledge when shown to be incorrect on each (even complaining that my reply debunking some was too long), which is the hallmark of a bad faith debatebro. Grab a microphone and camera, learn to talk really fast and go own some libs in uni campuses like the Ben Shapiro impersonator you want to be.
Just in case you completely skipped it, here again is a source on the Russian demands before the war that you keep ignoring. Next comment is going to be like âand yet again I see no sources, Iâm very smart.â
Itâs a saturday, cooking day. Me staring at the food boiling is just mildly less entertaining than you. Ironically it also requires a bit more effort. Itâs like morbidly browsing mensa teens on quora, but this one actually has a parasocial relationship with me.
Edit: not to mention, when I did not come back, you came crying to me a week later that I didnât prove you wrong enough, and you have a deep need to prove wrong or be proved wrong. Debatebros are so needy.
Have you read your source? Not a single mention of nazis or the war in Donbas. So go read your own source and then come tell me how those demands are justified.
Good point, I mixed up the articles about this, the Guardian doesnât even list the demands one by one. Hereâs one that lists all demands, which donât list the Nazis or Donbas directly, though those have been complained about before (see Putin speech earlier on). Then you can see this slightly newer negotiation development which acknowledges the DPR and LPR and demands the end of militarisation there and denazify (and therefore the end of the paramilitary death squads).
Now, you donât seem to understand that Russia can demand whatever it wants, even different things that were not in previous demands. That means that theyâll often drop or return to demands depending on their conditions, and Iâm not Putinâs personal spokesman and donât have to 100% agree with which of their demands is the most important. What prompted this whole conversation is what NATO couldâve done to de-escalate the conflict. Do you know a single guarantee made by NATO to reduce the likelyhood of war or prevent it going on for another 2 years with the risk of nuclear warfare? Iâd be happy to hear it.
Also you seem to confuse the meaning of âjustifiedâ there. You asked for sources on what demands have been made, those are up in the first paragraph. They donât justify anything though, only prove that the demands have been made in the past. Now after that you need to verify the veracity of those demands, and here are some sources that you might enjoy 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, on Azov and Nazis being trained and supplied by NATO and the Ukraine government, and just the wikipedia article on the War on Dombas because you donât seem to even be aware of it. Then once you come to a conclusion on whether the demands exist and are factual, you can decide if disbanding the Azov brigade and recognising the LPR and DPR are morally justifiable or not. âwhat sources???â
cute how you ignored everything else, though. Makes you look very sensible and intellectual. You should make an account here
How long are we going to talk in circles? I have been explaining how none of the demands are justified. Like you said Russia can demand whatever it wants, but whether those demands should be met depends on how reasonable or justified they are. It should be apparent that what NATO couldâve done to de-escalate also follows the pattern of satisfying reasonable demands. If none of the demands are reasonable thereâs nothing NATO can do to de-escalate, right? So, aside from the dissolution of Azov and recognizing LPR and DPR as legitimate (both of which are arguable whether NATO could even do something or if meeting those demands even matter considering they werenât even in the first demands) what else couldâve NATO done?