Let’s have a war!

[jfish26]

JFC, this has been explained to you multiple times. Ukraine is not being "investigated for genocide". The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has ruled that parts of Ukraine’s case against Russia arguing that Moscow baselessly accused Kyiv of genocide to justify the 2022 invasion can move forward. This means that UKRAINE has asked for the opportunity to make their case that Russian claims of genocide are baseless. "Being investigated for genocide" is far different than "asking for a baseless claim of genocide to be investigated".

My god, no kidding. I try to avoid posting on this thread of idiocy because it makes my eyes bleed and my brain hurt. Just such a stunning lack of effort to read and comprehend. The side effects of reading everything in search of a zippy one liner, I suppose.

Scenario 1: A person is investigated for raping a child because there is credible evidence to believe that it has ha[[ened.

Scenario 2: A person asks a court to rule on whether a third party's baseless claim of them being a child rapist are true or whether the third party making the claim is using the claim to discredit you and justify their own illegal behavior.

Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 are completely different. Referring to them both as "being investigated for the rap of a child" is either deliberately ignorant or lazy.

so the NYT article in question is now behind a paywall for me. So now, all I can see is the title, which is:

"U.N. Court to Rule on Whether Ukraine Committed Genocide"

To me, I read that as, the U.N. Court is going to rule on whether Ukraine committed genocide. But if my Putin-poisoned mind is misinterpreting the headline, let me know!

This is, again, the exact same article we have already discussed. I would, again, point you to my and other responses, so that you are free to see the other excerpts, from which it should be clear that you drew entirely the wrong conclusion from the headline.

viewtopic.php?p=382826&hilit=genocide#p382826

And this is the whole point: you drew an entirely wrong conclusion (but, a conclusion that confirms your priors) from a source that presented only a small part of the story in a very particular way. This is an example of confirmation bias.

You then used that (entirely wrong) conclusion to make a broader argument. When you do that, your broader argument (which might be well-meaning) is without foundation.

This is precisely what I meant when I said that Russia is using disinformation to exploit people who sincerely hold anti-war positions. Russia is counting on people who sincerely hold anti-war positions to adopt and parrot Russia's talking points (which are disinformation).

[ousdahl]

...so I guess that's a, no, the U.N. Court has NOT yet ruled on whether Ukraine committed genocide.

Seems like that ruling could clear up a lot in a hurry, as it pertains to this discussion.

if the U.N. Court rules that Ukraine has not committed genocide, well duh! Of course they didn't! Cuz it was all just Russian disinformation all along, as concluded by the no less than the U.N. Court! Confirmation bias confirmed! And I guess I'll have to eat whatever crauw you perceive me as deserving to eat then, now won't I, and you know I will! (like for real, not sure what "entirely wrong conclusion" you think I've drawn when I've mostly tried to maintain the court's conclusion is still pending.)

if the U.N. Court rules that maybe Ukraine, heaven forbid, HAS commited genocide...


oh man.


what then?

[TDub]

I just....I mean....I dont even know. This spiral is really something to behold.

[Overlander]

And I'll try my best to avoid any told-you-so, cuz I know how annoying that would be, and cuz we all know the only thing it would achieve is some "buyers don't want to be educated against their will" sort of stop-making-me-question-my-own-world-views reaction.

No, you wont

[Overlander]

And I'll try my best to avoid any told-you-so, cuz I know how annoying that would be, and cuz we all know the only thing it would achieve is some "buyers don't want to be educated against their will" sort of stop-making-me-question-my-own-world-views reaction.

There is no visible gap between Randy and Ousdahl at this point

[ousdahl]

you guys.

the whole "no visible gap between Randy and Ousdahl" is far more of a self-own than you realize. That's why I mockingly post that very thing on the reg!

For real, I think we could all use a little awareness here. For real, can we stop and realize what a goddamn neoliberal circle jerk this thread is?

Now if you really want me to relent, you're gonna have to knock off all your own putting-words-in-my-mouth, and various other troll jobs.

Either that, or finally just nut up and take it to the QT thread.

[KUTradition]

For real!

[ousdahl]

for real, know who else used to ignore the substance of discussions and instead just post that laughing emoji antagonistically?



Lobster.



don't be a Lobster, trad.

[Overlander]

for real, know who else used to ignore the substance of discussions and instead just post that laughing emoji antagonistically?



Lobster.



don't be a Lobster, trad.

I only compare you to Randy because Lobster dried and died on the sunny shores.

But, you are getting there.

No idea if that is your goal….

[KUTradition]

For real!

[ousdahl]

for real, know who else used to ignore the substance of discussions and instead just post that laughing emoji antagonistically?



Lobster.



don't be a Lobster, trad.

I only compare you to Randy because Lobster dried and died on the sunny shores.

But, you are getting there.

No idea if that is your goal….

Def not my goal.

I only compare Randy to myself cuz one dood's ideology shits all over women and the other's actually impresses women, and yet the two are somehow literally the exact same thing

at least according to the pols bored echo chamber at large.

[TDub]

omg

[Overlander]

for real, know who else used to ignore the substance of discussions and instead just post that laughing emoji antagonistically?



Lobster.



don't be a Lobster, trad.

I only compare you to Randy because Lobster dried and died on the sunny shores.

But, you are getting there.

No idea if that is your goal….

at least according to the people more experienced and knowledgable as an echo chamber at large.

[ousdahl]

Another self own.

Tell us more about your knowledge and experience in echo chambers!



Tell us more about your knowledge and experience in echo chambers!



Tell us more about your knowledge and experience in echo chambers!

[ousdahl]

Whoa.

It worked!

Ok I’ll admit, that echo chamber is pretty rad.

[TDub]

https://youtu.be/JTMVOzPPtiw?si=NzgJRmniFX9RWTh0


jfc..."my ideology impresses girls" is about the dumbest justification you've had yet. Grab your fedora and comb your neckbeard. Really speaks to your maturity level.

some girls are impressed by confederate flags, some girls are impressed by money, some by gold chains, some by pink polos and a frat brand, and on and on...thats an absolutely pathetic thing to say out loud. You've really hit rock bottom and are grasping at straws. Congrats. You can't improve until you've hit bottom and know it. Let's hope this really is it.

[ousdahl]

Sure babe, the fedora can stay on during sex. You’re welcome.





(That’s a joke btw. Don’t get your zoot suits in a twist here)





Now do tell us more about how the one grasping straws is me!

Do you think another Limp Bizkit song might help you get the point across? And no doubt, speak to maturity levels too!

[twocoach]

JFC, this has been explained to you multiple times. Ukraine is not being "investigated for genocide". The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has ruled that parts of Ukraine’s case against Russia arguing that Moscow baselessly accused Kyiv of genocide to justify the 2022 invasion can move forward. This means that UKRAINE has asked for the opportunity to make their case that Russian claims of genocide are baseless. "Being investigated for genocide" is far different than "asking for a baseless claim of genocide to be investigated".

My god, no kidding. I try to avoid posting on this thread of idiocy because it makes my eyes bleed and my brain hurt. Just such a stunning lack of effort to read and comprehend. The side effects of reading everything in search of a zippy one liner, I suppose.

Scenario 1: A person is investigated for raping a child because there is credible evidence to believe that it has ha[[ened.

Scenario 2: A person asks a court to rule on whether a third party's baseless claim of them being a child rapist are true or whether the third party making the claim is using the claim to discredit you and justify their own illegal behavior.

Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 are completely different. Referring to them both as "being investigated for the rap of a child" is either deliberately ignorant or lazy.

so the NYT article in question is now behind a paywall for me. So now, all I can see is the title, which is:

"U.N. Court to Rule on Whether Ukraine Committed Genocide"

To me, I read that as, the U.N. Court is going to rule on whether Ukraine committed genocide. But if my Putin-poisoned mind is misinterpreting the headline, let me know!

So my question to you then is:

did the the U.N. Court issue their ruling yet?

if I recall, the article said it would take a long ass time to issue such a ruling. And a cursory google news search of my own just now indicated no updates on the case since the initial headlines in February.

But if I recall, the gist of the article was less, "asking for a baseless claim of genocide to be investigated" (to quote your words), and more "Ukraine asked the ICJ to throw out Russia's genocide claim as baseless but the ICJ decided to investigate the claim anyway"

but again, if I'm wrong, and Ukraine really did just to go asking the ICJ to investigate baseless claims, then please do correct me!

There have been other media sites that have covered the situation. Google it. If you were actually concerned about it then you already would have done that and realized that all your questions have already been answered out there.

[ousdahl]

“A cursory google news search of my own just now indicated no updates”

[TDub]

Sure babe, the fedora can stay on during sex. You’re welcome.





(That’s a joke btw. Don’t get your zoot suits in a twist here)





Now do tell us more about how the one grasping straws is me!

Do you think another Limp Bizkit song might help you get the point across? And no doubt, speak to maturity levels too!

I know you are but what am I. jfc