“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.

  • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    2 years 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?

    • FlowVoid
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 years ago

      Because the PM of Kosovo was an idiot. Fortunately he now seems to be willing to change his plans.

      • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 years 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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 years 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.

            • FlowVoid
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              Yugoslavia broke up Yugoslavia. NATO only went in after refugees started pouring out.

            • BrooklynMan@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              2 years 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
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                2 years 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
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 years 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.

                  “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?

                  • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    arrow-down
                    5
                    ·
                    2 years ago

                    Just to break it down, all I did was point out that you used a logical fallacy as a form of argument. In response, you started babbling about victimhood, narcissism, lies, and bullying. You are in that DARVO picture buddy, and it’s not a good look. What you’re doiing here is trolling and gaslighting. It’s very transparent. You have no points to make, you’re not able to formulate a sound argument, and all you do is just copy/paste the same drivel over and over adding nothing but noise to this thread. Go outside and touch grass.