80% of worlds's opioids consumption is in USA which has 4,6% of worlds population.
That's what they are doing, waging Third Opium War on their own people.
Intelligence agencies love the drug trade because:
- It's easy (certainly for a state actor) dark money
- It's ubiquitous
- It gives you blackmail material on all sorts of useful people
- It gives you the proven ability to smuggle bulk quantities across the globe
- Who is going to blow the whistle on you?
A reminder that the Taliban only exists because the US funded the Mujahideen during the Soviet-Afghan war
LOL. Raises questions for whom? Libs? Everyone knows what the fucking USA was doing all along. Except the libs.
NB: both USA Rs and Ds are both liberal in their political philosophy and are both subject to this critique.
During the time of the US occupation of Afghanistan, opium from the region comprised a full 90% of the world's heroin supply. So I would say "the same thing they've been doing since at least the days of the Vietnam War and the Golden Triangle."
lmao, no it doesn’t. the US didn’t go to Afghanistan to eradicate opium. the US didn’t give a shit about it at all, lmao.
do tankies so blindly hate the US that they’ll give the Taliban a bj just to try to make the US look bad? wow...
The Afghanistan Papers: A Secret History of the War is a summary of the Washington Post's reporting on Afghanistan, specifically on the US government's own internal assessments from all levels of the military and political administration. In it, you'll find this quote:
Of all the failures in Afghanistan, the war on opium ranked among the most feckless. During two decades, the United States spent more than $9 billion on a dizzying array of programs to deter Afghanistan from supplying the world with heroin. None of the measures worked. In many cases, they made things worse.
The US doesn't need "tankies" or anyone else to make themselves look bad as far as the Afghan drug trade goes.
lmao, so? we get it. you hate the US. what’s your point? just to come here and whine about it?
Ha you were conclusively proven wrong and didn't even blink. A brain so smooth no facts can get stuck on it.
spoiler
Post another 🤓 "I was on the debate team" graphic, that's how discussions work
I live in a US colony, so yeah I can be pretty fucking pissed about them
This flew over your head but it is heavily implied
are logical fallacies all you guys know?
Show
That’s not the creation of a straw man
I saw this in another comment, I think it works here:
“nuh-uh” isn’t a convincing argument. most people learn this when they’re 5.
hat is an accusation I’m making of you, specifically, based on the fact that your comment in no way addressed the idea
just because you don’t understand (or refuse to acknowledge) what I said doesn’t make me wrong or you right.
If you read my comment you’ll see that I also address your “argument” directly.
with a logical fallacy. I pointed this out
Show
🤡 “Why would you post world news in a world news community? Who cares?”
when you have t twist my words into something other than what they meant just to score imaginary points, it’s not me who looks bad… ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Show
you misrepresented what I said to make the argument easier to defeat.
Show
when your unimaginative rhetorical tricks fail, you hurl insults.
You're complaining about hurling insults? Here's you in this thread:
what’s your point? just to come here and whine about it?
are logical fallacies all you guys know?
“nuh-uh” isn’t a convincing argument. most people learn this when they’re 5.
“I know you are but what am I?” is not a convincing argument. most people learn this when they’re 5.
your inability/refusal to understand is not my problem
I’m amazed you didn’t snap your own neck with those mental gymnastics
Insufferable
The Reddit brain on display is amazing. My favorite part is when he uses debate terms incorrectly.
Like it's clear that he's heard people use the terms but doesn't actually understand what they mean.
I bet you find it frustrating that all of your bullshit doesn’t work.
so sad. lol
"I bet you find it frustrating that I'm too stupid to understand what you're saying"
Lol
oh, look, another troll from hexbear misquoting me. guess that’s all you know how to do ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
someone should teach you kids how to read
No, I'm mocking you because I don't respect you. Why should anyone take you seriously when your only response to any sort of citation is to pretend not to know how to read and post Reddit-tier debate bro buzzwords that you clearly don't understand the meaning of. It's hilarious.
No, I’m mocking you because I don’t respect you.
oh, no! I don’t have the respect of an internet troll and a bully! what ever shall I do?
Show
Bullying and trolling is when people call out your slimy bullshit lmao
not caring what internet trolls think of me = “slimy bullshit”?
if you screamed your insecurities any louder, I’d go deaf
People have been incredibly patient with you and you've done nothing but shid and fard everywhere in response.
People have been incredibly patient
oh, how nice of ‘everyone” to dedicate hours upon hours trolling me. I feel special to have kept them from trolling anyone else.
thanks for saying out loud how much control I have over you. all of you.
Where are these trolls, are they in the room with you right now? Is everyone that refutes your dumb ass a troll?
and here’s the name-calling again. did something I say make you mad again? :(
I didn't think people this Reddit brained existed. What a trip. Thanks for the laugh.
- Showding ding ding! we got an association fallacy, just because you think 1 responder is a troll doesn't mean they're all trolls, you didn't prove that, you just used a fallacy
ding ding ding! we got an association fallacy, just because you think 1 responder is a troll doesn’t mean they’re all trolls, you didn’t prove that, you just used a fallacy
just because you ignore the proof doesn’t negate it.
🚨 🚨 🚨 🚨 🚨 🚨 The fallacy police are on their way, you really did it now
YOUR APPLICATION TO JOIN THE FALLACY POLICE HAS BEEN DENIED
we found that you have used too many logical fallacies in the past to properly represent our organization
stop trolling man, you've been brigading this hexbear post for hours, I hope we defederate from your instance
stop trolling man, you’ve been brigading this hexbear post for hours
this post in on lemmy.ml on the community !worldnews.
you ARE lost, lol
I hope we defederate from your instance
PLEASE DO
so much brigading from these lemmy.ml users.
they really are The_Donald of lemmy
aww, there ya go, blaming others for things you did to yourself.
cute
- Showthats another strawman, you can't prove that these people are trolls, they're just regular people expressing their opinions same as you
thats another strawman, you can’t prove that these people are trolls, they’re just regular people expressing their opinions same as you
you’re welcome to try to prove that
You made the argument, the burden of proof is on you. Stop trying to make other people do your work for you
You made the argument, the burden of proof is on you
what argument? you seem lost. and mad.
do you have dementia? should we call your next of kin or something?
- Showthats a strawman, you're strawmanning your opponent by pretending that they have no real argument even though you've seen their argument and ignored it.
“I know you are but what am I?” isn’t a convincing argument. most people learn this when they’re 5.
I you can’t argue against “graphics”, you’re just admitting how weak your position is.
lol
“you see, I have drawn myself as the chad.”
if that’s what you have to do to fell better about yourself, I promise not to judge.
you quoted the entire text of my comment, like it was unclear what part you were referring to.
you are now strawmanning to avoid engaging with the subject at hand
“I know you are but what am I” isn’t a convincing argument. most people learn this when they’re 5.
I can copy and paste a response to every comment you make as well. It doesn't make you right, you just copypasta your response and move on. If that isn't a logical fallacy I don't know what is
congratulations on discovering copy/paste?
let me know when you discover a rational argument based on fact that’s actually relevant to the discussion.
Invoking the concept of a strawman when someone says you're not paying attention
That's just plain fucking stupid.
Who said I was arguing with you, dipshit? What would the point of that be? I've seen how you act. You ignore literally everything everyone says and post clippings from a high school textbook you clearly never read and don't understand.
And what the fuck would I be making an argument about in the first place? You aren't talking about anything. Shame on my comrades for engaging with you for anything other than to bully your ass for being a blight on the conversation other people are having around you.
Who said I was arguing with you, dipshit?
you replied to my comment. are you lost? lol
and your childish tantrums and name-calling don’t impress me, nor does your bullying. all it tells me is that you’re so afraid of losing an argument to a stranger on the internet, it drives you into a blind rage.
that’s how much control you give to strangers because you have no control over yourself.
you replied to my comment. are you lost? lol
Are you a fucking smurf? Do you have blue fucking skin?
Do you read the completely different words 'reply' and 'argue' and just hear "smurf smurf smurf!" in your head? You understand different words convey different meanings, right?
You said someone used a strawman argument when they said you didn't pay attention to what they told you.
Speaking of tantrums. Speaking of looking like a fool.
You said someone used a strawman argument when they said you didn’t pay attention to what they told you.
congratulations on learning to read, but that doesn’t explain anything.
Speaking of tantrums. Speaking of looking like a fool.
yeah… that still doesn’t explain why you did those things….
congratulations on learning to read, but that doesn’t explain anything.
It does, the message simply went over your head because you don't understand the concept of a strawman.
You may be shocked to find that those cool drawings you've been posting have words on them. Maybe you should learn to read too!
it’s sad that you have to keep telling yourself that, despite zero facts to support it.
What part am I telling myself and from when was it repeated?
Have some more pride in your trolling, you fucking loser. You're sleep walking here. Up your game.
Sleepy Smurf.
Have some more pride in your trolling
“I know you are but wha am I?” isn’t a convincing argument. most people learn this when they’re 5.
Is this new tactic of putting emotional distance between yourself and this interaction helping you feel less upset?
Is this new tactic of putting emotional distance between yourself and this interaction helping you feel less upset?
is that how your mind works? yikes!
I'm talking about you speaking as if you're observing the interaction from far away, no longer addressing yourself to me.
Elaborate on what you were talking about, please. What coping mechanism am I using?
I’m talking about you speaking as if you’re observing the interaction from far away, no longer addressing yourself to me.
sounds convoluted. do you do that often to cope with feelings and situations you have difficulty processing?
be a pissy little punk ass then. I postsed it for the benefit of everyone who comes later to laugh at you. Do what you want.This reply is funny because it implies you were fine being called a smurf.
It's funny as an insult because it reflects both how you used bots to give yourself upvotes (you also post on them with those fallacy notecards of yours, don't think it hasn't been noticed) and how you can't tell the difference between words.
By calling you a smurf I'm saying you're both a fucking idiot and a pathetic loser who needs other people to think you're getting social validation but are faking it and are receiving none.
If someone said that shit about me I'd be very upset, but I guess it's just incorporated into your self image so fundamentally it doesn't even register as an insult. That's fucking sad lol.
I hope you're short irl too so it hits on three levels.
Yeah really funny how all your posts appeared with exactly five upvotes and after that no one upvoted them afterwards.
you’re saying you’re child who can’t argue a point and can only deal with heir anger with name-calling.
Again, you fucking moron, from the very beginning I said I had no intention of arguing with you and that you didn't have any points to argue with in the first place. Am I wrong? Do you have a point?
No points rattling in your head confirmed.
because all the comments in this thread
Literally the second you got called on it.
you’re doing this to yourself, you know… it stops when you walk away….
Oh my god you think you're a badass doing this. Holy shit that's fucking hilarious.
Show
Literally the second you got called on it.
called it
Show
Oh my god you think you’re a badass doing this
why would I? just because it’s what you think doesn’t mean it’s what normal people think.
I think you enjoy being this angry or you wouldn’t even be here trolling. why else would you torture yourself like this?
Lol if anything it would have been post hoc ergo propter hoc
You're bad at doing your own bit lol
why would I?
Lmao how the fuck would I know?
Lol if anything it would have been post hoc ergo propter hoc
well, you’re the pro at wielding local fallacies. nice telling on yourself, btw.
You’re bad at doing your own bit lol
I just got you to confess to the trolling you’ve been denying, so… obviously not, lmao
Lmao how the fuck would I know?
you pretend to know lots of things about me. why would you stop making stuff up now? if you can’t even make sense out of your own argument, how do you expect it to make sense to anyone else? LOLOLOL
well, you’re the pro at wielding local fallacies. nice telling on yourself, btw.
I'm not a pro I'm just not some sophomoric idiot that uses them as yugioh cards without reading them.
Neutral. Your core personality trait is just something I learned in school. Except I didn't fetishize it as being a way to argue itself. And I actually paid attention in class.
more insults because you can’t argue facts.
we learned about that in school, too.
When did I insult you just now? What makes you think I can't argue facts?
Use words, dummy. That's been your problem from the beginning. You can't articulate a fucking point to save your life.
You can’t articulate a fucking point to save your life.
says the guy who hurls insults and swear words and trolls for hours and hours.
lol
Wanna go back and count the number of times I pointed out you never made a point to argue about and tell you how many times you've proven me right so far
A rational argument about what? What was the point of yours I was supposed to be arguing about?
rotational person
lol
A rational argument about what? What was the point of yours I was supposed to be arguing about?
you tell me. you’re the one who’s wasted the last 6 hours trolling me
If you have a point you want to make why would I know what it is. That's the point of asking questions stupid.
A rational argument about what? What was the point of yours I was supposed to be arguing about?
Answer please.
If you have a point you want to make why would I know what it is.
I made it many hours ago.
A rational argument about what? What was the point of yours I was supposed to be arguing about?
Then you should be able to provide an answer, please.
Then you should be able to provide an answer, please.
I did. sorry for you troubles with reading/comprehending
I appreciate your sympathy but if you're cognizant of my mental deficiencies it would be good of you to accomodate them if you're planning on continuing this conversation.
To wit I need an answer please.
Literally just tell me what you think we're talking about. Come on. You can do it. Don't be scared. Nice and slow.
sympathy? what makes you think I have any sympathy for you? or any feelings at all?
The part where you used these words in this order:
sorry for you troubles with reading/comprehending
Why do you need to have sympathy for me in order to continue this conversation productively?
Answer please.
Yeah I wasn't going to make fun of you for the grammatical error because it's not fair to be mean to fucking idiots like you
If you have a point you want to make why would I know what it is.
The point @AntiOutsideAktion@hexbear.net was making is that you have no value as a poster. Your words are meaningless because you are not even trying to say anything you are just trying to be antagonistic.
To him your only purpose in existence is to be used as a speed ball for anyone with a brain to show how many times they can smack your ugly mug. Your only virtue is your ignorance as it makes you keep coming back for more.
He just got a free workout at the dunking gym. He didn't brake a sweat pummelling your thick leathery brain. He is using you to make himself look like a golden god of shitposting by measuring himself against you. (though his endurance is pretty impressive) If you had any redeemable qualities I'd feel his continued dunking was a bit mean and I'd pity you but you are beyond pity to the point of farce. You seem too pathetic to exist and yet you do. Its a marvel that makes me laugh.
Do you think quoting someone smarter than you is going to make your arguments better? That's actually adorable. And usually you'd be right! But you're running into the same problem as the fallacy flash cards, dummy. You have to read the words first to know what it says.
aww, mad boi is hurling insults again because he can't handle his rage in a healthy way :(
Lol I love Scrappy Smurf
Do have another line for him or is that it? Other impressions?
Uncultured swine. That's Hefty Smurf. You're Tuffy* Smurf. The Scrappy Do analogue.
This one
Show
Still +5 upvotes on this six hours later, huh?
Weird how the only people who find value in your comments only ever show up right when you make them.
Difference is I explicitly said I wasn't arguing. If you think you're winning an argument... what's it about?
You know we are leftists here. You can just say you are into your wife sleeping with other men. We respect a diversity of lifestyles. You don't have to do the whiskey overcompensation persona thing here. We can accept and respect who you are.
lmao, so? we get it. you hate learning. what’s your point? just to come here and whine about it?
We also didn't threaten to kill the farmers for growing it. No shit the Taliban was successful. Comply or die. They're the ones who were profiting from it anyway. Now that they're in charge again, religion trumps financial needs.
I'm pretty sure the Talibans (not to defend them, mind you), were already cracking down on poppy farming before 9/11 and the subsequent decade long war.
So how were they benefitting? Or do you mean to say the US and allied forces allowed mass poppy crop farming that was then utilized by the Taliban to fund itself? You know there is an alternative hypothesis: the US and other occupation allied forces tolerated poppy farming to pacify and win over tribal chiefs and keep corrupt Afghan officials squarely on their side. Maybe both were happening, who is to say.
Financed their war effort. We valued the whole hearts and minds over destroying farmers livelihood.
winning the hearts and minds of the people we brutally conquered and ruled over for 20 years
Quite a few would disagree with that view, giving how many fled their own country when the Taliban took over again. But hey, don't let that narrative ruin your perspective. Lol
Of course people who cooperate with occupiers usually want out when the occupation ends. They don't want to face the consequences of selling out their country.
And of course "when people leave a Bad Country it's for political reasons, when they leave a Good Country it's for economic reasons" applies.
Lol, winning hearts and minds by protecting child rapists
Average soldier wanted to deal with that. It was high command keeping that shit going because they wanted to keep tribal leaders happy.
That's even worse? Your senior officers are supposed to be the ones doing the right thing.
No no you see the rank and file totally wanted to stop all that child SA, but alas they simply had to follow orders
"Just following orders" I say at my trial, confident no one has used this argument before
Lmao, how can you justify this shit? Do you really think American was actually trying to win hearts and minds when even you admit high command was protecting child rapists?
it must be easy to say whatever you want when you don’t have to worry about facts, lol
The us was using opium as a weapon of war against russia and iran. Its well known and the public health concequences in both those countries were horrific
But since mexico has orders of mag itude more state capacity than the taliban their failure to solve opium problem makes one almost certain the us goverment is also behind that.
I had a bunch of friends who went to Afghanistan/Iraq and they were protecting poppy and marijuana fields
Lmao
You mean the US wasn't trying to eliminate heroin production
Show
"...but at what cost?!?!" These lizards deserve a whole lot of things.
Mint Press News – Bias and Credibility
Show
FAR LEFT BIAS
QUESTIONABLE SOURCE
A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency, and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact-checked on a per-article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.
- Overall, we rate Mint Press Far-Left Biased and Questionable based on the publication of conspiracy theories, pseudoscience anti-Israel propaganda, poor sourcing, failed fact checks, and false claims.
Detailed Report
- Reasoning: Propaganda, Conspiracies, Pseudoscience, Poor Sources, Failed Fact Checks
- Bias Rating: FAR LEFT
- Factual Reporting: LOW
- Country: USA
- Press Freedom Rank: MOSTLY FREE
- Media Type: Website
- Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
- MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY
History
Mint Press News is an independent Minnesota-based news website launched in 2012 by Mnar Muhawesh. It covers political, economic, foreign affairs, and environmental issues. According to their about page, “We focus our coverage on issues relating to the effects of special interest groups, big business and lobbying efforts and how they shape policies at home and abroad, including American foreign policy. Through the lens of social justice and human rights, we report on how these dynamics drive our foreign affairs and impact the world, and examine the effects they have on our democracy and freedoms as defined by the constitution.”
Analysis / Bias
Mint Press presents news with a strong left-leaning bias in story selection. Headlines and articles use moderately loaded language like this: NFL Freezes Policy Barring Players From Kneeling During Anthem. This particular story is republished from the conspiracy website ZeroHedge. Typically, Mint Press sources their information, but sometimes it is from Mixed factual or conspiracy websites. In general, story selection moderately favors the left, such as this Trump Administration Opens Door for Corporate Attack on Vulnerable Wildlife.
shame on Time?
also, it’s not the exact same article. it’s a different article by a different author. you can tell if you bother to read it instead of just googling around until you found another article with a similar click-bait headline...
do you often lie to make your point, or is this a new experience for you?
sorry, i thought native english speakers would be more familiar with the concept of hyperbole. i will take the time to write a brief summary of relevant semantic techniques used in subsequent posts to help out the more rhetorically challenged members of our community.
oh, so when you get caught in a lie, you just hurl insults rather than admit to it. hardly a surprise…
notice how i didn't prepend that post with a brief summary of rhetorical techniques like i said i would? that's because i didn't use any. ditto this post.
are you seriously expecting a pat on the back for not being a more toxic troll than you already are? is not lying and arguing in bad faith such a difficult impulse for you to control that you think you deserve treats when you don’t do either or both?
woooow
you expressed confusion with my use of the english language and so i have adjusted my communication style to suit your apparent needs. if you feel this somehow reflects poorly on your personal character it is no fault of mine.
the entire point of me linking the time article was to point out that it was cognitive laziness (and likely bad faith) on your part to invoke a third party 'bias checker' (that in all likelihood is itself biased) as some impartial mediator of reality. typically, the next logical step to take here would be to engage with the points of the articles in question and judge their merits through consensus based on verifiable fact, but it seems you got lost somewhere along the way and now you appear to be resisting attempts to shepherd you back on topic.
you expressed confusion
no, you lied, and when caught in your lie, you lied again and called it “hyperbole” even though it was just obviously just a lie. now you’re piling lie upon lie thinking you’re fooling anyone but yourself.
this is just sad.
We all understand how exaggeration works. @meth_dragon@hexbear.net linked the article, clearly indicating it's not the same article with the same word as the exaggeration. After that, @meth_dragon@hexbear.net was willing to be clearer, but you had already removed the thread from being about the topic of whether or not this bias indicator has any value. Now it never returned to the point being obviously initially made
I honestly think this guy might be some kind of troll. every single exchange he has with people results in him reusing these points.
careful you don’t sprain something with those mental gymnastics!
We all understand how exaggeration works
clearly you know how to lie badly in an attempt to cover another pile of lies, but not how to lie well enough to convince someone smart than a small woodland creature— or yourselves.
you know what would be impressive? if any of you could just admit you made a mistake and dropped this whole charade.
What more do you want than "I was exaggerating"? Once that was said, this whole BS could've just stopped. You then say "ok, now that we're clear that you were exaggerating, how different are these articles?" But we never got there, because you derailed.
Request an edit if you really think it's so misleading, I'm sure @meth_dragon@hexbear.net would've initially just edited if you were so concerned that this "lie" would mislead others. Now I doubt it, because you've proven to be acting in bad faith by not just accepting the explanation and continuing the initial discussion, but you had that chance.
should have just called him names to begin with, this was one of the most pathetic interactions i've had online in recent memory
although i guess it's possible he's like 11 and can't really come up with anything else
Also they seem to have 7 likes on a lot of comments, or just above it. Get the feeling there's some real bot/alt account stuff going on because I cannot imagine anyone liking it lol, let alone a consistent number as you go down the chain.
What more do you want than “I was exaggerating”?
since it was an obvious lie - not an "exaggeration" - not lying about it for hours and hours would be a nice place to start.
But we never got there
because I’m not stupid enough to believe such a feeble lie.
Request an edit if you really think it’s so misleading, I’m sure @meth_dragon@hexbear.net would’ve initially just edited if you were so concerned that this “lie” would mislead others
I that were true, they would have after I confronted them rather than doubling down, again and again, with one lie to cover another. for hours.
Now I doubt it, because you’ve proven to be acting in bad faith by not just accepting the explanation and continuing the initial discussion
refusing to accept such an obvious and feeble lie is not “acting in bad faith”. you coming here to try to gaslight me into believing that lie, however, IS:
“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.”
"for hours" lol fuck off loser it's the fucking internet, where interactions take a while.
And "gaslight" and "abuse"? Jesus Christ kid, that's some shit. I'm not replying anymore, so goodbye, you are being ridiculous and pathetic.
“for hours” lol fuck off loser it’s the fucking internet, where interactions take a while.
And “gaslight” and “abuse”? Jesus Christ kid, that’s some shit. I’m not replying anymore, so goodbye, you are being ridiculous and pathetic.
way to prove my point with a swear- and insult-filled tantrum.
I’m not replying anymore, so goodbye
gee, ya promise? lmao
how does one have such a punchable face over the internet oh my god
I have been offline for a while and just now dealing with these people. They jerk off over everything, it's insane. Like, I fucking know they have nothing going on in real life because you don't have saved pictures of logical fallacies to show off to girls at parties or your friends at work. Hell, even the debate club would find that tacky if you used it over text.
Do you know what hyperbole is, or exaggeration? Of course it's not the exact same article. Come on. The point is that multiple sources collaborate the main point, that opium production has fallen under the Taliban.
Do you know what hyperbole is, or exaggeration?
Yes, and I know when someone is lying but just says it’s “hyperbole” when called out on a lie, which is obviously what’s happening here.
Of course it’s not the exact same article.
so you even admit that they lied
The point is that multiple sources collaborate the main point, that opium production has fallen under the Taliban.
so what? there’s a famine right now, and there are obvious reason to shift production to a viable food source. twisting yourself into knots just to blame the US is absurd and not supported by the facts.
Before 9/11 they had banned poppy cultivation. After America leaves, they ban poppy cultivation. During the occupation, lots of poppies are cultivated and processed into opium.
America consumes 80% of the world opium supply on average.
What conclusion do these facts support?
What conclusion do these facts support?
that you will draw biased conclusions and assert them free of any factual evidence to back them up.
Show
You said American blame for poppy production during the occupation isn’t supported by the facts.
I restated those facts and asked what conclusion they do support.
So did the occupation increase opium production on purpose or just turn a blind eye to it?
You said American blame for poppy production during the occupation isn’t supported by the facts.
I didn’t claim that. but I’d like to see what I did say that you somehow twisted into that.
I restated those facts and asked what conclusion they do support.
you stated something and jumped to a conclusion you wanted, with zero facts to back it up.
So did the occupation increase opium production on purpose or just turn a blind eye to it?
here’s the staw man and association fallacies again— The US did not go there for this reason, which is the original assertion— so none of this is relevant. You’re trying to prove a point that has nothing to do with the argument of WHY the US was eve there which had nothing to do with opium. It was just one of many things the US concerned itself with once it was there. Like building schools. We didn’t go there to do that, either, but we happened to do it while we were there.
are you capable of speaking in anything other than 100% logical fallacy?
You, in this post:
twisting yourself into knots just to blame the US is absurd and not supported by the facts.
So what conclusion do the facts support if not that the us is to blame for opium production during the occupation?
So what conclusion do the facts support
I’m not here to draw conclusions, just to present the facts (and object to when my words are twisted, when logical fallacies are used to argue against the facts, etc.), which is all I have done.
Suggesting someone needs to twist themselves up in knots to blame the us for opium production during the occupation implies that the United States isn’t clearly responsible for opium production during the occupation.
Unless theres another reason someone would have to twist themselves up in knots to get there, of course.
That’s a conclusion. Now I’m not trying to get a gotcha or own or something here. I understand that sometimes when you get to talkin about something you might say things you don’t mean to. My question is how’d you get there?
Suggesting someone needs to twist themselves up in knots to blame the us for opium production during the occupation implies that the United States isn’t clearly responsible for opium production during the occupation.
had someone actually made such a suggestion, that would be interesting. when and where did that happen?
Unless theres another reason someone would have to twist themselves up in knots to get there, of course
I’m not here to speculate.
That’s a conclusion
ok,, goodbye!
I understand that sometimes when you get to talkin about something you might say things you don’t mean to.
I understand, and if you wish to apologize for twisting the things I said to try to win an argument, I’ll forgive you.
My question is how’d you get there?
probably the same way you did; using a web browser.
had someone actually made such a suggestion, that would be interesting. when and where did that happen?
Allow me to repeat myself:
You, in this post:
twisting yourself into knots just to blame the US is absurd and not supported by the facts.
So, how’d you come to the conclusion that the us isn’t to blame for opium production during its occupation of Afghanistan?
So, how’d you come to the conclusion that the us isn’t to blame for opium production during its occupation of Afghanistan?
because there are zero facts to support it.
Show
you argument is fundamentally flawed. no matter how many ways you twist yourself up, twist my words, or twist anything else, you’re never going to successfully argue against the facts.
you lost this argument hours ago. you’re just torturing yourself at this point.
Quick response!
Would you say that the United States is responsible for governing industrial and agricultural output during its occupation?
first, as I’ve said, I’ve presented facts. I’m no here to discuss your straw man r be drawn into any rhetorical “traps” you might try to get me to admit something you can twist into something you can claim as a ‘win”— and I know that’s all you’re after here.
I’m obviously not going to engage with you when I know you’re arguing in bad faith an from a flawed premise.
it’s clear that you’re after some sort of catharsis - something to prove your hours of trolling was worth it, and I’m going to tell you now: you won’t get it from me.
Lol believe me, the only thing I’ve gotten or expect to get from this interaction is a headache.
I’m not using any strawmen or rhetorical traps (what even is that?) or twisting your words. If you feel attacked just tap out, there’s nothing to win or lose and a conversation on the internet isn’t worth getting heated over.
What you said and I quoted a couple of times way earlier implies you don’t think the us was responsible for opium production during the occupation and I want to understand your viewpoint. Do you think the us was responsible for opium production during its occupation of Afghanistan?
Lol believe me, the only thing I’ve gotten or expect to get from this interaction is a headache.
you have only yourself to thank for that. after all,. you made the decision to come and troll my comments, and you’re the one who refuses to stop. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I’m not using any strawmen or rhetorical traps (what even is that?) or twisting your words.
except for the many, many times I clearly show you were, you said “nah-uh!” and we keep going around in circles.
all because you refuse to admit you’re wrong and keep hatefully trolling me due to your deep-seated insecurities. because you just can’t walk away due to some hangup about what an internet stranger happens to think.
but go on and deny that, too, and I’ll just keep repeating the same thing again and agin until the end of time.
tired of losing yet? because I’m happy t keep telling you this forever.
You said there were zero facts to support blaming the us for production during the occupation, so does that mean that the production didn’t happen or it wasn’t the occupation governments fault?
There’s no wrong answer here. I’m not gonna send the stasi to break down your door for being a lib, I just want to understand how someone who clearly values logic and rhetoric came to that conclusion.
so does that mean that the production didn’t happen or it wasn’t the occupation governments fault?
have fun on that journey of discovery!
There’s no wrong answer here
except for those which had no evidence to support them.
I’m not gonna send the stasi to break down your door for being a lib
you keep calling me names because it makes you feel better for trolling and bullying me, but you don’t know me at all nor what I believe because ii have said anything other than providing and debating the established facts. I could be communist or fascist or something in between, but all I’ve argued is the facts. nothing personal.
I just want to understand how someone who clearly values logic and rhetoric came to that conclusion.
I’ve said it hundreds of time, and you’re going to ignore it this time too: THE FACTS as supported by THE EVIDENCE.
So you’re not going to explain how you came to the conclusion that the us occupation government in Afghanistan wasn’t responsible for opium production while it was in power and you’re also not gonna provide any source for the facts that led you to that conclusion?
So you’re not going to explain how you came to the conclusion that the us occupation government in Afghanistan wasn’t responsible for opium production while it was in power and you’re also not gonna provide any source for the facts that led you to that conclusion?
I never said that. why do you think lying, especially when there’s evidence of what I DID say, will win you any “points” or whatever you’re after here?
I drew no conclusions as there was no evidence to support such a conclusion.
you’re welcome to prove - with evidence - how you came to that conclusion. As of now, none has been provided to support that conclusion. Someone asserted that and provided some link, but the evidence did not back up their claim.
so, keep raging, but you’re wasting your time trying to twist my words into something I never said.
Here I go repeating myself again:
You, in this post:
twisting yourself into knots just to blame the US is absurd and not supported by the facts.
The thing people are blaming the us for is increased opium production under the occupation of Afghanistan.
So are you suggesting that the claim that the United States is responsible for opium production during the occupation of Afghanistan isn’t supported by the facts?
twisting yourself into knots just to blame the US is absurd and not supported by the facts.
so you admit that you lied about what I said, even quoting wha I actually did say to PROVE you lied, yet...
The thing people are blaming the us for is increased opium production under the occupation of Afghanistan.
you misrepresent a handful of commenters as “people’ making it seem like this is a commonly-held argument that rational people actually believe — without any evidence to back it up… or any evidence that it’s even true.
so, based on these lies and bad-faith twisting of the argument, why should I engage with this discussion further knowing full well you’ll just continue to lie and twist my words because that’s exactly what you’ve been doing this whole time?
So are you suggesting that the claim that the United States is responsible for opium production during the occupation of Afghanistan isn’t supported by the facts?
see? you couldn’t even make it to the end of that comment before you did it again!
can you not control it? is the lying a compulsion for you? I mean… the evidence of what I said is right there yet you insist I said something I clearly didn’t. it’s… very strange.
So let me summarize:
You won’t tell me what I’ve lied about. You won’t clarify your position. You won’t confirm or deny what statements of fact you accept. You won’t accept the other posters in this thread as people (???).
You asked why you should engage in this discussion any further. I don’t believe you should. You seem to have nothing to say even when asked clear, direct questions intended to give you a platform to speak. There is no discussion here.
If, on the other hand, you do want to keep going (you do not have to. You can just not respond. No one will judge you.):
Based on your statement
twisting yourself into knots just to blame the US is absurd and not supported by the facts
Which was made in the context of other users blaming the United States for production of opium during the occupation of Afghanistan, I surmised you meant that the claim that the United States is responsible for opium production during the occupation of Afghanistan isn’t supported by the facts.
Was I wrong in that? If so, what blame being placed on the us isn’t supported by the facts?
I’m not trolling. I haven’t insulted or accused you of anything and I’ve tried my level best to treat you with the kindness of Christ and patience of Job.
I’d like to know what you meant by
twisting yourself into knots just to blame the US is absurd and not supported by the facts
I took a look at the context, which was users blaming the us for opium production during its occupation of Afghanistan, and surmised you meant that the claim that the United States is responsible for opium production during the occupation of Afghanistan isn’t supported by the facts.
Was that a wrong assessment? If so, what blame being placed on the us isn’t supported by the facts?
I want to understand what you meant. Ive refined my question to be as straightforward and clear as possible over our entire conversation.
If you think you’re being trolled then just don’t respond. Look away. Do something else.
If you are willing to have a conversation based on the thread topic:
I’d like to know what you meant by
twisting yourself into knots just to blame the US is absurd and not supported by the facts
The context is users blaming the us for opium production during its occupation of Afghanistan, and surmised you meant that the claim that the United States is responsible for opium production during the occupation of Afghanistan isn’t supported by the facts.
Was that a wrong assessment? If so, what blame being placed on the us isn’t supported by the facts?
Hi guys, it's pissy dickle here. This is one of my lost alts. They seem to be misbehaving. This is sad because I taught all my alts not to use logical fallacies such as:
*removed externally hosted image*
can you not control it? is the lying a compulsion for you? I mean… the evidence of what I said is right there yet you insist I said something I clearly didn’t. it’s… very strange.
Why do you need to insult soneone who has veen nothing but respectful in their interaction with you? You refuse to commit, you are not discussing anything, you are provocing and trying to put down your conversation partner.
pseudoscience anti-Israel propaganda
Lol what is this even supposed to mean
It means they peddle far-left conspiracy theories like Palestinian children needing water and food to survive which is something that Israeli scientists have debunked
I suspect it’s just a typo and should say:
pseudoscience, anti-Israel propaganda
anti what propaganda, I don't see a word there
I just reported this exact same phrase from Whiskey Pickle for ableism. Is that your alt? Anyway, don't be ableist.
Don't be an asshole. And maybe I should take my own advice, and not feed the troll.
Others are arguing with facts, you aren't paying attention, you're showing clip art of the scarecrow's phallus. We're not in debate club, you're not a teacher, I don't respect you. The fact that you keep trying to turn your nose up doesn't make you look like a genius, it makes you look more like a fucking liberal. cause you are, that's what you. And you'll achieve jack shit because of it. have fun
ingborrowed form another comment: “nuh-uh!” isn’t a convincing argument. most people learn this when they’re 5.
you’re showing clip art of the scarecrow’s phallus
wow, if “scarecrow phallus” is what you see, that speaks volumes about the contents of your psyche. yikes
that said, if you can’t debate your way around “clip art” and the best you have is the argument of a 5-year-old, that’s just an admission that you have no valid argument at all. that explains the whining and childish insults.
rage on, sad kid.
wow, if “scarecrow phallus” is what you see, that speaks volumes about the contents of your psyche. yikes
holy shit, this is one of the funniest things I have ever seen. also "I'm not arguing with you." "Wow, your arguments are shit." what a brilliant dialogue. like leonardo da vinki wrote it.
I think subtly the voros twins' best bit was calling Timon from the lion king "time-on"
holy shit, this is one of the funniest things I have ever seen.
I knew your standards were low, but wow
I have higher standards and I think you're more pathetic than funny
Is that better?
I embrace the far left bias
if you don't, I wonder which bias you accept
We need a bot for this. Synopsis should be added to the tldr-bot or something.
it's just a test of how much the position agrees with the people running the website haha
there's no such thing as "bias-free" propaganda, and propaganda isn't inherently subversive
why? read the article, and if you can't tell the bias that's on you.
ya know, I’ve looked into it. one of the biggest problems with bots is that they have to be hosted from somewhere. that’s my first hiccup.
I’d LOVE to make this a bot, but I don’t know where I’d host it from.
Learn to read. If you can't be assed to actually read the article you're commenting on then go back to le 100 wholesome keanu reddit.
Holy shit is this a bit? Do people on here really still believe in a neutral or unbiased press? Shouldn't virtually every event from the Iraq war onward have already disillusioned you of that?
No, it doesn't raise questions. We knew back in 2003 that there was never a long-term plan. The point was to kill a guy, and then to do some military spending. A major success, on those lines.
The Taliban are terrible, though.
Whitey Bulger: protected by the FBI for decades while being the biggest heroin importer in the northeast
Freeway Ricky Ross: supplied by the CIA with coke from the Contras, in a relationship mediated by a DEA informant
Golden Triangle heroin trade: controlled by the CIA for decades after the Korean War, arming and protecting manufacturers and traffickers, with heroin flown on CIA planes
The French Connection: French gangsters were protected by the CIA and allowed to import heroin to their primary market, the US, in exchange for keeping the port of Marseille out of the control of French communists
La Corporacion: the biggest Bolivian cocaine cartel, the "GM of cocaine", started with the cooperation and protection of the CIA according to a DEA agent whose investigations into them were repeatedly thwarted by the State Dept and CIA
the USA has been doing this shit for a long time
Well, what else is there to say? You've gotta hand it to the Taliban.
