Blind to ____ / turn a blind eye to ____ / blinded by ignorance/bigotry/etc. / double-blind review Refers to Blind, low-vision, or sight-limited people. Often used as a metaphor. Consider instead: willfully ignorant, deliberately ignoring, turning their back on, overcome by prejudice, doubly anonymous, had every reason to know, feigned ignorance
I modded a niche outdoor community sub and I banned every bot that found its way there. Sorry, but we don’t need a metric conversion bot nor a grammar correcting bot.
There was one for a while that told you how many times you left a comment saying “nice.” It had a leaderboard and the top ones had done it some tens of thousands of times.
I suspect if you are trying to build an inclusive community but don’t have a lot of diversity already, the only thing you can really do to change the culture is to remind people to be considerate in the way they speak. And if most people who would be offended aren’t actually part of the community (but you would like them to feel welcome to join), then you might want some bot rather than a person to be the “narc” and remind people to be on their best behavior. So I guess if the mods are the only ones who want to be nice, then yes, it is a bit ridiculous because it will never work. Even if people change their language, they won’t be nice. But if most people want things to change, it could be a helpful way to both remind you to be inclusive and get the few people who would rather talk about how having to say bartender is censorship (without actually defending why they want to make a point of saying “barmen”) to realize that they either have to change the way they talk in that particular community or find a better fit.
guys about to be invaded by russia and they’re protesting nato/us imperialism? priorities??
don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory don’t mention horseshoe theory
your comment is clearly formulated in a way so that my reply to it should give my reasons why i believe russia is likely to invade ukraine, which isn’t bad in any way of course (formulation, not invasion), but, i’m afraid there’s not much i can offer besides the existing satellite pictures, convoy footage, articles and other news coverage, intelligence of other countries etc, which you no doubt have already seen
don’t get me wrong, i, more than anyone would like this whole thing to turn out to be a too-far-taken negotiating tactic for russia’s demands to stop expansion of nato, bc i have ukranian friends who are likely to get drafted, some of my closest friends in russia were at risk of being drafted even before this whole thing started, i myself could get drafted in the event of a war
i would be really happy to be able to look back at this comment in a year and laugh at how ridiculous this whole thing was, but, one thing we’ve learned is that we’ll never fail to be surprised by the kind of fucked up shit a crazy, nationalistic autocrat with zero oversight catering to a nationalistic population can do…
First, let’s establish some context here. What Russia is rightly concerned about is the fact that NATO has been relentlessly expanding to the east. They’ve now given NATO an ultimatum that it has to roll back and comply with the original security guarantees that were given after USSR dissolved. The threat to Russia is real and should not be understated. NATO being able to put nukes in Ukraine would mean that they could reach Moscow in five minutes. This is a red line for Russia. All the NATO members have already stated that there is no prospects of Ukraine joining NATO or EU in the foreseeable future. This precludes any reason for Russia to act.
Russia has also never once said that it plans to invade Ukraine. The troops you’re talking about are stationed in their barracks. Likewise, France, Germany, and even Ukraine are saying that there is no Russian invasion happening.
So far, the only countries insisting that there is some imminent invasion are US and UK. And the country that’s been most damaged by these claims is Ukraine since all the investors are now pulling out leading to the economy crashing. This is the primary reason Ukrainian government has now broken with the US narrative.
Russia is achieving its goals without any need to invade Ukraine. Europe has absolutely no interest in having a full out war in Ukraine, and it’s also heavily dependent on Russian gas and oil meaning that EU has little appetite to try and sanction Russia. On the other hand, US appears to be pushing for conflict as a distraction from the disastrous domestic policy and because accepting Russian demands would be seen as weakness. This is already driving a serious wedge within NATO. Russia will continue to apply pressure by doing military exercises within its borders, and negotiating with western powers. France, Italy, and Germany are already having direct talks with Russia and this is the most likely path towards resolving the issue.
Russia invading Ukraine would be counter to their goals as it would actually help unite NATO against them. There is no conceivable benefit to Russia from fighting a war in Ukraine. It’s also worth noting that Russian media hasn’t talked about any war, and typically countries prepare their public for a war when they’re planning on having one.
The only scenario Russia has stated that it would engage militarily in Ukraine would be if Ukraine invaded Donbas. Ukraine has been ignoring its Minsk agreement commitments failing to grant autonomy to Donetsk and Luhansk, and has been engaging in committing war crimes in these regions by attacking water supply and civilian targets.
russia is a country with the most number of nuclear weapons in the world, being extremely sensitive about any border disputes, fueled by an unfortunate self-perpetuating symbiosis of a large portion of the population being nationalistic being catered to by an equally nationalistic autocrat…
no sensible country would touch such an explosive combination country with a long pole, let alone try to invade, which would virtually guarantee mutual destruction with nuclear weapons…
fueled by an unfortunate self-perpetuating symbiosis of a large portion of the population being nationalistic being catered to by an equally nationalistic autocrat…
Not all nationalisms are equal. Russia’s nationalism has invaded 0 countries, and has like 4 external military bases that are holdovers from the USSR. I’m showing you a picture of dozens of NATO bases used to launch invasions and encroachments for Euro-american chauvinist interests, like as @yogthos mentioned, in Yugoslavia, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq.
How many countries has Russia since the 1990s, compared to NATO?
Olga is glad that Russia has intervened in the conflict, and she indeed corrected me when I once referred to the Russian SMO as an “invasion”, telling me that Russia did not invade. Rather, they were invited and welcomed in. That does seem to be the prevailing view in Donetsk as far as I can tell.
Well, the warmongers don’t seem to be doing so well. It’s been well over 100x (coming up on 200x) of the initial timeline with no victory in sight.
With respect to your original statement though, we have now seen which sources were more accurate so we can judge more carefully who to take seriously in future.
People are making good money off this war though, including in Ukraine. There have been lots of reports of grand scale embezzlement of the funds and resources being sent for the war.
What’s your hypothesis here? Some corrupt folks in Ukraine figured that maybe if Russia attacked and on the chance than the country could maintain a solid defence and assuming that western nations would be willing to send large amounts of military aid over a sustained conflict there could be money to be made? Seems like quite a dice roll to me let alone how they could exert influence over Russia to get them to invade. Maybe I’m misunderstanding what you’re suggesting but it seems pretty implausible to me.
Only a child would come up with a hypothesis like this. An adult would understand that Ukrainian oligarchs keep their wealth in western banks, and they make money through the corrupt government they set up after the coup in 2014. If you think Ukrainian oligarchs care about Ukraine any more than US oligarchs care about the US then you must’ve been born yesterday.
the protagonist will then use this incident to prove that public transportation is dangerous and proceed to bribe the local government into replacing it with a highway.
lemmy.ml
Top