If you want to use a very high burden of proof then you will have to wait a while to know what’s going on.
I agree but I also think that a high burden of proof should be the standard for political topics especially armed conflict. If this was a youtube video about a pig saving a goat from drowning I wouldn't really care if people chose to believe in it or not.
This is something new but I’m still pretty skeptical and I think rightly so. Photos and videos posted to telegram aren’t always what people claim they are. I also haven’t seen any new media willing to say whether or not these videos show what they purport to show. I’d add that it’s also entirely possible for North Korean troops to enter Russia as part of some joint training exercises. However, they may not be intended for deployment in Ukraine.
I’d also be interested to know why the US or NATO do not seem to want to validate any of these claims at this time.
When do you think this conflict started? Because if you’re not aware Israel has been bombing Gaza for decades. The bombing of the desalinization plant I mentioned happened in 2021 and Israel has bombed water infrastructure in Gaza far before that.
Don’t avoid the question this time. In such circumstances what do you expect Palestinians to do? Because as far as I can tell the only answer you have for them is death.
What do expect Palestinians to do? Do you want them to waste away drinking contaminated water because Israel attacked their sole desalination plant? That isn’t peace either.
I generally agree but with a few caveats.
First, this is a uniquely bad headline. More reputable outlets would report it as something like “Russia denies using North Korean troops in war effort, Ukrainian Intelligence claims otherwise”. That at least allows the reader to understand who is making what claim and whether or not that claim is contested.
Second, most people are not anywhere as skeptical of media outlets as they should be. They may expect bias but rarely do people in western countries expect journalists to regurgitate and launder whatever wild claims state officials make. Unfortunately thats exactly what many new agencies do which is why I think it’s important to talk about when discussing articles like this one.
They aren't being obtuse. They’re just an idealist. They likely believe the decisions people make and the things they choose to believe in are detached from the circumstances in which people find themselves. In their mind, morality is self evident and anyone committing an immoral act, as they define it, could simply choose not to.
As far as I can tell these claims are largely coming from Ukrainian sources. I have not seen independent validation from anywhere else. At best we can say is that Ukrainian intelligence claims North Koreans troops are being deployed as part of Russia’s invasion.
Unfortunately, the headline of this article acts as if this is a known fact. A better headline would be include the source of the accusation being made. That’s a problem because most in this thread and the other similar threads are treating the claims made as fact and any reasonable skepticism is downvoted and dismissed.
Good luck convincing anyone here to be skeptical of sources that reinforce their preconceptions of the world. Media literacy is sorely lacking is this thread.
Yes it's "propaganda" to be critical of the media you consume. 🙄
Israel is being the very opposite of a force for stability in the region, which isn’t going to help the Petro-Dollar.
Israel being a destabilizing force gives the US leverage over the oil rich nations of the region. That’s why Israel is important for the petrodollar. I’m also not sure the US currently has a way to maintain its global economic dominance without the petrodollar. That’s in part why I think you see the US doubling down on support for Israel even in a context where doing so is increasingly risky.
Personally I’m not sure the gate keeping you’re observing is all that much of an issue. I think it’s useful to remember many vegans are also public advocates for veganism. It’s important to them that people generally know what they mean when they advocate for veganism.
However, the definition of all words are always in flux. It’s not uncommon to see people call themselves vegan when a more apt description of their lifestyle would be plant based, flexitarian, vegetarian, etc. As such, I think edge cases like your friend take on an outsized importance that goes beyond the morality of your friend eating honey.
Basically, the goal may not be the social exclusion of your friend which is what I think is usually the problematic aspect of gatekeeping.