• @BMTea
    link
    English
    1
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    We can move on to my opinions on the Economist’s Gaza coverage once you explain why you believe their coverage of whether the U.S government should invade Iraq was justified by the U.S government’s decision to invade Iraq. You seem quite desperate to move on from this argument because it’s inexcusable and proves my point.

    • @Lauchs
      link
      English
      04 days ago

      I didn’t say it was justified because of politicians, just that it wasn’t a crazy position.

      I have no idea how this validates or invalidates the Economist. I get that you think this is some sort of gotchya but it’s pretty darned weak.

      Stillllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll waiting for your critique of the Gaza coverage. (I know, silly to ask, it’s never going to come.)

      Have a pleasant new years.

      • @BMTea
        link
        English
        14 days ago

        I didn’t say it was justified because of politicians, just that it wasn’t a crazy position

        Actually it was crazy to everyone who didn’t exist in the bubble of US and UK elites that The Economists coexists in. Way to prove my point again.

        but it’s pretty darned weak

        It’s “darned weak” for me to point out that The Economist is biased in the exact way you keep revealing yourself to be lol? Who could’ve questioned the Iraq War, I mean it only inspired the biggest single day global protest in human history!

        Admit you were caught with your pants down, that you insisted on outsourcing indepedent or critical engagement with press to a subjective barometer website and that your particular range of political and historical knowledge is quite limited and should be expanded.