Yet another prime example of item number 4 on my list, you just can't make this stuff up .
People nowadays just seem so programmed to "react" instantly to buzzwords but they rarely ever actually read and comprehend a whole post first before reacting. It could be that there's too many words to read in one go in these modern "say everything in 280 characters or less" or "a 1 min video is too long" twitter/tiktok times or maybe it's just that reading big words is hard for some, however thats just an opinion. Sadly I don't know what the issue is with the lack of basic reading comprehension nowadays, nor how to fix it but I'm guessing rule number 3 might be incoming next.
You're guilty of doing the exact same thing, you're no better than the rest of us.
Are you willing to take part in the discussion?
You quoted someone who has claimed biolabs are a reason for Russia bombing Ukraine. Your actual quote of that posters comment (the one I replied to) is that person suggesting NATO actions have caused Russia to attack (liberate?) Ukraine. If you're not in agreement with that person, why did you quote them?
Once again, if Russia is concerned about NATO and has therefore decided to act, what use is bombing Ukraine's infrastructure? Is it to drive out Nazis? To punish NATO? To punish Ukraine? Are you at least able to clarify this? What am I missing?
If you aren't in agreement with the post you quoted then you've successfully derailed the thread for no reason, which is pretty much what you've been moaning about in your posts. Typically when you quote someone as asking a difficult question, ending with a it suggests (everyone interprets things differently) you are at least in agreement with them to some extent. If you weren't, why didn't you answer the difficult question yourself, rather than go on a rant... surely you'll admit it was a rant?
Last edited: