ghostwriter

6 ms·

1.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
> The only reason why EU stopped buying it [...] > I should have said natural gas, not gasoline. You need to sleep a bit more: "Spain Boosts Russia LNG Imports 84% While EU Urges Less Reliance" https://www.bloombe
2.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
> It's not intended. In current situation more money go to middleman compared to ru Let's pretend those middlemen are Martians. https://www.offshore-technology.com/news/trafigura-stake-nay...
3.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
> This means that Russia can't sell at full price because even those not enforcing the cap aren't willing to pay full price for it (why should they, when Russia's choices of customers are severely limited?) Yeah, as if ene
4.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
> Nope it’s ad hominem Demonstrate exactly how it's ad hominem. I couldn't care less about you in the first place. You haven't refuted anything I said neither regarding the whataboutism, nor any other point I made regardin
5.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
> You realize that 2006 is both before the 2008 denial of the MAP and before the 2014 Maidan Revolution, right? Do you realize that in other thread you complain that certain events regarding NATO have happened after 2014? And in this thr
6.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
> Yup - they're literally saying that the fact of a tiny fringe group that managed to get involved with the Muj in Chechnya -- is equivalent to saying that Ukraine as a whole (or its government, whatever) supported those folks. Yup
7.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
> So all you’ve got left is some whataboutery? The thing that you call "whataboutery" is the basis of the Socratic method that every student who attended Philosophy 101 understands as an essential form of argument-building. Unf
8.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
> That's not a fact. [..] and even the post-Maidan government expressly declared it a non-goal. You're wrong: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_anti-NATO_protests_in_Feo... > 2003 was before 2008 [...]
9.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
> So if a country disagrees with the political situation of a neighbour I see how nicely you downplay the armed coup and the ethnic discrimination against former citizens of one of the sides (who voted to remain a single country in the p
10.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
Yeah, I've already heard that you don't believe in succesion of power in Ukraine and that it enables everyone in the government to act at a whim of the moment as long as it serves the current agenda. Turns out that strategy doesn&
11.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
In other words you sound like an offended Ukrainian who got registered "77 days ago" and who had constantly been denying everything that didn't fit your agenda, including the political stance of your government prior 2014.
12.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
> Once it was at war with Russia, Ukraine changed its mind again and decided it needed to pursue NATO membership as a goal, for some reason. Your timeline is missing a few important points, let's start with the fact that it never st
13.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
> Ah it’s Ukrainian leaders fault that they were invaded and had their territory annexed? Let me remind you what happened in 2014. The Ukrainian leaders of the successful armed coup did pass a bill to prohibit official use of minority la
14.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
The question is lacking historical context of the declaration of state sovereignty of Ukraine from 1990 to be worthy of specificity you’re willing to hear. Welcome to the real world of messy politics that cost human lives, unless guided by
15.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
Where did I say that annexation was predicated on the fact of joining rather than an intent to join? Next, what was sovereignty of Ukraine predicated on in 1990?
16.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
> Curious, do you think Russia is to blame at all for violating the terms of the Budapest Memorandum? The Budapest Memorandum was predicated on adherence to all prior agreements Ukraine would never see sovereignty without in the first pl
17.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
> and the 2008 statement it references was made several governments before the Ukrainian one in power at the time the war began Are you suggesting there's no succession of power in Ukraine and, effectively, legitimacy with respect t
18.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
Let's see, in 1994 Ukraine supports military uprisal in Chechnya and aids separatists and their terrorist field commanders arriving from Saudi Arabia and Middle East [1] in a war against Russia on the territory of Russia. Namely, UNA-U
19.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
> https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_185000.htm >> We reiterate the decision made at the 2008 Bucharest Summit that Ukraine will become a member of the Alliance with the Membership Action Plan (
20.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
The US did preemptively invade Panama in the past, at the first sign of General Noriega's shift toward the Soviet bloc, after his soliciting and receiving military aid from Cuba, Nicaragua, and Libya.
21.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
There are no government subsidies and bailouts in a free market, what you see in the US today is exactly the opposite of it: crony mixed economy with overreaching government control.
22.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
> Parts of it are fine, the Air Forces are likely fine too. He didn't say parts of it, he said much of their military. > But the ground forces has been completely destroyed You've mentioned 35.5k-43.5k KIA losses for Russia
23.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
> Which is 100% true, they haven't lost a single submarine in this entire conflict. You're deliberately omitting the fact that he says "Much of the Russian military" and "one of those" in a single sentence a
24.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
> This 3 day war has already lasted over a year, and with losses so high by Russia that they are fielding T62's against Ukraine. "Much of the Russian military has not been affected negatively by this conflict" [1] What are
25.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
> following the terms of the German-Soviet treaty that facilitated the start of ww ii. Correction: you were meant to say British-French-Polish-German treaty of 30th September 1938, that provided "legal" grounds for the German,
26.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
This guy did see it: https://youtu.be/B02ASaskWTQ?t=2047
27.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
> The US has Confederacy parades, and also has criminal sentences for being an unregisteres agent of a foreign power. No wonder the US did everything to save the nazi collaborator responsible for the massacre of ~100k Poles in Eastern Ga
28.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
> I’ve just been fortunate enough to work in situations where people were there for the mission and there for the people. How is "being there for the mission and for the people" better than "being there for money and for t
29.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
> In a strict language, you can say (roughly at least) that replacing [] with [1..n] will add at minimum a certain number of extra CPU cycles and a certain amount of additional allocation. It's not at minimum, it's always the
30.
by ghostwriter 3y ago
> Where Haskell is worse: > Infix operators are bad. Custom infix operators are worse. Disagree, as a regular user of `shouldBe` and other HSpec expectations, as well as DSL libraries that rhyme like English. And even when they don&#x

More ›