nsrxn

joined 1 week ago
[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 3 days ago (4 children)

no, I'm examining your position, and the evidence provided, and found that they are insufficient.

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 days ago (11 children)

turns out, everything is political, so, yes, it's all propaganda.

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 days ago (6 children)

I haven't seen them, but I do know they work with the pentagon, so my guess is they aim to legitimize American hegemony and military spending

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 days ago (6 children)

it shows that the evidence you've provided doesn't actually support your claim

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 days ago (15 children)

it's not useless if it describes something.

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 3 days ago (8 children)

it doesn't need to be misconstrued. the best propaganda imho is totally true and in context. spreading it with some kind of political goal is still propaganda.

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (8 children)

the only peer reviewed source you provided spends as much time detailing risks as it does explaining potential benefits, and it's based on a single case study.

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 6 days ago

You’re on the block list now.

oh thank God.

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 6 days ago

calling me names doesn't change the facts

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 6 days ago

this is more hypothesizing. it's not proof of your claim.

your accusation of sealioning is also bad faith.

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 6 days ago

then make that case instead of claiming they'd fold someone.

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 6 days ago (3 children)

your accusation of bad faith is, itself, bad faith.

view more: ‹ prev next ›