I've so far said nothing about wether or not Russia invaded Ukraine. I've literally only asked you about what happened in 2014. So far you've failed to answer.

Now you're just projecting and insulting me instead of explaining what you mean

Yeah, like you've been doing all the way through. Answer the question.

I know what happened in 2014,

Then tell me. Why is it so hard to just answer a question? What happened in 2014?

[–] WldFyre@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, like you've been doing all the way through.

Quote where I've insulted you.

Then tell me. Why is it so hard to just answer a question? What happened in 2014?

You're the one making claims, you tell me what you think happened that justifies what Russia's doing, or even provoked them in some way.

[–] Egon@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Quote where I've insulted you

I meant the projection.

You're the one making claims, you tell me what you think happened that justifies what Russia's doing, or even provoked them in some way

What claims have I made? Quote them to me please. I've literally only asked you to answer the question, WHICH YOU STILL HAVENT DONE. Why is it so difficult?

[–] WldFyre@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In response to someone saying Russia invaded unilaterally, you referenced what happened in 2014, as if that provoked or justified Russia's current actions. That is your argument, you should explain it. Unless you're just Just Asking Questions.

I'm open to actually discussing it with you if you'll actually explain what you mean and why you feel that way, because I've been following the situation for years and don't know how one would come to that conclusion.

[–] Egon@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago

you referenced what happened in 2014, as if that provoked or justified Russia's current actions.

I'm not the user that referenced it. Once again: I've literally only asked you to answer the question. Had I been the one to state the question initially, you still wouldn't be able to make that conclusion, it is a huge assumption that that would be the line of reasoning, angle of argument or anything else. It could just as easily have been a way to see where we disagree, create a common basis from which to have an argument, to help illustrate a point of larger context or something else entirely. It is common for a discussion to create a basis of shared understanding from which we can then diverge or argue.

Im open to actually discussing it with you if you'll actually explain what you mean and why you feel that way.

No thanks. Its pretty clear you're not capable of pleasant or good faith discussion, instead choosing weird debate tactics, condescention and strawmanning me. I've literally only asked you to answer a question, and you haven't been able to fulfill this simple request. It's pretty clear any extended conversation would just be even worse.
Maybe when you're less of an antagonistic debatelord.