nope! if we look at the orgins of the conflict, russia actions are surprisingly logical, ergo, reliable. If west does A russia does B.

and to bring that to the fore: if the west sanctions russia, ofc russia will respond in kind. this is logical, ergo, reliable.

Don't post your selfies. It's not a dating site.

Strawman fallacy

Maybe we should start calling it the blitzbrief?

OOF kusatarres/Nor-lander sister who was posting online her russian propaganda and provoking people in Germany, turned out to be a $100 an hour prostitute




This post was edited by Lvivz on Oct 18 2022 09:56am

"A straw man (sometimes written as strawman) is a form of argument and an informal fallacy of having the impression of refuting an argument, whereas the real subject of the argument was not addressed or refuted, but instead replaced with a false one.[1] One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".

The typical straw man argument creates the illusion of having refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition through the covert replacement of it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and the subsequent refutation of that false argument ("knock down a straw man") instead of the opponent's proposition.[2][3] Straw man arguments have been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly regarding highly charged emotional subjects.[4]

Straw man tactics in the United Kingdom may also be known as an Aunt Sally, after a pub game of the same name, where patrons throw sticks or battens at a post to knock off a skittle balanced on top.[5][6]."

Therefore, when I take the problem statement: "The problem here is that Russia has shown themselves to also be unreliable." and when I overlay that with my response: "if we look at the orgins of the conflict, russia actions are surprisingly logical, ergo, reliable. If west does A russia does B. and to bring that to the fore: if the west sanctions russia, ofc russia will respond in kind. this is logical, ergo, reliable."

I would challenge you how is my response strawman ?

If the position is Russia is not reliable because they invaded Ukraine and because they weaponised a natural resource, then I would be of the position that this is more cause and effect, and my response is not strawman but rather nuanced.

This post was edited by ferdia on Oct 18 2022 09:58am

Russia has been preparing for this war for a long time. It is not a coincidence that they struck as soon as Nord Stream II was completed and their hypersonic missiles had passed the final test. Furthermore, they had deliberately let German gas storages run low throughout the summer of 2021 - in hindsight, this was an obvious preparation for the Ukraine war. Also, there's a long list of disputes with various neighbors in which Russia closed the gas tap in the middle of winter to force them into submission. They have a decades-long history of weaponizing other countries' energy dependence. In hindsight, Western Europeans - myself included!!! - were delusional when they ignored this history and told themselves that Russia had previously never weaponized energy against them and was thus a reliable supplier.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Oct 18 2022 09:59am

This is all sound logic. /edit but to be clear people and states dont become "unreliable" for no reason. which is back to what may in some quarters be called my strawman argument: cause and effect.

This post was edited by ferdia on Oct 18 2022 10:01am

wipe white off your lips when speaking to me (your master) peon

We are talking about Russia's reliability in the supply of energy. And you said this,
"if we look at the orgins of the conflict, russia actions are surprisingly logical, ergo, reliable. If west does A russia does B. and to bring that to the fore: if the west sanctions russia, ofc russia will respond in kind. this is logical, ergo, reliable."

I'm surprised you actually think Russia is a reliable supplier of energy at this point. Seems like a very lonely hill to die on.