You know what? Saddam was a whole other league of bastard but if you spent your Bush years going “the war is bad but Saddam is also bad” then you were no better then every fucking liberal who just kept talking about how we’re butchering innocent Iraqi’s the wrong way, and that we should do it the smarter way.
Poignant. Am remembering this for the next time I make an opinion on geopolitics. Thank you, internet stranger
I'm not both sidesing. Assad is bad, the US is significantly worse.
But if you think there's literally noone who thinks Assad is good because they're so high on hating any opposition to US Imperialism, you're wrong. I've encountered them. I also know plenty of people who critically support Assad against US Imperialism, which is the correct political line. In fact there are more of those people than there are sincere Assad likers. But the sincere Assad likers do still exist, to deny that is just silly.
Saying one thing is bad and the other thing is significantly worse is definitionally not both sidesing lmao.
ETA: If you think this shit is any different than liberals using whataboutism as a thought terminating cliche, you're wrong. It is in fact possible to criticize bad things and recognize that another thing is significantly worse. Notice I keep using the word significantly? It's not even close. But yeah, OK, just downvote without saying anything. What I said above is literally true. It is not both sidesing to acknowledge degrees of evil. Both sidesing is saying two things are exactly the same. That is, the literal definition. I'd love to see any of you actually explain how it isn't.
Well, I'm autistic, so I need feedback for things I say and being downvoted with NOONE replying to explain what I'm wrong about kind of fucks me up. So please don't?
You didn't know that, but also I think not giving feedback is rude as hell even if you're talking to an NT.
deleted by creator
Poignant. Am remembering this for the next time I make an opinion on geopolitics. Thank you, internet stranger
I'm not both sidesing. Assad is bad, the US is significantly worse.
But if you think there's literally noone who thinks Assad is good because they're so high on hating any opposition to US Imperialism, you're wrong. I've encountered them. I also know plenty of people who critically support Assad against US Imperialism, which is the correct political line. In fact there are more of those people than there are sincere Assad likers. But the sincere Assad likers do still exist, to deny that is just silly.
deleted by creator
Saying one thing is bad and the other thing is significantly worse is definitionally not both sidesing lmao.
ETA: If you think this shit is any different than liberals using whataboutism as a thought terminating cliche, you're wrong. It is in fact possible to criticize bad things and recognize that another thing is significantly worse. Notice I keep using the word significantly? It's not even close. But yeah, OK, just downvote without saying anything. What I said above is literally true. It is not both sidesing to acknowledge degrees of evil. Both sidesing is saying two things are exactly the same. That is, the literal definition. I'd love to see any of you actually explain how it isn't.
deleted by creator
Well, I'm autistic, so I need feedback for things I say and being downvoted with NOONE replying to explain what I'm wrong about kind of fucks me up. So please don't?
You didn't know that, but also I think not giving feedback is rude as hell even if you're talking to an NT.