I’m sure this is true. I wish there was a way to communicate it better, though. People have been sounding the alarm for so long that stories like this fall flat with most people. I don’t have a solution, I’m just lamenting that most people will just scroll past because we’ve been hearing dire warnings like this for decades.

There is nothing bad faith in my arguments. I am sincere in saying that I disagree with sending troops over there and in saying that I don’t see it as a massive escalation to send 100 troops when we already have 50,000 in theater.

You are arguing in bad faith by ignoring what I am saying and simply labeling any disagreement as “obvious propaganda”. Nothing here is black and white. This conflict has been going on for generations. Any immediate response has generations of previous actions behind it. To say otherwise is disingenuous.

Nothing in this conflict is simple. Nothing is clear. Nothing is black and white. Maybe labeling me as a propagandist for disagreeing on one specific thing while agreeing with your broader stance shows who the real propagandist is.

Jesus fucking christ… Why does everything that anyone disagrees with “propaganda”? Why can’t it be someone with a different fucking viewpoint? What the fuck is wrong with people on Lemmy that we can’t discuss something without it being “obvious propaganda” or some other bullshit?

Not everything is black and white. There is room for disagreement on parts of this conflict. I don’t agree with the US sending troops of any kind to Israel and I think we should stop giving them weapons until they stop committing genocide. The only point I was trying to make is that it doesn’t seem like a massive escalation to send 100 troops and a defensive system when we already have 50,000 troops, many war ships, two nuclear aircraft carries, and a ton of aircraft in theater already.

I agree that we shouldn’t be sending troops to Israel right now but 100 troops is hardly “all the troops” and isn’t a large change in the number of troops in the region.

Again, I don’t think we should be sending troops or weapons to Israel right now, but this does seem like a proportional response to Iran’s attack. They launched missiles at Israel. The US sent an anti-missile battery and 100 troops to support it. It seems like kind of a token force to say “we’re supporting Israel in this, but we’re also not going to go crazy”.

I’m actually asking. What is meant here? That Israel isn’t a real country? Or did I miss something?

I’m afraid to ask but, what do you mean by “false country”?

Right now, if he were able to convert all of his $241.8B to cash, then distribute it evenly among all of the employees at all of his companies, he could give each of his 146,000 employees $1.6M.

No one person should be that wealthy. I don’t necessarily think that billionaires should be abolished, but I do think they should be paying a shit load more in taxes than they are.

Also, before anyone says it, yes, I know it’s not as simple as converting his holdings to cash. I’m just saying “if it were possible”.

I take it that you would argue that the media bias bot is worse than nothing?

I’m not arguing in favor of the media bias bot in particular here. I’m just kind of thinking about what might be a better solution. Given the fractured media landscape at the moment, it seems unreasonable to expect everyone to immediately have know the various biases of each news source. Having tools that help with that, even if they are themselves biased, seems like a good starting point for understanding the bias of different news organizations. Is there a better way to develop a similar tool that provides more useful information?

Okay, I can certainly see that perspective and, after reading the link posted by @ayyy@InEnduringGrowStrong@sh.itjust.works I can see how this scale is problematic in other ways since news bias isn’t one-dimensional.

Is there a better way to educate people about the bias of particular new organizations, though? It seems unreasonable to expect everyone to develop their own individual assessment of every news organization. There are simply too many of them offering too many different spins. This attempt at providing something easily digestible seems like a reasonable starting point. It’s certainly not perfect and has a lot of room for improvement but is it worse than nothing?

Thank you for the link, that was helpful!

This is an honest question because I see the media bias bot being consistently downvoted and don’t understand why. Can you fill me in? Why is the media bias bot hated so much? It seems fairly reasonable in its assessments. For example:

• Daily Vox: Left with High factuality
• Huffington Post: Left with Mixed factuality
• MSNBC: Left with Mixed factuality
• NPR: Left-Center with High factuality
• Reuters: Least Biased with Very High factuality
• Forbes: Right-Center with Mostly Factual factuality
• Fox: Extreme-Right with Mixed factuality
• OAN: Extreme-Right with Low factuality
• Newsmax: Extreme-Right with Low factuality
• Infowars: Extreme-Right with Very Low factuality
  • Conspiracy Level: Tin Foil Hat
  • Pseudo-Sci Level: Strong

Tell me that there is an anti trust suit over this.

Ah, “buy” was a typo but it wasn’t meant to be “boy”. I know better than that. It was meant to be “guy”.

Yeah, I’ve worked retail too and I don’t think I would have done this, even if I did have another task to complete.

This cashier’s lane light was on. They smiled at me, came to help, scanned my items, and let me pay. Then, rather than scanning the man’s six items, they put up their closed sign and walked away without saying a word while leaving their lane light on. It felt hostile and rude.

Thank you, I appreciate it. It’s honestly weighing on me that I didn’t say something. I guess the best that I can do is to do better next time something similar happens.

Thank you. You don’t think that speaking up would be more embarrassing for the man that what already happened? I feel terrible that I didn’t act more appropriately in the moment, but I was too shocked to think of a good response to the situation.

I like this. This is the mentality I plan to take with me in case of future situations. I feel terrible that I wasn’t present enough to act appropriately in the moment.

deleted by creator

She’s a bad ass for just having the guts to go out there like that. Good for her! I’d be mortified to try that…

I’m most interested in why the Pentagon did this. It seems like an weird thing to do. It also seems like, whatever upsides might have been there, the downsides of blowback if the scheme was caught almost certianky outweigh the upsides.