
[BOR]
0: Safe
1: Be civil
2: All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
3: No bots, spam or self-promotion.
4: Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
5: Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6: No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed.
7: No duplicate posts.
8: Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited.
9: No link shorteners.
10: Don't copy entire article in your post body

[EOR]
[BOC]
It's a wonder you can figure out how to navigate the world around you. The commenter was not making an argument, they were adding a list of facts about Russian meddling, none of which is up for debate. The argument is implied by the article to which the commenter was adding additional premises as supporting evidence. Again, no problem with those premises, they are supported by fact. The problem is with the argument made by the article, which is that we should care about Russian meddling and we should act, or support actions, to stop it.

This is argument is inherently relative and involves numerous relative claims. These claims can be that Russian meddling is distinct from other meddling, that it is particularly severe, that it leads to particular bad outcomes, that it is distinctly morally inferior, or meddling itself morally reprehensible and must be stopped.

But generally Western propaganda goes like this: that nation over there did a bad thing and we must stop them, we never do that bad thing, but if we do it's for good outcomes, but if the outcomes are bad it was an accident, but if it wasn't an accident than they deserved it. Basically the abusers psychological playbook. And West and their media arms play that game masterfully. In this case, Russian meddling is newsworthy and part of a larger trend of why we must defeat Russia, crush its economy, sanction its people, arm its enemies, and encircle it with military bases and nuclear capabilities.

Never mind the fact that Putin is in office because of US meddling. Never mind that US meddling has been more egregious, more comprehensive, has effected more countries, more of the world's population, more land, more wealth, more children, has caused more death, more environmental devastation, and has gone on for far longer than Russian meddling. The US media never says the international community should sanction US billionaires because of US meddling that led to Putin, Al-Qaeda, ISIS, death squads, drug epidemics, etc.

Nope. None of that. Because the US doesn't meddle in the affairs of sovereign nations, but if it does it's for their own good, and if harms them then it was accident, and if it wasn't an accident then they deserved it.

And you think I'm engaged in whataboutism? I think you're a myopic Western drone who's been indoctrinated since birth in a system that embeds orientalism, white supremacy, and global dominance into every single aspect of life from the time you were in grade school through all of your employable years, that your family raised you to succeed within that indoctrination because failing to do so would be worse for your economic and social outlook, and now, thanks to that indoctrination, you can't even reason effectively about a basic thing like whether or not someone is deflecting by asking "what about something else" or if they are fundamentally attacking the basic premises of an argument that culminates in a call for escalating a proxy war with a global nuclear power.

Get your fucking head on straight and think for a goddamned second instead of imaging that anyone accusing the Western war propagandists of hypocrisy is engaging in whataboutism.
[EOC]

1: Be civil