Recent comments in /f/worldnews

Riff316 t1_jaddmew wrote

  1. Are you drawing a distinction between “desire” and rights? That might be an important one.

  2. I love the insinuation that indigenous tribes are the same as suburban nimbys. Why don’t we just put wind farms on land that’s already been zoned away from indigenous populations? We have plenty of those here in Ohio and they haven’t harmed wildlife or farming efforts. People still act like they do, but again, not a lot of evidence.

1

Yelmel t1_jaddk30 wrote

> Russia's state-run RIA news agency released a video clip which it said showed Russian Su-25 fighter jets roaring over Bakhmut. "We are glad they are ours," says a man in the clip identified as a Wagner fighter

Has there ever been a more pro-Russia worded article? Even from pro-Russia Reuters this one is bad!

OMG "tighten noose".

11

autotldr t1_jadc2ob wrote

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 72%. (I'm a bot)


> Kampala - Uganda will propose a new anti-gay bill on Wednesday, the speaker of the country's parliament said, as conspiracy theories accusing shadowy international forces of "Promoting homosexuality" flood social media.

> Frank Mugisha, executive director of leading gay rights organisation Sexual Minorities Uganda, which was suspended by the authorities last year, told AFP that he had already been inundated with calls from LGBTQ people over the proposed law.

> Under colonial-era laws, homosexual acts are illegal in Uganda but since independence from Britain in 1962 there has never been a conviction for consensual same-sex activity.


Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: Uganda^#1 bill^#2 Among^#3 AFP^#4 homosexuality^#5

3

Flat_Plant5660 t1_jadbvf4 wrote

Keep in mind that when advocating for any proposed action, you will always be infringing on another groups desire. It's just that "we" have decided to give merit to one groups desires over another groups' desires. It's not nuanced as you point out, it's just you value others demands more than another's and you think to make snide comments as if the other commenter doesn't understand your level of "nuanced".

In sum, it's not nuanced. It's "not in my back yard", at its finest.

2

RogerRoger2310 t1_jadbgm1 wrote

You can go further with this. He didn't plan for the war, he wanted a quick land grab like with Crimea, in order to push his popularity up and prolong his rule. Second reason was like you said, people shouldn't get any ideas about having human rights or such so gotta keep them in line over the entire post-USSR territory. He got fed misinformation and failed hard, hence the war.

>Russians aren't stupid, they overthrew not one but two regimes that looked impossible to overthrow (the Tsar first and the Soviet Union second)

And both were very lucky circumstances + a failed war effort. Such circumstances have not yet formed. Gotta arrange them first.

6

degaussyourcrt t1_jadb0q1 wrote

I think perhaps in the entire history of war there has never been nor ever will be a reliable frontline news source. War is one of the most complex human endeavors we undertake, and there’s a reason “fog of war” is a military term. Couple a war on the ground with a war online (where both sides fight for the hearts, minds, and eyeballs of the rest of the world) and it’s a nearly impossible thing for the average Joe to get a truly accurate sense of.

1