I'm not sure why you're being downvoted.

Correct me if I'm wrong but you're not saying this is a good thing. Just that it is a thing.

Makes sense to me. But I concede that I'm ignorant of what diseases we have cured recently, and too tired to research it right now.

I didn't read this as policing anyone tbh. Sounds more like the person is saying we need to remain open to prevent ourselves from becoming as bad as those we aren't open to. Makes sense to me to be honest.

Still, I understand others may just not want to join in with these discussions. That's obviously an individual decision.

Cue some downvotes for not being a 'buy yer pitchforks' comment.

Edit. Which bit of those comments was castigating people? I'm tired and maybe I'm just missing something.

Cheers bye

Okay.

I guess in the same way you found my comment to be for no reason, I also found yours to be the same.

IMO, your comment wasn't really on topic. They asked a question about why it happens to them, and you replied that it never happens to you. How is that on topic?

I did find it interesting that it doesn't happen in the US, I was just checking that you were just making a comment about your own experience, and not to help answer the ops question. That's cool, and I was just checking.

I hope you have a nice weekend:)

This isn't meant to be rude or anything, I'm just not sure why you're telling us this.

Is it just an in interesting fact for non-americans?

There'd certainly be less people passing if those were missing!

No?

They do the dance too though. Really weird.

I'm sure it must be more difficult for you :( just to try and keep you going though, it's definitely a numbers game and those of us who don't have any concerns sometimes misread too.

Tbh, the recovery is probably more important than the execution in this scenario.

I wish more effort was put in to gamifying education courses.

Your last point is pretty much the most likely way to excel in life too, unfortunately.

You're lucky if you do actually like the person you have to suck up to.

He didn't accomplish anything though did he?

Except the gunman was killed right? So he wouldn't be able to try again.

How is this atheist?

Ask yourself, in 6 months time will you be able to find another contract job or employed job easily? If the answer is yes then I'd say go for it and get the extra experience.

No worries. I can see how it'd be interpreted like that. Especially given the amount of what aboutism we see in the comments.

I also struggle with Lemmy comments as I'm usually writing here tired in my 'downtime' between other responsibilities. You guys get the worst of me! Haha

I can't work out your tone from this text. Are you suggesting I'm saying it's okay that either of these things happening?

I'd say that if NATO are willing to point out China funding Russia, they should also be capable of the self reflection to admit their own faults too.

I get that this wouldn't work politically though. It's just really frustrating to see such an obvious scream at a mirror.

The only way they could enable Russia more is by directly sending them munitions.

It does seem rich for NATO to call China out on this when NATO members are sending Israel weapons and enabling a different genocide.

Maybe there's some reason that's different but I definitely don't understand it off the top of my head.

Sorry if I misunderstood. I'll reply on the basis of your latest comment.

I said I don’t see why I valid target would be made invalid just because it’s inside Russia

Is anybody saying a target would be made invalid just because it's in Russia? My point was all targets inside Russia are open to increased scrutiny because of targeting inside Russia.

The children's hospital example is because Russia likely does not have children's hospitals (or other non-military assets) inside Ukraine, and therefore Russian targets inside Ukraine are almost certainly going to be valid. On the other hand, when some high up revenge obsessed Ukrainian military personnel decide they want to target Russian children's hospitals, it's useful for their targets to have increased scrutiny to prevent an additional civilian massacre.

Just to clarify, the children's hospital example is being used to convey an obviously non military target which additional scrutiny can prevent from being attacked.

I'm going to stop replying to this thread now as I'm not sure I can make my point much clearer. I might re-read through the context though just in case I misunderstood something somewhere. I do Lemmy on mobile so sometimes it's difficult to track a conversation.

Yes. I am bringing children's hospitals in to this as an example for why additional scrutiny is required when attacking targets inside Russia.

I'm not sure you read my comment fully.