It seems that you like to play word games instead of speaking plainly then focus conversation on psychoanalyzing people you’re attacking instead of making any actual points in the discussion.
… I simply don‘t appreciate having words put in my mouth in order to make me a strawman.
You are an apologist of Russia‘s war of aggression, which is what I have said from the start and which you have made abundantly clear.
It seems you often interpret things the way you feel, instead of what was actually being said. You just did it again - I never said I agree this is a proxy war. As I said before, whether it is or isn’t is beside the point I‘m trying to make.
Funny how you call out the one thing I haven’t addressed after ignoring my rebuffs several times. Still, I took a quick look at the RAND study; it’s from 2019, they argue strategies to weaken Russia. After 2014, a move like that from Russia was always a possibility - thinking about this stuff is a thinktanks job. How you get from that to calling it „advocating“, and the claim it is a proxy war, and even think this is actual evidence of anything, is beyond me. There even is an editor’s note attached „because Russian entities and individuals sympathetic to Putin’s decision to invade Ukraine have mischaracterized this research“. That is my point.
Lead me through your thought process, please. Where exactly in these two sentences did I say that this isn’t a proxy war? Because once again, for around the fourth time today: what you claim to have been said, was in fact not said.
When/where did I say that?
I haven’t posted a single link.
Stop posting links and work on your poor reading comprehension.
Even though it is beside the point, Mitt Romney doesn’t say what you’re claiming, neither in the video nor the tweet you linked. McConnell says nothing about a proxy war in that statement and neither does Blumenthal. You are extrapolating political affiliation from half-statements or even single words. I don’t know about RAND and I do not care, because I never said it wasn’t a proxy war, but are these really the strongest evidence you could find?
You have on the game as a whole, though. Mechanics, strategies, locations, weapons, lore, maybe friendships with other players. Hard to leave all that behind.
I don’t understand how what your saying is a response to my post. I don’t even understand how your statements are internally coherent: „I think you don’t know what a proxy war is“ <> „because US officials now openly say it is a proxy war“. Also I don’t think someone who was an ambassador to Finland 18 years ago can be counted as a „US official“.
Do you think anyone doesn’t know what a proxy war is? Or are you sheepishly trying to shift away the blame from the country that started this war?
Not with money, but time and effort.
Too many people just accept it. Maybe due to an apparent lack of alternatives, fomo and some sort of sunk cost fallacy addiction.
Not saying you‘re wrong, but your arguments are weird. cRPGs are obviously not dead, and I‘ve encountered a group of more than 10 enemies maybe a handful of times. And, subjectively, that was fun.