MonsterMonster@lemmy.world to World News@lemmy.worldEnglish · 2 days agoPutin tells BBC the West is 'making Russia the enemy'www.bbc.co.ukexternal-linkmessage-square144fedilinkarrow-up1251arrow-down112file-text
arrow-up1239arrow-down1external-linkPutin tells BBC the West is 'making Russia the enemy'www.bbc.co.ukMonsterMonster@lemmy.world to World News@lemmy.worldEnglish · 2 days agomessage-square144fedilinkfile-text
Ukraine war latest: EU agrees €90bn loan for Ukraine as Putin tells BBC the West is ‘making Russia the enemy’ - BBC News
minus-squareGrammarPolice@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down1·2 days agoYour positions are correct, but it seems like you’re trying to deflect from the topic at hand. See red herring
minus-squareSocialism_Everyday@reddthat.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down8·2 days agoI’m not deflecting, I’m doing the testing of a hypothesis. Hypothesis: Europe is antagonizing Russia because it invaded a foreign independent nation Counterexample: Europe keeps befriending Israel and the USA despite numerous cases of them invading foreign independent nations Conclusion: the hypothesis doesn’t hold
minus-squareGrammarPolice@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4arrow-down1·edit-22 days agoYour argument doesn’t follow a valid syllogistic structure. You’re attempt to clarify still follows a red herring pattern. The only way to counter the premise: Europe is antagonizing Russia because it invaded a foreign independent nation would be to show that Russia isn’t doing so. Russia IS doing so, so it is a correct argument. Any other argument you introduce is a red herring.
Your positions are correct, but it seems like you’re trying to deflect from the topic at hand. See red herring
I’m not deflecting, I’m doing the testing of a hypothesis.
Hypothesis: Europe is antagonizing Russia because it invaded a foreign independent nation
Counterexample: Europe keeps befriending Israel and the USA despite numerous cases of them invading foreign independent nations
Conclusion: the hypothesis doesn’t hold
Your argument doesn’t follow a valid syllogistic structure. You’re attempt to clarify still follows a red herring pattern.
The only way to counter the premise:
would be to show that Russia isn’t doing so. Russia IS doing so, so it is a correct argument. Any other argument you introduce is a red herring.