Seems to me that if you shut down shipping out of Shanghai, with the rest of the world dependent on Chinese manufacturing you create supply shortages. There are probably people who know what shortages to create.
Are you stating that we currently have accurate numbers in regards to the number of casualties as a result of this war? Also, there was a reason that I used that specific phrase if that was what you were getting at.
It was literally the exact phrasing used by the poster I was responding to. It was strange that he was essentially shrugging his shoulders after admitting to the "shelling of civilian targets". Eh, no big deal, right?
So you are saying that a war that has been fought over a period of many years has a higher number of casualties compared to a year that has been ongoing for a period of 2 months? That was my point regarding it not being an apples to apples comparison when totaling up death counts.
I thought MVA's were the leading cause of death for children in the US. Does that mean some States in the US do not have compulsory car restraints and seat belt use?
You need to consider that the "green folk" among us are wanting to limit the amount of Co2 which if any folk were in school in the 1950's would have learned that Co2 is plant food and that is what makes vegetation grow. We need more Co2 not less. As far as wheat production goes Australia has had record yield in 2021 and as far I understand it cereal crops use Co2, you know the stuff that spews out of coal fired generators.
Climate Change causes largest ever Australian wheat crop << JoNova
I'm struggling to understand your position here. You know that the Ukrainians have been shelling their own eastern provinces for years, which are civilian targets. I have said repeatedly that all the numbers are bullshit, and he said "Or to be more recent, the conflict in the Donbass has been going on for eight years and includes constant attacking of civilian targets. The UN estimates the number of civilian casualties at close to 3500, the Russians at 14.000. Meet these two estimates in the middle and you still fail to get tens of thousands." And he was questioning your death numbers. Please summarize your "thoughts" for us, instead of arguing pointlessly.
That's why I asked for a definition. Are "children" defined as 17-year-old gang members in Chicago? Because when most of us think of "children" we think of little kids. The BBC knows this, and writes their propaganda accordingly.
I was, and I guess I am, trying to explain to you that there is no way to have tens of thousands of dead civilians without daily shelling of civilian targets for a prolonged period of time. Now, why I am doing this is really unclear to myself at this point, because you do not seem to be very intelligent, so let's go with the tens of thousands of dead Ukranian civilians, why not. We need to get wal to resurrect Charlemagne as the next coming of Jesus in order to stop this I guess.
Ok, I've been reading the debate here with the latest guy stuck in the 2-party dialectic, and I don't understand why the focus is not on casualties (including civilian) in US wars? You know, all the wars since the 1960s whose purpose none of us can justify with a straight face?
To all Americans here (including myself), we are responsible for all those deaths. Shut the fuck up about the Russian-Ukraine war. We have invaded countries all over the globe...fucked with their elections, overthrown democratically elected governments, apparently setup bio-weapon labs on the border of Russia...you know, STUPID shit like that. We WANTED Russia to go kinetic. We've been begging for it since at least 2010.
Estimates of casualties just for the "War on Terrorism" range from 400,000 to over 1,000,000. Those Americans here who are pretending to give a shit about war NOW, please shut the fuck up. We elected an anti-War President, but I guess that wasn't important to the majority of the country since "we" impeached him twice and then elected a demented puppet for the ALL the industrial complexes.