I don't think anyone is being fooled, based on the speed and unanimity of the downvotes.
Well… it’s filled with NATO arms and munitions
Fun fact: Do you know what the ratio is of money Russia's spent on the war, as compared with Ukraine plus allies?
It's about 2 to 1. When you factor in PPP, that means in real material terms it is somewhere in the neighborhood of ten to one. Russia has mobilized basically the entirety of its economy to try to win this thing, about half their federal budget every year now. While Ukraine is surviving on occasional drips of Western aid whenever their governments can get roused from their campaign-contribution-induced torpor of corruption to be reminded that there are actual real things happening in the world.
Basically, it is a war of Russian money, Western technology / intelligence support, and Ukrainian blood. Also Ukrainian ingenuity. Necessity being the mother of invention, Ukraine is probably at the forefront of the world at this point in being able to fight a modern war (meaning a drone war) and produce and strategize based on what's needed for one (meaning drones).
There's also the significant factor that without Western restrictions being put on Ukraine, stopping them from fighting back in several meaningful ways even to this day, they would have mopped the floor with Russia and been bombing strategic centers deep over the border for years now. Their invasion of Kursk and Belgorod isn't even the main thing, it is being able to blow up strategic centers inside Russia's borders.
Having fought a country one-twentieth their size, outspending them ten to one, Russia has managed to get stuck on the border for longer than the US's involvement in World War 2 with Ukraine fighting with one hand tied behind its back.
Think on that for a minute. It is a wonder. There are reasons, of course, mostly having to do with the inherent unfeasibility of a gangster-capitalist state to operate with any significant level of success against actual real challenges. We're about to become very familiar with that, in the US, I am sad to say.
But not once from the US invading Iraq/Afghanistan. Or England’s occupation of Ireland. Or the Israeli presence in Palestine.
Yeah I never heard any of those things. It's a wonder. You can look the length and breadth of American political thought, and never find even a single person who thought the Iraq War or the Israeli occupation was anything bad. You would think there would be some kind of dissenting voices somewhere to be found. Hell, you can't even talk about such things on Lemmy, you'll be banned for it.
I mean that is one among a few different things that's wrong with his mental model lol
I would really encourage the Trump administration to do as much of this as possible.
Military people can make their peace with malicious people, even ones dangerous to the constitutional order some of the time. And being friendly with incompetents is their daily bread and butter. But asking them to give friendly allegiance to foppishness, I think, will be universally revolting to all, regardless of their political feelings.
The scenes I've seen of people around Trump, making sure to kiss his ass and over-emphasize with nervous straight faces what a genius he is and how well things are going, are the stuff of nightmares.
In the speech, Kratsios emphasized the importance of American leadership in emerging technologies and criticized regulatory burdens that, in his view, had slowed progress. "We have weighed down our builders and innovators," he said. "But we are capable of so much more."
"Can we get some comments from the innovators?"
"No we fired them."
Dude I didn't pick this weird pedantic fight and get all upset about what Wikipedia says and what a problem it is. You did. Now that it turned out you were making it up, it's all of a sudden weird for people to care about it. Okay.
Wait, so up there it looks like the actual truth is not "Some years later I tried again but you could no longer make changes IIRC. Just checked, info still missing." but in fact that the exact information is already in the article.
Glad we had this talk lol. I mean it's a pretty trivial thing to get upset about even if it were true, I can somewhat believe that some random person might have reverted your edits for bad reasons, but I am wholly unsurprised to learn that there was no grand conspiracy and the information in the article has been corrected now even though you specifically said that it wasn't.
It strongly looks like you're making things up lol
It is trivial to check what changes someone did or didn't make 10 years ago on Wikipedia, if you know which page of Wikipedia it was on. Which page was it on?
What does the article mean “Juniper Networks, despite being a “Good Article”, is also mostly PR”?
It's all part of their various horseshit attempt at making something which is pretty simple an innocuous into something that it isn't.
Within the last few days, it looks like someone raised the issue on this guy's page, the arbitration committee is getting in touch with him, and he's saying he'll get back to them. Presumably there's a minor conflict of interest and they'll look over the article and make sure he didn't do anything slanty to it and then tell him to stay away from COI-adjacent articles in the future.
There's absolutely nothing sinister here, and they are stringing together a bunch of misleading stuff (like "mostly PR") to make a mountain out of a molehill to discredit Wikipedia. I've noticed a bunch of people doing this, presumably there is some organized campaign which actually is sinister in the way they're implying WP is, that is trying to make people think badly of them.
There are a lot of confusing conclusions here.
I think this falls into the "never interrupt your enemy while they are making a mistake" category.
If they want to fill our channels with random malicious nonsense in service of the idea of killing a bunch of innocent people and taking away their home, and they want to do such a bad job of it that it's transparently obvious horseshit that everyone just laughs at or dunks on... I say welcome. Come on in. Tell us all about your theories, good sir, I can't wait to hear.