Like, we all know what happened was bad and there is 300 news networks praising this guy for tackling the shooter and everybody is saying thoughts and prayers and ,...
That's all there. It's been said many times and it will be said many more times by smarter more eloquent people than myself and anyone else that ever installed Lemmy.
Nothing anyone writes here will be read by more than a handful of people and it is completely and utterly inconsequential on an inconsequential social media platform.
So why not go for something a bit more original and have a "drunk" philosophical debate about a "trolley problem" like this without some self-righteous outrage at a person for starting it.
But it's a social media with mostly shitposts, so why not say stuff out loud if for nothing else than to sort these thoughts that are kind of presenting themselves. And they are.
I mean, it would be a way cooler story of the guy went all Rambo and dispatched both of them instead of just caused a short pause for one of them.
That is obvious, but it's not the land, is just the defence line.
Hypotheticaly if they get NATO membership in exchange for Donbas, I think Ukraine would be all for that.
People aren't giving their lives there for some fields in Donbas, but to protect the rest of their country and nation.
There are people there that just want a normal life. Conquered or not, that doesn't mean anything compared to not being bombed while they are playing with their kids.
I don't think anyone really cares much about that land. It's s mixture of mud, plastic drone remains and unexploded munitions. It's important because the defence line is there. Many people say it's rich in minerals... a lot of land is in a lot of places. Nobody is going to use this land for mining, not at any time soon.
The narrative should be security guarantees.
Because when the news says: Zelensky doesn't want to ceed land, it implies some kind of pride and stubbornness. But in reality Ukraine wants security guarantees and they would be willing to not militarily contest Crimea and even Donbas.
There is no point in ceeding anything were there no guarantees. But if you get them, then a lot is on the table.
The point is it the news and everyone goes with security guarantees narrative it is a much stronger narrative: you want to exist, the enemy doesn't want you to exist. Instead of taking about land where it can all sound like it bickering about who gets what. Perception matters. A lot of Europeans don't know any the details of this war and most Americans have no clue. The narrative is important.
I got deleted from another channel "Ukraine" for this view and got called a lot of bad words and I don't know why. It's not an extreme view and I think Ukrainian government sees it like that as well.
Wasn't this obvious?
He didn't need to go "all-in on ai" cause there is hundreds of thousands of people who tried the same thing already and everyone of them could tell him that's not what ai can do.
No chance it doesn't suck.
They aren't making it for you. They are making it for young people, new audience, so it will be a cookie cutter bs show, with bad acting, no real story with illogical plot holes all around.
It will be pointless and cringe.
These companies are unable to make something good and the proof is that they don't.
I'm approaching this from another angle.
Like, we all know what happened was bad and there is 300 news networks praising this guy for tackling the shooter and everybody is saying thoughts and prayers and ,...
That's all there. It's been said many times and it will be said many more times by smarter more eloquent people than myself and anyone else that ever installed Lemmy.
Nothing anyone writes here will be read by more than a handful of people and it is completely and utterly inconsequential on an inconsequential social media platform.
So why not go for something a bit more original and have a "drunk" philosophical debate about a "trolley problem" like this without some self-righteous outrage at a person for starting it.