• Photonic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Mate, I’m gonna agree with the other guy here.

    Your statements diminish the efforts and successes of the Ukrainian military, both by greatly exaggerating the amount of drones they use to land a successful strike and by mocking the reported 16 million number with your “bazillion”. The 16 million number is imo a completely believable amount.

    They also simply did destroy a helicopter with a single drone. So the reporting is factual.

    Everyone knows that many drones miss their target or get intercepted, just like bullets do. If a warthog destroys an armoured vehicle, we also report that the warthog destroyed the armoured vehicle and not that the majority of the bullets simply hit the ground next to the vehicle.

    • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Your statements diminish the efforts and successes of the Ukrainian military,

      I mean - they don’t. They’re clearly having great success. I said that they have a strategy that works. You just want somebody to argue against. Argue against somebody who disagrees.

      • Photonic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        LOL, yes they do. They’re straw man arguments even:

        Most drones miss their target but some make a successful hit —> “thousands of drones for a handful of hits”

        1 FPV drone vs a 16 million dollar helicopter —> “$500 drone vs bazillion-dollar helicopter”

        I’m not saying you disagree that their strategy is successful, but your attempt at “putting things into perspective” are over exaggerated and diminishes the actual successes.

        Also: you don’t know me, so please don’t tell me what it is that I want :)

        • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          I’m not saying you disagree that their strategy is successful, but your attempt at “putting things into perspective” are over exaggerated and diminishes the actual successes.

          Of course it’s an exaggerated statement genius - a gazillion is a a pretty dead fucking giveaway n’est pas? But the constant cheer online of destroying “expensive” equipment with “cheap weapons” is not as clear as some people are making it out to be. “A lot” of drones are just destroyed.

          I’m not diminishing shit. I’m pointing out reality.

          • Photonic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 hours ago

            No, “genius”, you’re building straw man’s.

            And you completely ignored what I said and tried to be obtuse just because you… how did you put it? “want to argue”.

            I’m simply calling you on your bullshit. I don’t need you to agree to being called on your bullshit to be correct.

            • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 hours ago

              No, “genius”, you’re building straw man’s.

              It’s almost like you’re about to understand hyperbole used in informal conversation.

              • Photonic@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                2 hours ago

                Maybe you could understand that if you use hyperbole to make a point, even in informal conversation, it is a straw man argument.

                Nothing on Lemmy is formal, so your repetitive point about it being informal is just more bullshit.

                • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  2 hours ago

                  Maybe you could understand that if you use hyperbole to make a point, even in informal conversation, it is a straw man argument.

                  Sooooooooo close…

                  • Photonic@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    2 hours ago

                    Mate. There is nothing to get close to.

                    Bullshit stinks and I’d rather stay the fuck away.