A lot of the comments are whataboutism and strawman arguments (big corporations, fossil fuel, military). To de-emotionalise the discussion, it makes sense to se

A lot of the comments are whataboutism and strawman arguments (big corporations, fossil fuel, military). To de-emotionalise the discussion, it makes sense to separate the two aspects: 1. Is the argument from the linked article factually (and semantically) true? 2. If that is the case, what are the moral and political implications?