3 ms·
Its mission for the past 2 decades was seemingly to also agitate for every war it could. And honestly the articles are just shallow in general Just these headl
by mardifoufs 5y ago
Its mission for the past 2 decades was seemingly to also agitate for every war it could. And honestly the articles are just shallow in general
Just these headlines themselves are a bit disgusting honestly:
https://twitter.com/NaneAam/status/1504168188212387841 https://twitter.com/NaneAam/status/1504168188212387841
- jcranmer 5y ago> also agitate for every war it could It isn't agitating for a wider Russian-Ukrainian war right now (hell, it's explaining why it would be a poor idea for NATO to get directly involved in the war). It didn't agitate for a military response to the Russian annexation of Crimea. It didn't agitate for war against Iran, not even when Trump was considering it after the Iranian missile attack on a US base in Iraq. It's been a while, but I think it's criticized all of Israel's recent wars, as well as the proxy war going on in Yemen. It's also criticized the Iraq War, and they are very open about the fact that a) they originally supported the Iraq War, and b) that support was a mistake. You don't find too many people who will admit to both--for most people, if they now believe the Iraq War to have been a mistake, they try very hard to bury the fact that they ever thought otherwise.