• nautilus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    False equivalence, that’s an entirely different historical context. Things can apply to one situation and not another

    • rug_burn@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Explain. How is it a false equivalent? Romans controlled the city / region for over a thousand years and were later conqured, and their land stolen, to use the vernacular of this thread.

      • nautilus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re oversimplifying in order to compare the two. Wildly different historical contexts with entirely unrelated events. Distilling both down to “area conquered” just so you can make a point is reductive.

        Beyond that though, why does it matter honestly? Does the fact that a city was conquered in the 1400s invalidate anything mentioned so far?

            • rug_burn@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              People. On a land mass. Wiped out. People. On a land mass. Wiped out.

              Yeah, I guess I see your point.

              • nautilus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Damn, still couldn’t make it past the first sentence huh? Really hard question too, I’m not surprised you conveniently ignored it given the aptitude you’ve shown so far. Ain’t my fault that you can’t possibly comprehend two things being somewhat similar yet remaining distinct.

                God, I love sealioning.

                • rug_burn@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Oh wait, my fault. I was responding to your comment “We are still here

                  Wasn’t sure which part of my anaolgy you weren’t getting. Now we can peacefully argue about that instead.

                  **EDITED FOR TYPO

                  • nautilus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Nice, made it extremely clear this time that you have no interest in actually discussing anything. Really appreciate your honesty, have a good one