Rogers offering buyout packages to roughly half of its staff (financialpost.com)

submitted 2 days ago by yogthos@lemmy.ml to c/canada@lemmy.ca

37 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 days ago

Oh wow you wrote a whole essay and still missed the point. That is honestly kind of impressive.

Let me explain this slowly for you. A proxy war requires a proxy. A proxy is a client state or a dependent group that does the bidding of a bigger power because the bigger power controls them or owns their loyalty. Iran is not a client state of Russia. Iran is an independent country with its own government its own military and its own foreign policy agenda. Russia does not call the shots in Tehran. Russia does not control the Iranian military. Russia does not decide when Iran attacks Israel.

You keep saying well they fund groups that fight our enemies and that makes it a proxy war. No. That makes them an ally with overlapping interests. There is a difference. The US and Israel are allies. Is the US a proxy of Israel? No. Because the US makes its own decisions. Same logic applies here.

Iran helps groups like Hezbollah and the Houthis because Iran has its own goals. They are Iranian proxies not Russian ones. Iran is not fighting a war on behalf of Russia. Iran is fighting a war on behalf of Iran. That is the key part you keep tripping over being the genius that you are.

So no. Iran is not a Russian proxy. Iran is an independent nation doing its own thing. You can call that a proxy war if you want but only if you do not understand what the word proxy actually means. Amazing that you do not even understand your own argument.

Let me know if you need me to use smaller words to explain this to you.

[-] Skankhunt420@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Yes see you have no grasp on what the fuck proxy war actually is.

A war where two powers use third parties as a supplement to, or a substitute for fighting each other directly.

I posted again friend maybe you will realize you missed a word or something.

The USA helping Ukraine is a proxy war because the USA wouldn't dare fight Russia because of the threat of nuclear annhiliation. So they give weapons to Ukraine and Ukraine fights Russia. They are "using a third party" to fight each other indirectly.

Russia is helping Iran because Russia also woudlnt dare fight USA because of the threat of nuclear annihilation. So Russia is giving weapons and intelligence to Iran "using a third party" to fight USA indirectly

"Amazing you don't know what proxy means"

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

You're like a poster child for the Dunning–Kruger effect. I explained to you what a proxy war is already above. It's clear that you're unable to engage with that given the obvious limits of your intellectual capacity. The fact that your whole conception of a proxy war is derived from superficial googling really is the cherry on the cake here.

[-] Skankhunt420@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Here, I got my superficial definition here from Yandex comrade!

proxy war is an armed conflict where at least one of the belligerents is directed or supported by an external third-party power. In the term “proxy war,” a belligerent with external support is the proxy. Both belligerents in a proxy war can be considered proxies if both are receiving foreign military aid from a third-party country. 1 2

It turns out that you can be a communist and possess reading comprehension!! I'm shocked. Might have to look into yandex more often because all this time I just thought you guys didn't have the right definitions to go by or something.

Nope. Turns out you just didn't know what the words you said meant that you were so vehemently defending.

Or is this Yandex stuff just dirty western propaganda too?

"Amazing you don't even know what a proxy is"

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

You went to Yandex and copied the first definition you saw. That is adorable.

Of course, even the dictionary definition says it is about support and third-party powers. That is the starting point, and you are acting like you found the rosetta stone here.

A proxy war is a political arrangement. It is not just two countries who vaguely dislike the same guy and happen to help each other out. If it were that loose then every military alliance in history is suddenly a proxy war. NATO is just a bunch of proxies. The Allies in WWII were proxies. See how stupid that sounds?

The scholarship is very clear on this. Tyrone L. Groh in Proxy War: The Least Bad Option does not just say support like your Yandex definition. He defines proxy war as directing the use of force by a politically motivated, local actor to indirectly influence political affairs in the target state. There is a hierarchy there with a principal and an agent. Not just two buddies high fiving because they both hate the same person. But of course, reading actual books is too much to be expected from somebody like you.

Your definition is a child's sketch of something that takes entire books to understand. You looked that up and thought you had a mic drop while you had a flimsy entry level summary that collapses the moment you apply it to a real world scenario.

By your Yandex logic the US giving Israel weapons makes Israel an American proxy. Do you believe that? Or do you understand that Israel is a sovereign nation with its own agenda and the US just shares some of those interests? That is the exact same relationship Russia and Iran have.

The mental gymnastics here are genuinely impressive. You dismissed actual analysis and instead pulled up a search engine and acted like you discovered fire. Go read a book then come back and tell me your Yandex definition is the airtight argument you think it is. I will wait. Amazing you do not even know what proxy means.