>>17301606That post was replying to this post:
>>17301591How is it a refutation of anything I said. The initial Russian numbers were false, but that doesn't make those BBC estimates credible in return.
>>17301608What the fuck are you even trying to debate here, you are just shifting the goal post and tip toeing. By saying that both sides are lying through their teeth, I implicitely affirmed your article that brands the initial Russian claims as false while simultaneously not taking the BBC numbers any more serious. You were construing some objection to that Reuters article. It's a shitty strawman nothing more.