Search results

  1. History Learner

    peter Zeihan 2020

    Because if I was making a different argument, why would I post that chart? Pretty simple logical train here.
  2. History Learner

    peter Zeihan 2020

    Which is why I included #2; you could've just asked what I meant instead of making a strawman argument.
  3. History Learner

    peter Zeihan 2020

    Once again, when you directly concede the chart says total drug deaths, how am I making a different argument? From this, we can infer: You didn't bother to actually read the chart before commenting You picked a strawman argument for me instead of just asking
  4. History Learner

    peter Zeihan 2020

    Here's the CDC literally explaining what is. In which case, why did you not ask me instead of assuming the argument? I mean, as you literally concede, the chart itself says total drug deaths. You're mad, but the fault here lies entirely with you.
  5. History Learner

    peter Zeihan 2020

    If someone is murdered by a gun or a knife, does that change the fact they were murdered? I'm also unsure how it can be allegedly when you admitted the chart directly says total drug deaths.
  6. History Learner

    peter Zeihan 2020

    Because the point was always total drug deaths, and does not include alcohol deaths. Nor did I change my argument; I literally did not even include a comment with the original post because I thought it spoke for itself.
  7. History Learner

    peter Zeihan 2020

    That's entirely the point: His argument seemed to revolve around whether it's mostly opioids, which misses the central point is on total drug deaths. As I said, we don't quibble on murder statistics regardless of whether they're caused by a knife or a gun, etc; the murder still happened is...
  8. History Learner

    peter Zeihan 2020

    Wouldn’t it be crazy if the chart in question said exactly that? Oh wait… As I said, I assumed the reader would not be obtuse. It was my mistake for placing that much faith in you. I’m happy to be of service to those that need it.
  9. History Learner

    peter Zeihan 2020

    That drug deaths in the United States are now equal to alcoholism deaths during the collapse of the USSR. Whatever the composition of the drugs is is irrelevant to that central fact; we don't quibble on whether a murder is done by a hammer or gun when counting it in the statistics. Forgive me...
  10. History Learner

    peter Zeihan 2020

    Indeed, so I’m not really sure what your argument is over; you quibbled over the level of what amount of the total drug deaths is opioids but have yet to dispute the central point of the tweet I posted. Drug deaths now equal alcoholism deaths.
  11. History Learner

    peter Zeihan 2020

    No, your argument was on the composition of the drug deaths. Total drug deaths has exceeded alcoholism deaths in Post-Soviet Russia.
  12. History Learner

    peter Zeihan 2020

    Fair, regardless of the exact break down, the original point stands.
  13. History Learner

    peter Zeihan 2020

    Caveat here being this data is from 2020-2021, and thus before the Taliban were able to shut down the poppy trade like I pointed out.
  14. History Learner

    peter Zeihan 2020

    It appears the U.S. is imminently about to abandon its position(s) in Syria, in a major win for the Russia-Iran axis and it's local client Assad. This follows months of increasing base attacks that have left the U.S. presence in the region increasingly vulnerable and exposed:
  15. History Learner

    peter Zeihan 2020

    Source is listed on the second, for the first I'll look around. I can believe it, Heroin availability has cratered because of the Taliban and other drugs aren't as lethal; cocaine (IIRC) is actually less lethal now than anytime before, the issue with it is that it is increasingly cut with fent.
  16. History Learner

    peter Zeihan 2020

    The U.S. Army's official multi volume study on the conflict, written by and based on interviews with, the very men who were there. It came out in 2018 during the Trump Administration and directly criticizes the strategy and tactics made, which ultimately led to defeat.
  17. History Learner

    peter Zeihan 2020

    The U.S. Army disagrees and notes numerous failures within the organization itself, specifically noting bad strategy and tactics on the part of the service directly led to the overall American failure in Iraq. The “we weren’t allowed to fight” excuse is directly rejected by the people who...
  18. History Learner

    peter Zeihan 2020

    My understanding of his comment was that he was referring to the combat capability of the U.S. Armed Forces in the abstract, not just vis-a-vis with Iran. If the aforementioned is what he meant and If we are specifically talking about material distribution and capabilities, then I think the...
  19. History Learner

    peter Zeihan 2020

    It's worth noting even the Soviets have a better record on this. The U.S. backed GIRoA collapsed almost as soon as the U.S. pulled out, while the Soviet backed DRA lasted until 1992, having outlived its patron. It had scored notable success in maintaining its power, most prominently via the the...
Top