Pretty hard to argue that it wasn't.
The persecution of Jews in Germany certainly predated the war, but the extermination of them very much did not.

The dipshits literally blamed the Jews for the German loss of WW1. You bet WW2 played a role in the rapid acceleration of the persecution into mass murder.

Has to do with- sure. Particularly if done in good faith.
Both Ukraine and Russia are blowing shit up and/or killing innocent people and blaming it on the other side currently. Those are not legal and legitimate acts of war.

And your enablement of criminal activity as long as it's someone you support doing it is worse than disgusting. You're one of the fucking filth that voted Nazis into power because you hated some group of people, and then hid your face when they turned murderous.
You try to pretend like you're the opposite of them, but you're not. You're just too fucking stupid to see how you aren't.

So do I.
But I'll not let facts be a victim of that war as well.

There is rapid and strong outrage if you dare point out that Ukraine has gotten caught executing false flag action as well. One of which, the Nordstream bombing, even directly impacted the people giving them money.
That doesn't make them worse than Russia somehow. It just means they cannot be taken at their word.

No argument with Russia's past and certain future being propagandist piece of shit bad actors.

However, Ukraine spent 4 years blaming the Nordstream bombing on the Russians. When it was the Ukrainians did it.
Trying to pretend like these 2 people are cut from entirely different cloths is absolutely fucking asinine, and contrary to evidence.

Not quite- that's how you get the proximate cause felony murder rule, of which only a couple of jurisdictions in the US, and none outside of the US in the Western world recognize due to its obvious injustice.

It isn't in proximate cause jurisdictions... but even then, not all of those.
To give you an example, in even the laxest proximate cause jurisdictions, if the police officer fires his weapon inappropriately, then the proximate cause is broken. You are not responsible for someone else breaking the law (say, pulling out an AR-15 and spraying into a crowd to stop you).

But even that's moot, since again- very few jurisdictions still recognize proximate cause felony murder.

I am not RWNJ, a right winger, a not job, or one who wears a bow tie.
You may call me someone who spent too much time in college learning how to be a scholar, which forced me to learn to view everything as objectively as possible as far away as possible. I'm not kool-aid proof, but I'm damn close.

Trying to shut down criticism of Ukraine with claims of false balance fallacies (ignorantly called "both sides") or accusations of trolling for Russia is just a fucked up purity test the left has began to employ in their ever-increasing panic attack over Trump's election.

Note: I vote left.

Quite incorrect.

The only equivalence I claimed was in fact true. They're clearly enumerated.
You extrapolated a false equivalence out of that, because your brain shuts down whenever any criticism is levied at all at your pet cause.

The things I listed being true does not mean that Ukraine and Russia are the same. The fact that I need to say that is a defect in your reasoning skills, not me employing a fallacy.

That is statistically impossible in a bit flip scenario.
You couldn't do it in a googol ages of the universe.

486! hah!
The avionics package on the orbiter in fact consisted of 8086s. You may be thinking about Hubble.

In our datacenters, our per-server MCE anomalies are, averaged, ~0.2/yr, across ~150 servers.
We're at sea level, and in datacenters with lots of shit on the roof, so maybe we're doing a little better than someone's house, but 1/week is 100% not the FSM fucking with your bits. That's memory or bus timings or voltage on the razor's edge or something.

Na, that's a problem in the bus or the memory.
We have hundreds of servers and don't see that kind of MCE log frequency across all of them combined lol

It's close to.

Even in cases that still allow proximate cause, it's not absolute.

In your example- Waddy- the charge of assault was dropped, and a police officer was charged instead.
This is because the police officer committed a crime (negligently discharging his firearm into a crowd), thus the direct chain of proximate cause was broken.

The problem is not that you proclaim that they're perfect widdle angels, it's that you proclaim that any criticism of them is tantamount to support for their opponent. This makes you dangerous. You're the kind of braindead motherfucker who ends up putting actual fascists into office.

There is nothing comparable. What's up with the whataboutism? Do you think Russia's war crimes justify Ukraine's?

I didn't say I don't support them. I absolutely "support" Ukraine, in that in the balance, they are the just party.

You're the fucking moron that thinks any criticism of them is endorsement of their enemy.

lol-
Give me a fucking break.

No. Get fucked, partisan slime.

Russian's are happy to deliberately contaminate their own people, rivers, lakes and forests with nuclear waste. They fly nuclear powered cruise missiles over their own land. They leak weaponized anthrax in their own cities. They have solders dig and occupy trenches in land they know is contaminated with nuclear waste.

What could possibly make you believe the Russians would hesitate to spread yet more nuclear waste around in Ukraine if they thought it would bring them some military advantage? In all likelihood this damage to the confinement shell was accidental, but I don't know, and neither do you. What I know with absolute certainty is that Russians don't give fuck number one about the consequences of this, deliberate or otherwise, whether they eventually occupy the land they hope to or not.

Entirely incorrect.
In the compromise of 1877, both sides claimed to certify the election. It was some pandemonious insanity, which is what led to the Compromise of 1877- to hopefully prevent it from happening again by drawing clearer rules. The problem is, those rules were never binding. Everyone just played by them for 150 years.

Not voting for A does not imply voting for B.

I don't believe you, particularly since you clearly believe that any means justify your ends.

So from beyond arguing from a position of simply being incorrect, I think you're also trying to hide your rhetorical goals.