He could also live for 20 years, statistics wouldn’t say so but there is always an odd one out. Also, he doesn’t smoke, doesn’t drink, doesn’t drive. So I wouldn’t choose to ‘just wait it out’. Especially considering the longer he is in power, the more likely it becomes the next one in his place isn’t there because of free and fair elections. Again, I wouldn’t choose to just wait it out.

Not click and scroll, just scroll, the link is to a comment on this page.

You’re trying to use logic against a man who only uses logic when he needs it to make his plans sound legit to rational thinkers

Imagine we just waited in 1944 for someone to succeed Hitler

It’s only rumours so far, but according to the new president nobody is going to vote ever again, soo

Just scroll down 👇

You’re thinking if us laws, but we’re talking about international law

Or they’re so used to smartphone that windows and Linux are equally alien to them

Picking wild flowers disrupts the circle of life, artificially growing flowers requires energy, fertilizer and insecticides which also disrupts the circle of life. Best option is to buy her broccoli instead. Don’t wrap it though, wrapping paper is basically really flat chopped trees with a layer of chemicals on top. No ribbons either. Maybe some sauce, but not milk/yoghurt/egg-based.

Be wary of giving the robot your WiFi password though

An ad on Lemmy??

You are just plain wrong, you would see that if you would actually read what’s in the source you provide. To be honest I think you just Googled for something that fits your narrative so trying to get a point across might not be worth my time, but to explain what is in the information you provided:

First of all, this data covers bilateral aid to Ukraine between January 24, 2022 and December 31, 2024. In other words, the data covers nearly 3 years while the article writes about 2024 only. Since the data you provide isn’t about the same time period as the article I posted, it is not relevant to your argument.

Second of all, you can see in the graph this is about 3 kinds of aid. Of that $114 bn, 64 is in militairy aid and 64 is financial aid. Both of those are not included, as i explained to you in my previous post. The actual humanitarian aid the US provided over the time period in your graph only 3.4 Bn is actually humanitarian aid.

I don’t disagree that the headline would be more precise if it specifically said humanitarian aid instead of international aid when the article would be about aid from the us (or any other country) to another specific country, as it would be about bilateral aid. International aid in this case can also mean the aid that is given internationally, as in, multiple nations giving aid to multiple nations. But I don’t care about your argument about the preciseness of the headline.

You’re point is that the article is wrong and so poorly written it is basically misinformation and I do not agree at all. But I’m not going to explain why that is bullshit, I’ve wasted enough time. If you want to believe your own truth, be my guest.

Instead of aid to developing countries, the headline says international aid. Aid to Ukraine is international aid, but Ukraine is not a developing country.

Yes, the headline says international aid because it is not only aid to developing countries.

The article explicitly mentions it is because governments choose to spend their money internally, have you even read it??

What do you mean?

Official development assistance (ODA) is government aid that promotes and specifically targets the economic development and welfare of developing countries.

DAC member countries’ bilateral ODA to Ukraine fell by 16.7% in 2024 compared to 2023 and amounted to USD 15.5 billion, representing 7.4% of total net ODA (a decline from 8.0% in 2023). Contributions from EU Institutions outpaced those from DAC member countries combined.

The part that is not given in the form of weapons is counted, but looking at the data I don’t think the aid offered to Ukraine is a factor in the overall decline.

Edit: I quoted this from https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/official-development-assistance-oda.html not from the article

The data the article writes about can be found here: https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/official-development-assistance-oda.html

Especially the media from outside us

I’d love it if they just went like “man walks nude in white house” and then show a picture of some guy walking around in a white house, focussing on the headline instead of the body of the text

The Onion can’t compete with this

I just follow exposés by his baby momma’s, it’s not as up-to-date but it’s good enough for me