Fewer american terrorists to be worried about
this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2026
80 points (98.8% liked)
Progressive Politics
4373 readers
526 users here now
Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)
(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The united states of maga is the biggest terrorist organization, you should be worries about
The post is about american army losses so naturally the I am called them terrorists not the iranians
That wasn't obvious, but thanks for downvoting me after you edited your comment
It is obvious but since there is people like you who can't think a bit more I have to edit
You're being a jerk, dude.
I am not. The article and photos only mention the usa army cadualities. Everybody should be able to makes such simple connection
Dude, its a screenshot of a twitter post. wtf article and photos are you talking about.
Lmao @mrdown, you reply confidently incorrectly saying the tweet doesn't mention Iran, then delete your comment, and still downvote me anyways. You're a real piece of work m8.
When you're clearly not talented enough in writing to effectively convey your thoughts unambiguously (even after editing your initial comment), I don't think you have a leg to stand on when defending against the "being a jerk" accusations when you respond as you did to someone having misinterpreted you.
This being said I don't think your ability to speak/write English shows any indication of your intelligence, but when you insult someone for not interpreting your poorly worded comment correctly, it's safe to say you're being a fucking jerk.
You don't want to engage in good faith so you rely on those stupid fallacies.
I dare you to speaks perfectly in a 3rd language.
I literally stated I think it has nothing to do with your intelligence. I just think its mean to insult someone for not understanding you when you're also communicating in a language that's not your first.
What if I said something in your first language that was ambiguous, prompting you to correct me, and insulted you for not understanding me?
Also I never mentioned any fallacies, I called you a jerk for behaving like one.
I choose to believe you are being downvoted for incorrectly choosing between "less" and "fewer".
I don't care about downvotes.what is the difference between using less and fewer?
Fewer is for countable nouns, like 4 apples is fewer than 10 apples.
Less is for uncountable nouns, like Lake Placid has less water than Lake Superior.
It can be confusing because you could find a way to express the same idea using either, like Lake Placid has fewer drops of water, or fewer liters of water than Lake Superior, be sure "drops" and "liters" are discrete countable nouns. But water as a noun covers any amount. Similarly less snow versus fewer inches of snow, or less money versus fewer dollars.
Downvoting for grammatical errors is weird but anyway not a big deal. I would not downvote people who do the same errors in my mother tongue
Sorry. I was making a little joke. I genuinely believe people were down voting you because they don't believe that the American military is a terrorist organization. But since I agree with you, I was trying to come up with another explanation.
For the record, I down voted him because he's a twat who both acknowledged that his comment was ambiguous by editing it while also downvoting me for being confused by said ambiguity.
All good
I'm torn between up voting for the sentiment and down voting for the misspelled "you're".
Wait, what? You saw my ninja edit?
It's still "your" on my side, but I can believe an edit didn't propagate correctly.
Whatatatatatata!???? I just edited it again. What do you see?
It's "you are" now in my side. Chalk it up to the mysteries of federation!
Supporting death: fine
Minor grammatical mistake: that's a line you can't cross
That's why I love this place
We support the end of the killing. The end of the killing requires stopping the killers. Sometimes those killers are so insistent in their killing that they need to be killed to stop the killing. We desire the end of war, but the enemy desires war. Thus, ending war requires war, because the enemy will bring it to us.