Comments by "yessum15" (@yessum15) on "Ryan McBeth" channel.

@jacquesstrapp3219 They actually do. The foundation has literally assisted in writing legislation that was subsequently passed by legislators that they helped get into office. The previous "orange" administration already implemented some of the recommendations in Project 25, and multiple people currently slated to staff the new "orange" administration already support both Heritage and many of the specific policy propositions outlined in the Project 25 agenda manual.
35
Listening to Ryan Macbeth for an unbiased view is even worse. This video is deeply misleading.
23
@adrienneclarke3953 This channel has deteriorated into a blatant propaganda channel. With Ryan sharing misleading and extremely questionable hot takes, punctuated with him professing how incredibly "fair & balanced" he is.
18
@n3v3rforgott3n9 Too much to go over but using military spending as a percentage of GDP is intentionally misleading. Military spending is not paid for from GDP, it is paid from tax revenue. A high GDP can be used to mask out of control military spending which is essentially what Ryan is doing. Also, this statistic ignores non-discretionary spending which is a large chunk of military spending. A more accurate way to get a sense of whether military spending is too high is to look at both the absolute number and the number as a percentage of the fiscal budget, not total GDP.
14
@captainmichael787 Regardless of whether these arms were planted, came from an injured patient, or whatever, the tiny amount & bizarre placement seemed inconsistent with the claim that this was the primary command center of HAM, and a major depot where they held captives. Even more baffling, despite a siege wherein no personnel or equipment could enter or leave the hospital no combatants or captives were anywhere to be found. To speak nothing of the embarrassing calendar incident, wherein they claimed a document found listed the names of HAM members, whereas it actually turned out to be a list of days of the week.
10
@n3v3rforgott3n9 Also he mentioned a bounty for showing that project 2025 gets rid of the teaching of coerced labor. However the project doesn't call for that since that would be silly. Rather it calls for changes that would allow its supporters to teach incorrect information about the subject. So again, he's being misleading.
10
@RyanMcBethProgramming No it isn't & we both know it. Stop misleading your viewers: 1) High GDP can be used to conceal excessive military spending. US military spending exceeds the spending of all its competitors combined. However, US GDP does not exceed the GDP of all its competitors combined. 2) The statistic ignores discretionary spending. A significant part of US military spending is discretionary allocations. The statistic you are using ignores this entirely and only includes non-discretionary spending. This is a big deal because unlike most other countries US discretionary military spending is always large 3) The statistic ignores the difference between GNP & GDP Is it fair to compare (for example) US military expenditure as a percentage of GDP to Russian military expenditure as a percentage of GDP, when GDP is an accurate measure of US wealth but GNP is a more accurate measure of Russian wealth? CONCLUSION Ryan you are using a nonsensical measurement that is being promoted by deeply biased pro military think tanks in order to avoid many obvious and more clear ways to compare military expenditure across countries: 1) Spending per capita Does the US need to be spending so much more per citizen on defense than every other competitor country in the world combined? 2) Total Spending Does the US need to spending more than every other competitor country combined? 3) Spending as a percentage of tax revenue This is what really pays for the spending, not GDP. Do we need to be allocating so much more of our revenue to military spending than every other country in the world?
9
Not really. The car was clearly a family traveling down the road. Ryan concealed the words of the journalist filming indicating as such. Vehicle attacks like this don't involve the attackers executing a 3 point u-turn. Many other families were traveling down the same road and did not expect the Israeli blockade. Had they wanted to set up a blockade they should have issues a warning in the form of signage, or road blocks. There is no sense in hiding a tank where families travel and then predictably surprising them and then killing them as they flee. The person filming was a journalist and Ryan characterized him as a potential insurgent. This video is biased and this incident is a blatant war crime.
7
@redbeard5939 The document can't be analyzed outside of the context of its authors who have already expressed a desire to roll back democratic protections like VRA enforcement. We should also pay close attention to schedule F which rolls back job protections for public employees, thereby strengthening the president's hand at the cost of reducing the influence of experts and scientists
7
Just a heads up, Ryan is misleading his viewers as always. No one looks at military spending as a percentage of GDP because this is a mostly meaningless statistic. Military spending is not paid for by GDP, it's paid for by the fiscal budget. A very high GDP can easily be used to conceal out of control military spending. Which is what Ryan is doing.
5
@orionide4032 That's ideology not fact. Here are some actually factual statements: 1) There is no evidence to suggest that a reduction in US military spending would adversely impact global trade. In fact, historically free trade has often expanded alongside a reduction in US military spending. 2) The purpose of the military is not the support of free trade and it has historically been activated both to support and to undermine free trade. 3) The US as a whole has been both a supporter of and an opponent of free trade depending on its own national interests. 4) The single greatest way to establish sustainable free trade is to support a strong system of universally binding international law. 5) The US is categorically opposed to the establishment of a system of universally binding international law. The official US position is that it cannot be held liable for any violation of international law and is immune to sanction from any international legal body. CONCLUSION: Gentlemen, let's try to stick to the facts.
5
@n3v3rforgott3n9 It doesn't for many reasons. For many other countries GNP is a more accurate measure of wealth than GDP. Which makes the US seem like it's spending less than those countries. It also ignores discretionary military spending which is always high in the US, unlike other countries. It also understates the cost. Remember: US military spending is greater than all competitor countries combined. In contrast, US GDP is not greater than all competitor countries combined. It is much better to simply compare per capita spending, the absolute amount, or percentage of fiscal budget (which is what actually pays for military spending, not GDP).
4
@malcire I was just sticking to your chosen verbiage for the purpose of simplicity.
4
@senatorjosephmccarthy2720 Again, the US and its military has worked in favor of and against free trade at any given moment. And free trade has grown alongside both increases and reductions in US military spending. No one believes that if the US cut military spending, free trade would suddenly cease to exist. And the military has no commitment to preserving free trade. It is also unclear what percentage of US military spending is being used to assist free trade and what percentage is being used for other purposes. In short, this is no explanation or justification of the current spending level.
4
@malcire It is not used to compare across countries by any peace activist precisely because it is deeply misleading. It is however commonly used by pro military think tanks.
3
@RyanMcBethProgramming Oh, also Ryan please stop misleading your viewers regarding Proj2025. It does not mandate the removal of teaching on "coerced labor". Rather, it removes the regulatory framework preventing its supporters from restructuring the curriculum so as to misinform students on the facts of "coerced labor". Again, we both know this but you are misleading your viewers intentionally with a dishonest strawman.
3
@CosmicTeapot Settle down, no one expects you to learn anything.
3
@RyanMcBethProgramming Regardless of whether these weapons were planted, came from an injured patient, or whatever, the tiny amount & bizarre placement seemed inconsistent with the claim that this was the primary command center of HAM, and a major depot where they held captives. Even more baffling, despite a siege wherein no personnel or equipment could enter or leave the hospital no combatants or captives were anywhere to be found. To speak nothing of the embarrassing calendar incident, wherein they claimed a document found listed the names of HAM members, whereas it actually turned out to be a list of days of the week.
3
WhyThesePeople Brother, Ryan is not telling the truth about anything in this video. Let's begin: 1) Ryan characterized the passengers on the Mavi Marmara as possible hostiles. This is absolutely not the case. They were and are universally recognized as civilians engaged in humanitarian work. They did not do anything illegal in order to be boarded, were carrying no non-humanitarian cargo, had no weaponry, and did not express any intention to engage in combat. 2) Ryan forgot to mention that the "blockade" ISRL was enforcing was completely illegal. ISRL had no legal basis to stop the ship and were essentially engaged in the abduction of a civilian vessel on a humanitarian supply run in international waters. 4) Ryan characterized the demise of the 9 activists as occuring in the midst of a battle. This is not true, as the United Nations reported that at least 6 of the activists did not pass in combat, but rather had been summarily executed by ISRL soldiers. Conclusion: I could go on, as this entire video is remarkably easy to debunk. However, at this point I think we should reemphasize that Ryan is not a reliable source of information and should not be trusted.
2
@kgeri6089 This is the main road for Gaza travel and the primary evaluation route through which Gaza residents have been told to take (as per NYT). It will obviously be heavily used. On the road in this video alone there is the lead car, the journalist car and a van. No roadblock or identifying market was put up to stop traffic or warn motorists. In this context you can't preemptively fire at cars executing a slow u turn from a safe distance from your tank as they move away from you, in the vague hopes that maybe you hit a combatant. Literally the sum total of all your evidence is "Hmm, car seemed kinda heavy" Never mind that they're not approaching you, travelling at a safe speed, on the only major roadway, with others. The journalist was obviously a journalist or else an Oscar worthy actor as his panic was very real. A militant would have no reason to go through the entire act as the footage alone would be enough. He would also have no reason to attempt to wave away other civilians. This is a pretty obvious war crime and there's no question that if this footage involved US troops in Iraq, it would have resulted in an investigation and likely punishment.
1
@ApostateApostrophe42276 Only superior as compared to you. Which is hardly a flex.
1
@vitaly6312 10k is basically a made up fantasy number. ISRL isn't even bothering to pretend that number is remotely accurate. In truth no one knows the answer to this question, however it is virtually impossible it is as high as 10k given what we know about totals for the region. However, one point that pretty much all sides agree on is that despite significant losses, HM is still operational and will likely not only survive this conflict, but emerge very strong. If the intention is the ending of HM, then the conflict is unwinnable. But if it's something else, then perhaps ISRL is making progress.
1
@bluemarlin8138 "But maybe they used to tunnels to escape" You cannot use a baseless claim to support a baseless claim. No evidence has been given of a vast network of escape tunnels. No evidence of the hospital being their central command center. No evidence of large groups of captives. No evidence of an armory. "Then who were they fighting outside the hospital" The firefight outside spanned a large area with multiple buildings. They encountered combatants outside the hospital and in a number of structures surrounding it. As happens in regular war. Makes sense as HAM is attempting to defend all major infrastructure in the area, and ISRL (as part of a civilian expulsion campaign) is attempting to destroy or annex all critical facilities.
1
ISRL is committing war crimes after holding a press conference announcing they intend on committing war crimes. And you think that's "losing the information war"? Brother, that's being the villain outright.
1
@darrellbanks924 He called P&G a diaper company to downplay their importance. They themselves have multiple military contracts and are the largest supplier of personal care goods in the world.
1
@Randy778 It's not the "only way". Ryan is just being deceptive again. It's not even the most commonly used way. I listed 3 better methods that are used.
1