[Cyph0n]

Alright, your good faith arguments have convinced me! To summarize:

On one side, two sovereign nations setting press restrictions in areas they control. Standard stuff.

On the other side, a genocidal state blockading a tiny strip of land for 20 years waging a campaign that has killed & maimed so many children that we have lost count unilaterally enforcing a total international media blackout. Also standard stuff.

Silly me, how could I even argue about this? It’s just so damn obvious! Sometimes, arguing with random anons on HN pays off :)

[FunnyUsername]

You're just changing the topic with unrelated accusations. How nice or mean you think a military is irrelevant to the fact that they don't like random journalists tweeting photos of their military assets.

[Cyph0n]

Next time, if you really want to have a serious discussion, cut the snark and try not to hide behind a throwaway. This is not Reddit.

[FunnyUsername]

You might want to review the HN guidelines yourself. You shouldn't be complaining about snark right after writing

> your good faith arguments have convinced me!

> Silly me, how could I even argue about this? It’s just so damn obvious!

[Cyph0n]

I only employ snark in response to snark..

> That would seem very unfair, if Russia did it just because they're mean

> Still not a great idea to have random journalists waltzing around and tweeting photos of military assets.

> This is a funny explanation