It's amazing how confidently some people speak about a topic they know nothing about.

>Let's set the framing correctly because I think we're starting off on the wrong foot. The US is not in a desperate need of any product from Canada. Nice to have and super important? Yea. Desperate? No. Not by any stretch of the imagination.

Literally yesterday:

“This country desperately needs aluminum,” Trump said. “Selfishly, we need aluminum in this country. We don’t have it. We get it all from Canada for the most part, and we need it badly.”

Note that Trump said this within hours of claiming "we don't need anything from Canada". What else does the country need that Trump has lied about (that you seem to have bought hook, line, and sinker)? Have you considered another source of information?

Well you can start with potash (very much a critical need according to the United States Ambassador to Canada), and oil (according to the US voters), electricity (according to several million American households).

That's not even to mention current and future supplies of critical minerals. Remember how much Trump panicked when China cut off critical minerals? You'd better hope that doesn't happen again.

▲ ericmay a day ago | parent [-]

Well there's layers right. If you're going to claim that we're very desperate for such things we would of course have to act as a country of desperation and secure aluminum, oil, and critical minerals perhaps at all costs. I wonder what that would look like? If we don't take desperate measures, maybe we aren't desperate yea?

But just as we don't have to take Trump at his word when he says something we disagree with, we don't have to take Trump at his word when he says something you happen to agree with. I disagree with Trump - it's better to get aluminum and other commodities from Canada, but we are not in desperate need.

▲ mthoms a day ago | parent [-]

"If I choose to adopt the most extreme definition of the word 'desperate', then I'm technically correct, and I don't have to support my assertions, or argue with facts!"

You know very well that the intended meaning of the word "desperate" in the comment you replied to isn't what you're now desperately pretending to be confused about. Stop it.

From the HN community guidelines:

"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."

▲ ericmay 12 hours ago | parent [-]

  > From the HN community guidelines: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."

If you’re going to quote these guidelines then you should at least follow them in good faith. If you believed my interpretation of the word desperate wasn’t what was intended to be communicated you or others can clarify it or ask questions instead of doubling down on what is an incorrect use of the word in this situation.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/desperate

There is nothing uncharitable about my interpretation of the word desperate here.

▲

mthoms 8 hours ago | parent [-]

I responding to you saying:

>If you're going to claim that we're very desperate for such things we would of course have to act as a country of desperation and secure aluminum, oil, and critical minerals perhaps at all costs. I wonder what that would look like? If we don't take desperate measures, maybe we aren't desperate yea?

Which I presume is an allusion to war ("secure... at all costs"). The implication being that since there's no war, then the phrase "desperate for oil" simply cannot apply. I only realized you were using that extreme interpretation when you... you know... alluded to war(!) At which time I pointed it out.

But go ahead Eric, carry on with your desperate[0] flailing.

[0] So there's no confusion, the intended meaning here is this one (from your source):

ˈde-sp(ə-)rət: "involving or employing extreme measures in an attempt to escape defeat or frustration"

	▲	ericmay 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Instead of doubling down you should just admit that you should have backtracked from the usage of the term desperate here. It's not a big deal but you're making it into one to the extent any Internet comment can be. It's a bit of an annoyance that you are sitting here quoting the rules around charitable interpretation and then you turn around and cite the definition of desperation which was how I was using it and start calling that an "extreme interpretation". Nobody is casually desperate. I'll leave you here to mull it over as I demonstrated my point, unequivocally, to my satisfaction and the satisfaction of others.