If nobody lessened their consumption habits and just switched to "vat grown meat", that would not solve the core of the problem. While less resource intensive than farm grown meat, it's still resource intensive.
As I said before, it can exist to fill the voids left by other solutions, but it is not a solution in and of itself. For this reason it should not be the priority as the priority should be on growing/promoting other less intensive alternatives and lessening consumption itself.
Within our current political-economic system? End subsidies for farmed meat, subsidize alternatives, and raise awareness on the issue as well as about health effects of excess meat consumption.
This will have the "push" effect of driving up farmed meat prices while having the "pull" effects of cheaper, healthier alternatives. There is nothing in particular to enforce.
Edit: and as the market on farmed meat becomes less profitable producers will leave the industry as well which leads to a sort of "spiral" as scarcity goes up, raising prices, pushing more away.
I think it's far more unreasonable to go along with a genocidal regime in the name of "following laws/orders". Where do you draw the line on that front? Is joining the IDF and activily participating in genocide fine because it's required by law and you can't expect others to sacrifice anything of themselves in the name of opposing genocide?
It is an environmental problem because the resources required to obtain the same caloric/nutritional content from meat is far higher than the alternatives. If the "better method" is better than our current method of meat production but still too intensive to maintain at scale then it doesn't solve the problem without reducing the scale of meat consumption.
That doesn't mean nobody can eat meat, it just means that on average people need to eat LESS meat.
Why are you so against people eating less meat? Your arguments here are akin to the "nuclear energy" bros who rag on renewables all day. Just like we can use renewables and rely on nuclear to fill any gaps, we can lessen meat consumption and rely on less intensive forms of meat production to fill the gaps.
He's literally cozying up to Israel and the US and ignoring their occupation of/attacks on his lands, which ramped up when he overthrew the previous regime, weakening the country in the midst of extreme Zionist aggression.
I'd also love to know how he's "protecting ethnic minorities" by launching raids against them and threatening to invade them to seize their towns.
Being a "moderate who protects ethnic minorities" by launching raids and threatening to fully invade their towns while ignoring Israels own occupation and bombardments against them.
You think just calling something stupid is a good argument deserving of a proper intellectual rebuttal?
I don't think your opinion on someone's intellect is of much value if that's the case.