Not true, live stock feed is mostly the husks and stalks of the plants that are inedible to humans, which if it weren't for livestock, would be discarded as waste. See this video for some more common misconceptions, if you're interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGG-A80Tl5g
Every plot of land used to grow crop represents countless animals that used to live there, and were wiped out by the farmer. Farmers constantly battle against pests, which too are animals, just trying to live. Vultures are often seen following combine harvesters, to prey on the corpses of field mice and other small mammals that get caught in the blades. Zero harm is a myth.
Zero harm is a myth for most things. But harm involved in producing cow’s milk (to animals, to environment) and plant based milk is HUGELY different.
It sounds to me you want to make everything relative so that the conclusion is “everything involves some harm, so I might just eat me some steaks and drink some cow milk, it won’t matter”. But it matters greatly. So let’s not do that.
That's exactly my point - your original comment said there is "no cruelty involved to make it", which is plainly incorrect.
You're mistaken about my motivations - I believe that eating ethically sourced, grass fed, grass finished, certified organic meat is better for the environment than a plant based diet. Watch the video I linked if you'd like to understand how someone could possibly make that argument.
Every plot of land used to grow crop represents countless animals that used to live there, and were wiped out by the farmer. Farmers constantly battle against pests, which too are animals, just trying to live. Vultures are often seen following combine harvesters, to prey on the corpses of field mice and other small mammals that get caught in the blades. Zero harm is a myth.