The first paragraph is absolute nonsense, there's no need to make false statements to justify a position irrespective of whether you're vegan or vegetarian or anything else.

In the sensitivity analysis, the environmental footprint of vegan diets is between 5% (CH4) and 38% (water use) of the footprint of high meat-eaters. For low meat-eaters, the impact is between 37% (land use) and 67% (water use) of high meat-eaters.

Dietary impacts of vegans were 25.1% (95% uncertainty interval, 15.1–37.0%) of high meat-eaters (≥100 g total meat consumed per day) for greenhouse gas emissions, 25.1% (7.1–44.5%) for land use, 46.4% (21.0–81.0%) for water use, 27.0% (19.4–40.4%) for eutrophication and 34.3% (12.0–65.3%) for biodiversity.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s43016-023-00795-w#%3A%7E%3Atext=In+the+sensitivity+analysis%2C+the,)%20of%20high%20meat%2Deaters.

You can feel how you want, but the water burden thing is just factually incorrect. A pound of beef uses a LOT more water to raise than a pound of lentils. Or are you forgetting that you also have to use water to grow the stuff that the cow eats?