General Discussion

LittleBlue

(10,362 posts)

12. An awful lot of guilt needing

Tue Apr 16, 2013, 03:01 PM

Apr 2013

assuaging today.

This is something you can only deal with internally. No one can make you feel guilty unless deep down, you already feel some measure of guilt.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

122 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

These false equivalency posts (Drones vs. Boston attack) are ridiculous [View all] stevenleser Apr 2013 OP

Thank You. Tarheel_Dem Apr 2013 #1

What is the difference besides the nationality of those causing the explosions and those killed? RC Apr 2013 #2

It's a matter of intent - you really can't see the difference between trying to kill civilians el_bryanto Apr 2013 #6

It's only an accident when we do it and not when they do it? RC Apr 2013 #9

Did they time the drone strike to make sure the streets were full of civilians? el_bryanto Apr 2013 #13

Timing of drone strikes Maedhros Apr 2013 #60

This message was self-deleted by its author npk Apr 2013 #18

So you think that when George Bush went to Iraq he went there honestly and gave orders to avoid sabrina 1 Apr 2013 #66

Really this is the modern day news reporting. Wellstone ruled Apr 2013 #3

Big REC and kick! n/t zappaman Apr 2013 #4

Well, you are missing one thing here The Straight Story Apr 2013 #5

"I can say both are wrong without detracting from either." marions ghost Apr 2013 #70

"There is none so blind... 99Forever Apr 2013 #7

If someone causes a car wreck and kills a child, should they be subject to the same penalties el_bryanto Apr 2013 #15

Not if he does it multiple times after he has been caught doing it. demcoat Apr 2013 #19

Caught doing what? Having a car accident? nt stevenleser Apr 2013 #56

If someone is mowing down hundreds of people morningfog Apr 2013 #45

There are none so blind as those that go around creating false equivalencies everywhere. nt stevenleser Apr 2013 #29

Keep repeating the same drivel, over and over... 99Forever Apr 2013 #62

You should be looking in the mirror when you say that. nt stevenleser Apr 2013 #75

Let me know when you've done that about the issue.. 99Forever Apr 2013 #85

I think you're making things up. Donald Ian Rankin Apr 2013 #57

Innocent dead children are innocent dead children. 99Forever Apr 2013 #63

Well, your title at least is correct. Donald Ian Rankin Apr 2013 #65

Dead kids and you're talking about definitions. 99Forever Apr 2013 #67

Definitions? Like 'dead'? You don't like definitions? Language is how we perceive the world. stevenleser Apr 2013 #80

I know the definition of neo-liberal too... 99Forever Apr 2013 #84

No, you dont. Neoliberal refers only to economic policy. nt stevenleser Apr 2013 #94

Bullshit. 99Forever Apr 2013 #122

You're simply making things up. Donald Ian Rankin Apr 2013 #59

You're seriously trying to create a relative scale between governments slaughtering civilians Egalitarian Thug Apr 2013 #8

Wonderfully to the point. Solly Mack Apr 2013 #11

+1 nt Fresh_Start Apr 2013 #20

Succinct. Agreed. morningfog Apr 2013 #37

+1 G_j Apr 2013 #55

yeah marions ghost Apr 2013 #71

+ a brazillion undeterred Apr 2013 #87

One tangential drone thing I've been thinking about frazzled Apr 2013 #10

Nothing to do with the OP but... kenlayisalive Apr 2013 #83

I think you need to inform yourself frazzled Apr 2013 #90

An awful lot of guilt needing LittleBlue Apr 2013 #12

Come to think of it I believe you are correct Fumesucker Apr 2013 #16

Do you think the victims care about the difference? Rex Apr 2013 #14

Yes. I think they do. It would matter to me. stevenleser Apr 2013 #27

Where did I say people are dumb? Rex Apr 2013 #31

Are you saying you would be understanding morningfog Apr 2013 #38

Also would he want revenge against that state? Rex Apr 2013 #41

Equal, No. bvar22 Apr 2013 #17

Thanks, excellent post - nt dreamnightwind Apr 2013 #49

LOL the equivalency posts are all over DU and places like antiwar.com stevenleser Apr 2013 #53

so your murdered women and kids are Are more valuable then their murdered women and kids? nice nt msongs Apr 2013 #21

Straw man. can you make an argument without using a logical fallacy? nt stevenleser Apr 2013 #23

Yes they are WonderGrunion Apr 2013 #74

Predictably, you have a problem comparing victims of US Government violence cpwm17 Apr 2013 #22

Like others, you create a straw man. Try not using a logical fallacy. nt stevenleser Apr 2013 #24

You start with a logical fallacy. What do you expect? morningfog Apr 2013 #43

I think the timing sucks. Warren DeMontague Apr 2013 #26

This message was self-deleted by its author Warren DeMontague Apr 2013 #25

Gandhi Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2013 #28

And he was wrong about that. nt stevenleser Apr 2013 #30

And, the difference is? Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2013 #34

Right, Steve the Lesser is going to school Gandhi whatchamacallit Apr 2013 #35

I don't fear disagreeing with anyone when they are wrong. stevenleser Apr 2013 #42

Here's another quote from Ghandi. Donald Ian Rankin Apr 2013 #61

chuckle marions ghost Apr 2013 #72

Wow. At least you stand by your ignorance! morningfog Apr 2013 #39

Your right one of them we can easily avoid. aandegoons Apr 2013 #32

Hell, Steve says it for a good cause. They should morningfog Apr 2013 #40

This message was self-deleted by its author whatchamacallit Apr 2013 #33

Wrong Carolina Apr 2013 #36

Wrong what? I said nothing about Iraq. Don't invent things I haven't said. nt stevenleser Apr 2013 #44

If you don't get it Carolina Apr 2013 #46

The equivalency is false, Iraq was based on a lie and was a war crime from the beginning. stevenleser Apr 2013 #47

The privileged perspective of the man on the trigger end of the superpower. TheKentuckian Apr 2013 #48

False equivalency created by people who twist facts to fit ideology instead of vice versa. nt stevenleser Apr 2013 #52

All children are equal. zeemike Apr 2013 #64

No, this isnt nearly that hard. An attack where civilians are intentionally targeted is not the same stevenleser Apr 2013 #77

Really?....what army was the target a member of? zeemike Apr 2013 #88

A distinction without a difference. A combatant is a combatant. nt stevenleser Apr 2013 #92

Then they have the right to capture and torture our soldiers. zeemike Apr 2013 #95

A combatant can attack the combatants of the other side, yes. stevenleser Apr 2013 #96

K&R treestar Apr 2013 #50

There are important similarities and differences nt MannyGoldstein Apr 2013 #51

Some people are so desperate to find equivalency that they make insane interconnections. nt bluestate10 Apr 2013 #54

No... One dead child here or there is a dead child. glowing Apr 2013 #58

In the grand, cosmic, existential sense of 'which is worse' ... brett_jv Apr 2013 #68

the only reality that matters marions ghost Apr 2013 #73

It wouldn't be irrelevant to me and I doubt it is irrelevant to the families of the victims. stevenleser Apr 2013 #78

Your analogies are full of fail. morningfog Apr 2013 #86

Fully agree thanks. we can do it Apr 2013 #69

They're not false "equivalency" and they're not ridiculous!! MNBrewer Apr 2013 #76

They are very much both. nt stevenleser Apr 2013 #79

No, you're wrong. Nt. MNBrewer Apr 2013 #81

You're right. They are not equivalent. Bonobo Apr 2013 #82

About the same differene as... kentuck Apr 2013 #89

A fine example of brazenly arrogant whitesplaining. redgreenandblue Apr 2013 #91

A fine example of wharrgarbl. nt stevenleser Apr 2013 #93

I think you are seeing people disagreeing with you. Rex Apr 2013 #97

It was wharrgarbl. I am multiracial. I am not white and thus I do not 'whitesplain' nt stevenleser Apr 2013 #98

I mean in general in your thread. Rex Apr 2013 #99

Whitesplain="paternalistic lecture given by Whites toward a person of color." Since I am multiracial stevenleser Apr 2013 #100

No I disagree, they make good points. Rex Apr 2013 #101

The two things will never be equivalent. Intentionally hurting civilians vs accidentally hurting stevenleser Apr 2013 #103

Okay I agree, but that is not their general point. Rex Apr 2013 #105

Yes it is. They equate the two.If that isnt what they were doing, there would be no point to linking stevenleser Apr 2013 #106

So you won't answer my question then? Rex Apr 2013 #107

Just re-read your post. My answer is no, I do not agree. nt stevenleser Apr 2013 #110

Okay, well then you are completely wrong in this thread and invalidated your own argument. Rex Apr 2013 #112

No, and I proved my point in 111 nt stevenleser Apr 2013 #113

Not at all that is a weak analogy. Rex Apr 2013 #115

No, it isnt. nt stevenleser Apr 2013 #117

You have yet to state *exactly* what the logical flaws in the arguments are Fumesucker Apr 2013 #102

Yes I have. Repeatedly. And I just did again in 103. nt stevenleser Apr 2013 #104

So which logical fallacy is it then? Fumesucker Apr 2013 #108

I disagree. The French, Belgians, Poles, etc. did not blame the US or the Brits or Russians for stevenleser Apr 2013 #111

That is a very weak analogy. Rex Apr 2013 #114

No, it isn't. nt stevenleser Apr 2013 #116

Yes, it is. Rex Apr 2013 #118

No, I explained my last contention. You haven't. You lose. nt stevenleser Apr 2013 #119

The French, Belgians, Poles and so forth were occupied by German military forces at the time. Fumesucker Apr 2013 #121

It is a somewhat disingenuous argument made on emotions and not logic. Rex Apr 2013 #120

That the death of civilians (indirectly) in one country by a drone Rex Apr 2013 #109