General Discussion

Response to stevenleser (Original post)

Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.

Edit history

Cannot view edit history for self-deleted messages.

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