I see.
You are just determined to cling to the narrative you prefer regardless of any evidence one way or the other.
Oh well.
Are you claiming you've presented evidence of anything in these discussions?
What straw man claims have I been using here?
You invented a deal that you had no evidence for and are now doubling down on that deal secretly being true despite the lack of evidence.
That's a straw man claim right there.
When I discussed the deal I also included links showing where the story came from and now you are claiming I 'invented' the story. That's a straw man claim.
I'm not the one asserting things with no evidence, Frank.
You should also be very wary of thinking logical rigour is the be all and end all of an argument and logical fallacies are automatically bad.
That will lead you to all kinds of bad results in the real world.
On the contrary, I keep posting links that back up all my claims.
You keep arguing that I'm wrong based on your opinion without any evidence to back up your opinions.
I've posted polls, reports, human rights reports and statements from politicians.
What evidence have you supplied?
Bibi is a fucking monster, I agree.
But you are now saying that he had the greenlight from Joe but isn't using it.
Given you consider Biden responsible for the genocide, the fact Netanyahau isn't prosecuting something Biden greenlit means he is more reasonable, right?
That's still a straw man claim where you intentionally mischaracterize my statements to try to win high moral ground. You can do better.
How many times do I have to state that Netanyahu is responsible for the genocide and Biden is responsible for enabling it and actively aiding it give the US has the only real power to stop Israel.
Why would you try to argue that someone in the middle of committing genocide is being reasonable?
I know you can't suddenly be coming around to the idea that individual actors and nations and regimes have multiple pressures they contend with and multiple goals they want to achieve and the fact these things might interact and conflict in different ways means something to how things play out.
That would be crazy awesome for you suddenly to believe.
Considering that I've been the one detailing more of the multiple pressures and you've been the one trying to find gotcha moments, on what basis would you even try to make that claim? In reply after I specifically discussed the pressures on both leaders? And after repeated posts by you repeatedly giving only your opinion that I'm wrong? During this thread you've repeatedly used straw man claims to try to assert that my only goal is to 'punish' Biden, which is incredibly reductive thinking. Nothing you've posted has shown any sophistication or even real awareness, only your view that likely due to your personal research you think your views that US democracy will end if rump returns to power. But you haven't even been able to make a solid case why you think that will happen this time.
What?
He has his own agenda?
That's amazing!
When did you figure this out?
Well, at least you''ve progressed past trying claim that my sole goal is to punish Biden just for aiding and abetting genocide.
Holy shit, you think "Israel has agency" is a strawman?
After what you just wrote?
Do you even understand what a strawman argument is?
Yes, a straw man claim is like stating you said 'Israel has agency' and I said that was a straw man argument.
There is nowhere in my posts where that has been said.
Wow.
You really do think "Israel has agency" is a complete fabrication even when arguing about all the reasons Israel and the current government have their own agenda for doing what they are doing.
Holy fuck.
That's amazing.
That statement has nothing to do with what I posted, valcazar.
You really should try to defend that claim with linked sources.
Go ahead and try.
Its like you're trying to argue that a murderer doesn't have the agency to commit murder if he could have been stopped by better policing.
