We started the war dawg

13

Anonymous #3 7w

Dude regurgitated some bs propaganda used to justify the war & called it facts 😭

3

Anonymous #3 7w

but we literally started the war, i thought that was common knowledge

8

trump is breaking insider trading laws daily & constantly getting rid of enviironmental regulations & work and food safety regulations so his billionaire friends can make more money

8

Comment Deleted

0

Anonymous #3 7w

not that what #1 said isn’t interesting. always cool to learn about stuff like that. but we did start the war

5

im not arguing against what they’re saying, i’m arguing against their support for trump

0

another country violating humanitarian law doesn't automatically declare war on them on behalf of member states. they still declare war of their own volition it's interesting that you mention the "obligation" to intervene in iran's humanitarian violations but not our obligation to intervene in israel's humanitarian violations

6

Comment Deleted

0

I hate when people start citing all these logical fallacies when they are talking out of their ass lol

0

Also whataboutism uses a counter-accusation or unrelated topic to dodge criticism and avoid accountability, whereas a good comparison evaluates related subjects to establish fair standards or reveal meaningful patterns. so i don't think that's what #6 did at all.

1

Comment Deleted

0

I think #6 made that comparison because we didn’t intervene when Israel was targeting journalists or UN healthcare workers or civilians at aid sites

5

Comment Deleted

0

But you said we were obligated to intervene in Iran because the Iranian government broke humanitarian law by targeting and killing civilians. so why don’t we intervene in Gaza and Lebanon since Israel is doing the same thing to civilians there

5

Comment Deleted

0

I don’t see how you think it’s a whataboutism. You are invoking a universal ethical standard when you said we had the obligation to intervene. #6 is pointing out that the US has very recently chosen not to act on that standard in a very similar case. that isn’t whataboutism. it would only be whataboutism if i were saying “Iran killing protestors doesn’t matter to me since it doesn’t matter in Israel”, but I’m not

6

Iran killing protestors is awful and should be stopped. Unfortunately the larger conflict has been sparked by Israel as a result of Israel facing 0 accountability for war crimes. Netanyahu admin is trying to spark conflict in the reason to maintain a majority in the gov’t to further avoid responsibility for war crimes

4

Anonymous #5 7w

in the region*

5

Comment Deleted

0

wow what an enjoyable conversation 😐

3

Comment Deleted

0

you are actually the one dismissing the responsibility to protect since you think it shouldn’t be applied to Palestinian and Lebanese people. you can’t invoke a universal principle if you aren’t going to apply it to all situations

4

Comment Deleted

0

i'll accept your concession on the humanitarian violations being the start of the war that's definitionally not whataboutism, and the accusation of such is itself a form of framing and agenda setting

1

Anonymous #6 7w

*not being the start

1

point to where i am being dishonest. I don’t think you are labeling logical fallacies correctly. I can see how you might think it was whataboutism, but it’s not because i am acknowledging the fact that Israel is the one who started the war (wouldn’t have been able to without US backing) to avoid accountability for war crimes committed in their own country. I think Iranian govt should be stopped from killing protestors, but that is not the true motive behind this war.

1

And it isn’t antisemitism to want international humanitarian law to be enforced. Just like you and I aren’t being islamaphobic when we say we want the Iranian gov’t to stop killing civilians there.

1