Ok, let me make this a little bit more clear then. Taken straight from wikipedia we have the definition of a straw man argument. A straw man is a common form

Ok, let me make this a little bit more clear then. Taken straight from wikipedia we have the definition of a straw man argument. A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument which was not advanced by that opponent. Your reply to the parent poster was "So you are proposing that the French should respond to having over a hundred of their fellow citizens killed, and hundreds more injured by loving the supporters and leaders of ISIS?". I was correcting you because you suggested that the parent was "proposing that the French..." and leaving the absurdity of the proposition to be its own refutation, when in fact the whole statement was "an argument which was not advanced by [the parent poster]". Let us be clear that you can still desire to know what the parent was proposing the French do while also attacking his original position with a straw man arguemnt, which is exactly what occurred.