3 ms·
Because our last reaction to "terrorists" worked out so well.
by chaganated 6y ago
Because our last reaction to "terrorists" worked out so well.
- gruez 6y agoSo that should be a blanket reason not to fight terrorists?
- chaganated 6y agoIt's a blanket reason to not overreact.
- gruez 6y agoOverreact... according to whom? The side that doesn't want a reaction?
- chaganated 6y agoWith 9/11, the planes were just a catalyst. The greatest harm, we did to ourselves.
- gruez 6y agoThat doesn't answer the question. Moreover, the underlying problem with your argument is that "overreact" is entirely subjective. Everyone would agree that overreactions are bad, but the proponents of action would say it's not an overreaction and the opponents would say it is. The argument doesn't advance at all.
- chaganated 6y ago> according to whom? According to history, common sense, and several world religions. What doesn't "advance" as an argument is using a senile boomer self-own chimpout as a justification for FAANG absolutism. One of these guys literally tazed his own balls! I believe natural selection will be quite sufficient here.
- ausbah 6y agothat's a terrible comparison. there is miles of difference between invading another country and knocking a social media platform offline
- chaganated 6y agoJust like comparing a guy who took a dump on Schumer's desk to a guy who flew a plane into a building and killed thousands of people.
- ausbah 6y agoyeah that's not terrorism. setting up bombs, breaking into the seat of government with the intention of taking hostages and potentially executing people is
- chaganated 6y agoIntention... Potentially... Hostages and executions in an alternate reality do not justify corporate absolutism in this one.