3 ms·

They refuted it with anecdotes of their family members serving. If you want more, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_history_of_Jewish_Americans#World_W

• teddyh 4y ago
  I did not interpret it in that way; I thought it was “That is offensive to me and even more so to these other people I know”. Your point is correct – it can charitably be interpreted as being a form of refutation argument. However, anecdotes about individual people are a very weak form of argument. I could think of a few better arguments immediately from the top of my head: The clumsy wording of the text (in the PDF) itself. The fact that there seems to be no personal testimonies about what is implied to be an extremely widespread conspiracy. And, of course, your link is a much better argument than any individual anecdote. But ‘azinman’ did not do any of that; they chose instead to play the “I’m offended!” card. If this is allowed to fly, well, then anyone can be offended by anything, and argument and debate is dead here.
  • boomboomsubban 4y ago
    When one sides entire argument was "this flyer apparently exists," criticizing the rebuttal for killing the debate seems silly. They did not try to debate or present a real argument in the first place, though they have since somewhat fixed that.
    • teddyh 4y ago
      I didn’t criticize the rebuttal for killing this debate, since this debate is immaterial, and the PDF is easily debunked. I criticize people killing the idea of debate with “I’m offended” rebuttals.