4 ms·

Well, since no two situations are identical you can always make up a contrived argument as to why "X warrants Y" in situation A but not in situation B. "We shou

Well, since no two situations are identical you can always make up a contrived argument as to why "X warrants Y" in situation A but not in situation B. "We should divest any occupier state" applies to both Israel and Russia so you tweak your argument to "We should divest from any state that occupies the territory of another state" and, voila, Israel is excluded! If Palestine ever becomes a UN member, just tweak the argument further "... of another state recognized by the United States". Eventually the mental gymnastics reduces to "Divest from states whose names begin with R, but not from states whose names begin with I." You then claim consistency but everyone else can see what you are doing.

josephg 3y ago
> “Divest from states whose names begin with R, but not from states whose names begin with I” I’m not sure why you expect your comment to be convincing. The facts on the ground are obviously different. I sincerely believe those differences matter. Reducing my argument to a straw man only leaves me suspecting you don’t understand my point. In any case, if you take this as axiomatic: > We should divest any occupier state Do you also believe that non-indigenous people are “occupying” the USA, Canada, Australia, India, South Africa and so on? Should we all somehow return “home”? If you see Russia and Israel as the same situation, is it not also the same situation in many other countries? Where do you suggest we draw the line? And where, exactly, do you propose the Israelis should go this time?
- bjourne 3y ago
  Sure, the "facts on the ground" are different. The average temperature in Israel is significantly higher than the average temperature in Russia. Hence, it totally makes sense to subject Russia, but not Israel to economic sanctions. I'm not reducing your argument to straw men - I'm claiming that it requires mental gymnastics that would make an Olympian gymnast impressed to explain why Russia should be treated as a pariah state but not Israel.

josephg 3y ago

> “Divest from states whose names begin with R, but not from states whose names begin with I” I’m not sure why you expect your comment to be convincing. The facts on the ground are obviously different. I sincerely believe those differences matter. Reducing my argument to a straw man only leaves me suspecting you don’t understand my point. In any case, if you take this as axiomatic: > We should divest any occupier state Do you also believe that non-indigenous people are “occupying” the USA, Canada, Australia, India, South Africa and so on? Should we all somehow return “home”? If you see Russia and Israel as the same situation, is it not also the same situation in many other countries? Where do you suggest we draw the line? And where, exactly, do you propose the Israelis should go this time?

bjourne 3y ago
Sure, the "facts on the ground" are different. The average temperature in Israel is significantly higher than the average temperature in Russia. Hence, it totally makes sense to subject Russia, but not Israel to economic sanctions. I'm not reducing your argument to straw men - I'm claiming that it requires mental gymnastics that would make an Olympian gymnast impressed to explain why Russia should be treated as a pariah state but not Israel.