3 ms·
>However, in this case.. the post seemed to be about a new cool technology. So the article is little more than a straw man to divert from the real atrocities b
by ibisum 12y ago
>However, in this case.. the post seemed to be about a new cool technology.
So the article is little more than a straw man to divert from the real atrocities being committed by the Israelis' in Gaza today. And that is entirely the point of the OP - that this article is little more than a technocratic diversion to feed the fetish of a homogenous target group, rather than real reporting on the issue.
- hn_politics145 12y agoWhy is everything an Israeli conspiracy?
- CamperBob2 12y agoBecause if this stuff were happening anywhere else, people in the Western world would be genuinely upset about it.
- omonra 12y agoGood point - I want to know how long Washington or London would wait before wiping off whichever opponent was sending missiles at them.
- ibisum 12y agoDepends if Washington or London were facing a humanitarian crisis of epic proportions on account of repressive blockades from a neighbor. I'm quite sure Washington or London would be sending missiles towards any country promoting invasion, destruction of hospitals, repression of the general population ..
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- dllthomas 12y agoThat isn't what a straw man is. A straw man is a mischaracterization of an opposing argument that can be "successfully" argued against.
- icebraining 12y agoThe front page of the WSJ is covered with stories about the situation is Gaza, including the most prominent that has the number of deaths in the first phrase. Is it really fair to accuse them of diversion based on a single story?
- brucefancher 12y agoI figured this article would bring the anti-Semites out of the woodwork.