marshaul
Campaign Veteran
Again, it's clear you haven't bothered to read a thing I've actually said.
You're so emotional over the OP's article that you've been unable to take a breath and stop being defensive for long enough to read a single thing anybody else has written.
You haven't rebutted a single "argument" I've made this entire time (I've actually made precious few arguments in this entire thread). You have, instead, destroyed straw men which have, perhaps, much to do with the original article, but nothing to do with my own statements.
This is clear thanks to your repeated attempts to ask me rhetorical questions clearly designed to get me to contradict something you imagine I said, but which in fact are complete non-sequiturs had you bothered to take one minute of your time to read what I actually wrote.
You are, of course, completely free to assume whatever you like about me, assign to me straw men, and even to completely convince yourself that those straw are, in fact, my arguments. That doesn't mean you're right, and it certainly doesn't mean that "anyone paying attention" would share your conclusion (although a few clearly do).
In short, it's you who has been and is continuing to "mischaracterize" my arguments. Basically the only argument I've made this entire time I quoted coming out of your own mouth: justice/righteousness and sound foreign policy are not necessarily the same. And yet you've come up with all these wild contrivances about what you imagine I've said – all completely false. That's on you, whether you care to admit it or not.
Last edited:
