Are you trying to outdo w-lfs-n's chicken porn, Labs?
"The fact that this hasn't worked very well in the past doesn't deter them."
There must be some nice Latin name for this logical fallacy - X did Y and didn't get consequence Z therefore Y was wrong.
Also it shows a very naive view of what some conservatives think "maximal" means.
3: Yeah, we shouldn't "silence" the "voices" of those who want to exterminate the Palestinians outright.
4: and the mome raths outgrabe, for that matter.
2: So is the argument then that Israel's counterterror policy has been a smashing success? If so, I'd like to hear you elaborate on that, rather than make pithy and obscure remarks.
Huh? I'm arguing about the form of the argument, which is I think sort of post hoc ergo propter hoc. Plenty of correct actions lead to bad consequences by way of avoiding worse ones.
I was no fan of most Likud policies and look with horror on the more energetic conservative viewpoint.
This question seems to be making the rounds. My thoughts are here.
You see, this is sort of what I'm talking about. Can't we all just make fun of Hugh Hewitt's breasteses?
7: You're either misrepresenting or misunderstanding the form of the argument. It's not "X does Y and didn't get consequence Z, therefore Y is wrong." It's "A did B in an attempt to accomplish C, but instead has achieved not-C. A has continued to do this for thirty years. Therefore, A is behaving irrationally."
"I avoid these conversations as much as possible because of the high risk of running into someone who's" has no idea what they're talking about.
I will walk through the fire. The fire burns me bad.
I said it a jillion times, but lately in comments above this.
Meanwhile I am Becks-style.
You don't look like you try very hard to avoid these conversations, Gary.
"You don't look like you try very hard to avoid these conversations, Gary."
I'm kinda in and out about it.
I try to avoid the feeling of wanting to punch out people with no clue.
But it happens.
I'd much prefer to divert conversation to the wonders of "Once More, With Feeling," but I don't expect that to happen.
(I'm just enjoying it, as a diversion; I can use the diversion.)
11 - that's silly. Israel has been pursuing a variety of policies to achieve a variety of goals, principal among them preventing the state's destruction. Some of those policies were stupid, some were reasonable but counterproductive, some were reasonable and productive, etc. etc. (and which was which is hard to sort out even in hindsight). None of them were maximal strategies of the sort I linked to.
Note that you're making the argument conservatives make against the Great Society programs, which were intended to elimnate poverty - there's still poverty, therefore chuck out welfare.
Wait, is Gary saying that he wants to punch me? I can't quite make it out.
"Wait, is Gary saying that he wants to punch me? I can't quite make it out."
Every single night
The same arrangement
I go out and fight the fight
Still I always feel
This strange estrangement
Nothing here is real
Nothing here is right
I’ve been making shows of trading blows
Just hoping no one knows
That I’ve been
Going through the motions
Walking through the part
Nothing seems to penetrate my heart
"As near as I can tell, most conservatives simply take the uncomplicated stance that Palestinians are terrorists and that Israel should always respond to provocation in the maximal possible way."
This fact has a double whammy effect, because it breeds the assumption, among at least some lefty Palestinian sympathizer types, that anyone who says anything even vaguely critical of Palestine in fact holds the above mindset.
Personally, I can't quite grasp the mindset of anyone who's isn't pretty wholly fed up with the behavior of both sides.
you're making the argument conservatives make against the Great Society programs, which were intended to elimnate poverty - there's still poverty, therefore chuck out welfare
If welfare and Medicaid were actively making poverty worse, then yes, we should obviously dump them. That doesn't happen to be the case. But it does happen to be the case that killing and impoverishing a population does not deter terror, it reinforces the conditions which give rise to terror in the first place. A policy which exacerbates the problem it's nominally supposed to solve is a bad policy. This isn't radical thinking here.
> If welfare and Medicaid were actively making poverty worse, then yes, we should obviously dump them.
Welfare did a job on the black family and probably increased their poverty, so perhaps this isn't a great example.
It seems that much of the left's objection to welfare reform is that the right wants to change it.
Can I muse on the medium for a bit? I feel like blogs should be able to help one get away from this sort of un-informed feeling, or this feeling of fear at running into some informed-on-the-details zealot -- how much time do people around here spend in the whole Israeli-Middle-Eastern blog-o-sphere, in general?
For instance, could I take a moment to recommend On the Face? (but maybe you knew of Lisa, already)... People should go and lurk there for a while, it's not quite what you think.
I'm just saying, I like reading Drum and Djerejian, but when I want to read about the Middle East (and not just "how shall America deal with the Middle East") I go to blogs like On The Face.
Anyway, I don't have a real point, besides just pointing out that there's a lot more to bloggin' than just Hugh Hewitt being a dick.
"If welfare and Medicaid were actively making poverty worse, then yes, we should obviously dump them. That doesn't happen to be the case."
Conservatives claim they produce a culture of dependency, blah blah blah. Proponents of the Israeli policies in question would say things would have been worse otherwise. One has to compare relative outcomes, which is of course extremely hard in a complex world. That's my objection to the original statement.
I didn't feel like I had an idea of what was going on in Eastern Europe (not just the Balkans, but the region as a whole post-1989) until I took a history class on Eastern Europe in the 20th century and read some history books (including pre-20th century). I'm unlikely to take any more classes at this point, but I assume I'll have to do the same kind of thing to feel informed about the Middle East. I doubt blog-reading could make up for that, but I can see it being helpful for finding books to read.
pretty wholly fed up with the behavior of both sides.
That's where I've been for years.
Welfare did a job on the black family and probably increased their poverty
Um, no. Not to say that welfare doesn't have some pernicious effects, but the idea that blacks got poorer after welfare ignores the level of black poverty prior to its inception.
"The idea that blacks got poorer after welfare ignores the level of black poverty prior to its inception."
What's wrong with having one point of a comparison be an imaginary point in never-never-space? Politics as we know it would be impossible if this so-called "reality principle" of yours were consistently applied.