the 18,457 children on Gaza’s list of war dead

Stalin

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Messages
3,794
The children’s names below appear on a list of victims of Israel’s offensive in Gaza, maintained by health authorities in the territory. As of the end of July it ran to 60,199 names, of whom 18,457 were under 18s. Far from comprehensive, the list does not include the thousands still buried under the rubble of destroyed buildings, as well as the war’s many indirect victims


comrade stalin
moscow
 
Werbung:
The children’s names below appear on a list of victims of Israel’s offensive in Gaza, maintained by health authorities in the territory. As of the end of July it ran to 60,199 names, of whom 18,457 were under 18s. Far from comprehensive, the list does not include the thousands still buried under the rubble of destroyed buildings, as well as the war’s many indirect victims


comrade stalin
moscow
What responsibility do you think the Palestinian murderers have in all of this?
 
No one is proposing that Josef Stalin be elected US president.
Stalin was corrupt and cruel, no one is defending Stalin.
 
No one is proposing that Josef Stalin be elected US president.
Stalin was corrupt and cruel, no one is defending Stalin.
No Stalinist is running for president at the moment, but scores of hopeful democrat communists are fighting for recognition and dominance in the leftist socialist democrat party.
 
Shotshizpants is closer to Stalin in his desire to force citizens to put Christian Nationalist fundie fanatics in charge of our country than any Democrats.
 
That's what I thought. I suspect you also believe Stalin had no responsibility for the millions of his people's deaths under his brutal dictatorship?

Irrelevant logical fallacy.

in addition, the ad hominem logical fallacy is thrown in...

An irrelevant conclusion, also known as ignoratio elenchi (Latin for 'ignoring refutation') or missing the point, is the informal fallacy of presenting an argument whose conclusion fails to address the issue in question. It falls into the broad class of relevance fallacies.

The irrelevant conclusion should not be confused with formal fallacy, an argument whose conclusion does not follow from its premises; instead, it is that despite its formal consistency it is not relevant to the subject being talked about.


Ad hominem (Latin for 'to the person'), short for argumentum ad hominem, refers to several types of arguments where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than the substance of the argument itself. This avoids genuine debate by creating a diversion often using a totally irrelevant, but often highly charged attribute of the opponent's character or background. The most common form of this fallacy is "A" makes a claim of "fact", to which "B" asserts that "A" has a personal trait, quality or physical attribute that is repugnant thereby going off-topic, and hence "B" concludes that "A" has their "fact" wrong – without ever addressing the point of the debate.


comrade stalin
 
Irrelevant logical fallacy.

in addition, the ad hominem logical fallacy is thrown in...

An irrelevant conclusion, also known as ignoratio elenchi (Latin for 'ignoring refutation') or missing the point, is the informal fallacy of presenting an argument whose conclusion fails to address the issue in question. It falls into the broad class of relevance fallacies.

The irrelevant conclusion should not be confused with formal fallacy, an argument whose conclusion does not follow from its premises; instead, it is that despite its formal consistency it is not relevant to the subject being talked about.


Ad hominem (Latin for 'to the person'), short for argumentum ad hominem, refers to several types of arguments where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than the substance of the argument itself. This avoids genuine debate by creating a diversion often using a totally irrelevant, but often highly charged attribute of the opponent's character or background. The most common form of this fallacy is "A" makes a claim of "fact", to which "B" asserts that "A" has a personal trait, quality or physical attribute that is repugnant thereby going off-topic, and hence "B" concludes that "A" has their "fact" wrong – without ever addressing the point of the debate.


comrade stalin
Genocidal degenerates started the war with Israel and continue their atrocities against Israel, vowing never to stop trying to murder every Jew alive. The genocidal degenerates own the casualties produced by their ungodly terroristic war.
 
So all those children deserved to die? The terrorism of the IDF is far greater than anything the Palestinians have done.
 
Genocidal degenerates started the war with Israel and continue their atrocities against Israel, vowing never to stop trying to murder every Jew alive. The genocidal degenerates own the casualties produced by their ungodly terroristic war.

how many times can you re-package the same one-sided slogans of history..

there is something nauseating about christian fascists supporting zionist fascists..

cashing in on the death of children

shame

comrade stalin
 
Werbung:
how many times can you re-package the same one-sided slogans of history..

there is something nauseating about christian fascists supporting zionist fascists..

cashing in on the death of children

shame

comrade stalin
Ignoring 70 years of Palestinian genocidal atrocities against Israel will not make the truth turn into a lie.
 
Back
Top