From: Hal Finney (hal@finney.org)
Date: Wed Jun 11 2003 - 12:24:44 MDT
> Ron (Dehede011@aol.com) wrote,
> > In a message dated 6/11/2003 3:47:33 AM Central Standard Time,
> > amara@amara.com quotes: Amara, Have you noticed we haven't carpet
> > bombed Iraq with cluster bombs. Cluster bombs like any other
> > weapon are intended for specific targets. We haven't had those
> > targets and hence have not used the weapons. You've been
> > listening to the Hate America First crowd again. Ron h.
> >
> > Amara,
> > And you are still listening to that crowd. Did you notice
> > I used the term "carpet bombing?" In other words there had not
> > been any mass use of cluster bombs. I gather from reading the
> > article you enclosed that you know that.
> > The use of those bombs was very limited.
Harvey replied:
> Ron, your original claim quoted above was that "We haven't had those targets
> and hence have not used the weapons." Amara proved you wrong. It is
> misleading to reinterpret your original claim to say that "The use of those
> bombs was very limited." This is not what you said. It is dishonest to
> blame Amara for this misunderstanding when it is you who changed positions
> after the evidence was presented.
Actually I think Ron's comment can be interpreted either way. Certainly,
if you take the claim out of context, he says that no cluster bombs
were used. However, if you look at the whole paragraph, he first states
that "we haven't carpet bombed Iraq with cluster bombs." When he went
on to say that we "have not used the weapons", we should interpret the
second comment in the context of the first, so that he was referring to
"carpet bombing with cluster bombs" when he said that those weapons had
not been used.
It is common in discussions to make one's claim explicitly at the
beginning, and then to refer to it in shorthand form later in the
discussion, without listing all the caveats and limitations every time.
That's what I think Ron was doing here.
Therefore I disagree that he was being dishonest to claim that he was
referring to cluster bombing all along, although I can see how Harvey
might have misread his comments in that way.
> Secondly, your repeated ad hominem against Amara violates the list rules and
> should stop. There is no evidence that Amara hates America or listens to
> those who do. Your level of emotion and insult is out of proportion to
> Amara's calm and rational style. You are adding unnecessary heat and
> emotion into the debate. Whether you agree with me or not, this is in the
> list rules that you agreed to follow when you joined the list.
This I do agree with. There has been far too much name calling on this list.
I would also suggest that Harvey should not be so quick to claim that
another poster is dishonest. We should try to read each person's message
charitably, in the most favorable possible light, and look for valid
interpretations before leaping to accusations of dishonesty and the like.
Calling someone dishonest is a serious charge, worse than saying they
listen to those who hate America.
Hal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jun 11 2003 - 12:35:15 MDT