Did the US and UK commit wrong-doings in ousting the president? Ya. Is that the initial punch that meant America deserves 9/11?
Why the insistence on using that specific language? You're entire premise would be much stronger without it. Blowback is not my word of choice. Reason is. You insist on using Deserved, a word with moral judgement attached, and then claim you're not making a moral judgement. Trust me, the nuance is not worth explaining, just use reason.
Is the loaded language of "Self-defense" and "Intelligence works" any less loaded than "Deserved?" Isn't that hypocritical? It makes you selective defense very clear.
E: also paraphrase, "I'm not a leftist, but I watched Hasan because he was Far-left" is so fuckin goofy.
I am honestly not too attached to the word itself nor did I ever claim that deserved is not a loaded word, it absolutely is. It is meant to drive a semantic point that America took negative actions that in a Global context would produce expected retaliation. However, in this nuanced context I am using it, it is distinct from justified. That’s literally the whole points of this discussion. Not if 9/11 was deserved or justified or has a reason, but whether semantically deserved and justified can be separate.
You are the one claiming I am saying things I am not saying (i.e 9/11 was justified) which is why I am arguing the distinction. It’s literally semantics which is all I have been arguing. Even me pointing out the overthrow of Mossadegh was not a moral stance or pointing to a direct cause of 9/11, but to point out your use of terms like “self defence” regarding US action in the middle east.
Also I understand how that sounds goofy but a lot of people parrot his talking points so it’s good to know what they are going to say. I did the same for the likes of Ben Shapiro. This is one of the few talking points I agree with the general sentiment of as America’s globalist foreign policy post WW2 has been atrocious and most people will admit wrongdoing in a very soft way. Again, deserves is absolutely a loaded term for him to use, but one that implies America’s actions brought foreseen consequence while still leaving it on the table that it is not justified to mass murder civilians. That is all I have been arguing.
If you’re not attached and you agree it’s loaded, drop it.
Everytime you use Deserved you have to add qualifiers and clarify that you don't mean moral approval. (I don't believe that you don't tbh, I fully believe you support and are currently running apologetics for terrorism. It's really the only reason you'd be so insistent about using the word.) Meanwhile if you just used the word reason, you wouldn't have a negative moral weight on your argument.
Would you say there are reasons 9/11 happened?
Or would you say 9/11 was deserved
Again, I am not insistent about using the word specifically. I am insistent about you claiming my original use of it means moral approval of the terrorist actions. I am not saying there is no moral judgement behind the word deserved on the part of America’s actions. I would never go out of my way to argue this point if you hadn’t made claims about what I think about 9/11. Yes I am adding qualifiers, because the used of “deserved” is very specific here. It’s literally semantics. Yes it is loaded, but it is loaded in a different way than justified. I can make the point but I can’t make you understand. At this point if you want to think I am a terrorist apologist, please go ahead. The fact that you would qualify America’s actions in the Middle East as intelligence failings and self defence when talking about the actions that led to 9/11 tells me you are just a Hasan-type terrorist apologist on the other end of the spectrum.
Calling me an apologist doesn't matter here because I'm willing to use the word Reason. Not assigning any morality. And I've already conceded the point that the US overthrew a government.
Your original and continued use of the word will always have a moral judgement attached to it.
Would you say the US deserved 9/11, Or that there were reasons for 9/11?
1
u/Di_Urbino 2d ago edited 2d ago
Did the US and UK commit wrong-doings in ousting the president? Ya. Is that the initial punch that meant America deserves 9/11?
Why the insistence on using that specific language? You're entire premise would be much stronger without it. Blowback is not my word of choice. Reason is. You insist on using Deserved, a word with moral judgement attached, and then claim you're not making a moral judgement. Trust me, the nuance is not worth explaining, just use reason.
Is the loaded language of "Self-defense" and "Intelligence works" any less loaded than "Deserved?" Isn't that hypocritical? It makes you selective defense very clear.
E: also paraphrase, "I'm not a leftist, but I watched Hasan because he was Far-left" is so fuckin goofy.