I guess killing civilians is only okay when iran does it
Hi folks, if you're not sure how to have anti-war discussions with people around you I'd like you to take a minute to read this.
This anon is not asking this question in good faith, and this is the kind of redirection/defense that you'll see in a lot of people making pro-war arguments.
The goal of this is to put YOU on the defensive, it's to make you say "of course I don't support killing civilians" or to litigate the count of protesters killed by the Iranian government or to in some other way get you to stop talking about the subject.
The best way to respond to rhetorical attacks like this is to simply not get defensive. Here are some ways to redirect back to your point:
I don't pay taxes to Iran, I am talking about actions of the US military because I pay for the US military. Why are you trying to shift focus away from talking about the actions of the US military?
I said [that the US military shouldn't bomb civilian targets/it is wrong to attack a nation we are in negotiations with] and you are changing the subject. Why don't you agree that [the us military shouldn't bomb civilian targets/it is wrong to attack a nation we are in negotiations with]?
That's a very silly thing to say, and would be a ridiculous thing to believe; why are you making a childish argument instead of addressing the point that the US shouldn't bomb civilians?
I hold the US military to a higher standard than the IRGC, which is why I'm talking about the US military's actions. Don't you agree that the US shouldn't commit war crimes?
Often the person you're talking to will double down, and will say something like "Oh so you DO think it's okay to murder women for religious crimes" or "i can't believe you're defending the Iranian regime's massacre of protesters" and you just have to stick to your guns, point out that they're changing the subject, and redirect to the actual argument.
Remember that when people make rhetorical advances like this, they aren't doing it to have their minds changed or because it's what they actually believe, they are doing it to get you to stop making the argument that you were before. Online and in person debate is about the optics of your side; if you give in to an urge to be defensive you weaken your case or provide ammunition that can be used to undermine your other positions. If you stay on message the person who is coming at you in bad faith ends up demonstrating that they don't actually have a response to your point, which makes your position come off as more convincing to onlookers.
This is not about truth-seeking (you know the truth, and are advocating for it), it is about winning people to your position.
titsay
blakekathryn
kaledo-art
origamiaround
kianamaiart
