Re: Finian Cunningham: US Duplicity over Golan Demolishes Posturing on Crimea Archived Message
Posted by John Monro on March 22, 2019, 7:32 pm, in reply to "Re: Finian Cunningham: US Duplicity over Golan Demolishes Posturing on Crimea"
The problem then becomes a slightly difficult one. We agree for instance that the continued occupation of the Golan Heights by Israel is "illegal" in international law, but strictly speaking I imagine the annexation of the Crimea was illegal by the same law. Which then puts the person saying the Crimean annexation is OK, but the Golan Heights isn't, in the same sort of hypocritical quandary. That's why I state that each event should be treated on its own merits or logic, and not to conflate the two. It's generally a bad idea, indeed it is itself a form of informal logical fallacy, to support your argument by suggesting hypocrisy by the person or institution you are arguing with, or diverting the argument by referring to another event . It's worth reading Wikipedia on informal fallacies, this one is called "whataboutism"
|
|