When Dave's logic is shown to fail, or his plea to address his "real" claim (answered by centuries of thought and scholarship on the morality of war) he tries 2 things: 1) accuse someone of making a plea to expertise, authority, or credentials 2) make a plea of emotion - "but how does that centuries of thought/scholarship/globally accepted frame works account for death of children and intentionality." - it does btw, that is a fact. It is not an insult to make a judgement of Dunning-Kruger effect. Just an assessment based statements and positions. You can be anti-war, but you don't get to be anti-fact on how the moral or legal frameworks of war account for intentionality. https://bird.makeup/@comicdavesmith/1912549720129483125
See Tweet