Name Calling in Debates.

Frequently it is said name calling when discussing politics is the sign of being on the losing side of an argument.

I just engaged in that sort of thing over at the Belmont Club. There is a discussion going on a blog by Wretchard. The theme of the blog is how the left seems to think the terrorist movement in Iraq is not constrained by the normal laws of economics and we are constrained by a superrestrictive set. Wretchard talks of e-mail he gets from a Sweedish prof who claims the Marines were wrecked as a fighting unit by the assault on Fallujah.

Anyway there is one commentator who posited we have yet to do anything to go after Al-Qaida. I mentioned well what about Afghanistan? Well, he later responded by asking how that was going after Al-Qaida.

HUH? WTF? What can one do? I pointed out the obvious but if that commentator isn't swayed by the facts at this point....

I can understand the idea people have on how they think Iraq is a diversion (not a position I support) it is an argument we can have, but Afghanistan? Quite obviously this person is not going to buy anything so why argue? I called him a MoveOn/CodePink nutter and gave him a brief introduction to Arabic, as all good Muslims should at least try to learn Arabic.