I skimmed two of your papers. I’m honestly shocked that you’re the same person. They were both precise, carefully argued and with none of the pseudo-rigor or tunnel vision that I’ve found in your other writing. I apologize for misjudging you.
Unfortunately, I’m not interested in debating the specifics of this argument, and I never claimed to be an expert on ISIS. However I maintain that you are going beyond your scope of expertise when you claim to know what “ISIS would love to see”.
I’m glad you took the opportunity to skim my papers. My writing is highly varied depending on the audiences for whom I’m writing. Unfortunately, op-eds have to be a certain kind of format that is not given to the kind of precise and carefully-argued style in which I would much rather prefer to write. Pieces I specifically write for LW are also written in a more rigorous style, although not the level I would write for a peer-reviewed journal.
I hear you about “ISIS would love to see”—this was a rhetorical maneuver. It’s one of those stylistic things needed to get an op-ed published, as I learned over much trial and error. While “love” is rhetorical, the bigger point still stands. ISIS has specifically described its goal as attacking the notion that Muslims and non-Muslims can live together, and specifically aims its attacks to result in creating a hostile environment for Muslims in western countries so that they would turn to ISIS.
I skimmed two of your papers. I’m honestly shocked that you’re the same person. They were both precise, carefully argued and with none of the pseudo-rigor or tunnel vision that I’ve found in your other writing. I apologize for misjudging you.
Unfortunately, I’m not interested in debating the specifics of this argument, and I never claimed to be an expert on ISIS. However I maintain that you are going beyond your scope of expertise when you claim to know what “ISIS would love to see”.
I’m glad you took the opportunity to skim my papers. My writing is highly varied depending on the audiences for whom I’m writing. Unfortunately, op-eds have to be a certain kind of format that is not given to the kind of precise and carefully-argued style in which I would much rather prefer to write. Pieces I specifically write for LW are also written in a more rigorous style, although not the level I would write for a peer-reviewed journal.
I hear you about “ISIS would love to see”—this was a rhetorical maneuver. It’s one of those stylistic things needed to get an op-ed published, as I learned over much trial and error. While “love” is rhetorical, the bigger point still stands. ISIS has specifically described its goal as attacking the notion that Muslims and non-Muslims can live together, and specifically aims its attacks to result in creating a hostile environment for Muslims in western countries so that they would turn to ISIS.