Ok, let me make this a little bit more clear then.  Taken straight from wikipedia we have the definition of a straw man argument.<p>A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent&#x27;s argument, while actually refuting an argument which was not advanced by that opponent.<p>Your reply to the parent poster was &quot;So you are proposing that the French should respond to having over a hundred of their fellow citizens killed, and hundreds more injured by loving the supporters and leaders of ISIS?&quot;.<p>I was correcting you because you suggested that the parent was &quot;proposing that the French...&quot; and leaving the absurdity of the proposition to be its own refutation, when in fact the whole statement was &quot;an argument which was not advanced by [the parent poster]&quot;.<p>Let us be clear that you can still desire to know what the parent was proposing the French do while also attacking his original position with a straw man arguemnt, which is exactly what occurred.