ISIS on the offensive in Iraq

[Viking]

Your argument was in favour of those groups as "moderate" and "democratic", under (supposedly) modern, broader meaning of the word.

No, I did not argue that they were 'moderate' - I argued that we need to know what they mean by 'sharia' before can properly judge whether or not they are 'moderate' - after a definition of 'moderate' has been agreed upon, obviously:

Without knowing whether or not they intend to stone people to death and cut off people's hands, insisting that they are not 'moderate' seems premature.

I dispute the idea that modern usage of 'democracy' implies things like respect for 'human rights' (just look to the dictionaries), and I've also argued why such a definition is a really bad idea - regardless.

But the original point was not whether or not we could call what they wanted democracy (which is ultimately semantics), but that it offers a way for Syrians to change the way Syria is ruled (including the abolition of sharia). That's all - anything else is a straw man.

Go back, rethink your strategy. Yes, your e-penis will shrink a little, but at least you won't look like a fool.

If you are as right as you seem to think you are, you don't need to rely on such hostility in order to win the argument. Think about it.