If you ignore the the actual reasons why the bailouts happened, how can you argue against them? Sure, the bailouts preserved weak companies, which is a bad thing, but you can't just ignore the benefits of the bailouts and say they shouldn't have happened. That in no way resembles an argument, though "meaningless platitudes" may have been an incorrect characterization.
"You don't have to address the other sides reasoning because it's hard to find every flaw in an opponent's argument."
But the other side has put out a public statement explaining their actions. This isn't about predicting how someone is going to make their case. The case has already been made. At the very least, you have to address their justifications.
The goal of the bailouts is to minimize the effects of bank failures on the economy, not to make sure the banking system is sound in the future. The counterexample isn't valid. A valid counterexample would involve a country avoiding a recession while not bailing out failing banks, but even then, I don't think this particular situation has a historical precedent similar enough to be pertinent.
Also, after actually looking into the example, it looks like Sweden did bail out the banks to end the crisis: "The government rescued the banking system by issuing a general guarantee of bank obligations. The total direct cost to the taxpayer of the salvage has been estimated at around 2 per cent of GDP." (http://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/oxford/v15y1999i3p80-97.html)
Even with a valid counterexample, I think you should still have to explain why the current course of action is wrong, not just why another would be right, which is why I didn't address it in the first place.
"You don't have to address the other sides reasoning because it's hard to find every flaw in an opponent's argument."
But the other side has put out a public statement explaining their actions. This isn't about predicting how someone is going to make their case. The case has already been made. At the very least, you have to address their justifications.