Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Willravel
This is the very model of the same narcissism that is directly responsible for 1.2m Iraqi lives and thousands of US troops' lives.
|
Like I wrote, I doubt any "support" would meet your standard, and we don't have the benefit of knowing what would have happened if other actions were taken.
Quote:
|
I think you're a threat, therefore I have the right to attack you? That's absurd and you don't even believe this.
|
You certainly can take my position to an absurd extreme. However, there are legal standards for people to use to determine if a response to threat is reasonable. For example in my state, legally I would be justified in using deadly force if:
I believe deadly force is necessary to prevent an imminent threat of death, great bodily harm, or sexual assault.
And, the facts and circumstances would cause a reasonable person to hold that belief.
And, I am not the instigator or initial aggressor
And, the force is not excessive - greater than reasonable needed to overcome the threat.
That standard as it would apply to my wife may be different than it would apply to me because of my size and strength compared to my wife's size and strength.
So, on an individual basis, you could take an absurd action but legally you would be held accountable for it. On the other hand if you responded to a threat in a reasonable manner within legal parameters you may save your life or the life of another.
Quote:
|
I'm not talking about "imperfect" information (the word you're looking for is incorrect, not imperfect). I'm talking about the removal of reasonable doubt, which never occurred. And guess what? Bushco was totally wrong. The UN tried to warn them, most of Europe and our other allies tried to warn them. Shit most people in the US who weren't sheep tried to warn them: the intel is bad, don't do this.
|
No. The word I chose was imperfect because it encompasses not only the possibility of information being incorrect it also encompasses the possibility of the information being incomplete. Was it Rumsfeld who said: "There are known , knowns; known, unknowns; unknown, knowns; and unknown, unknowns. Or, it may have just been the voice of Samuel Jackson from an episode of the Boondocks. Either way information available can be "imperfect".