View Single Post
Old 08-11-2003, 07:02 PM   #28 (permalink)
ctembreull
Crazy
 
Location: Silicon Valley, CA, USA, Earth
Quote:
Originally posted by Dragonlich
First of all, please keep it civil. Calling me or my statements "idiotic" is insulting.
I'm sorry you feel that way, but I stand by my statement. Note that I haven't yet called you an idiot, merely your arguments.

Quote:
I did not say that I was willing to sacrifice 5000 people for "political gain".
But that's exactly what this war was. With the Bush Administration's justifications for this war falling like a hard rain, it becomes increasingly clear that whatever other supposed reasons we had to go to war, political and economic gain ranked highly among them. After all, the WMD argument has gotten hazier and hazier with each passing week, the nuclear weapons argument has been quite thoroughly debunked, and the al-Quaeda connection theory has been essentially gutted.

Quote:
If you want to see those two positive effects as mere "political gain", that is *your* problem.
It's called a "jaundiced eye." I note with some amusement, however, your staunch reliance upon one and only one valid argument: liberation. This might serve quite well for you, but it does not serve well for the international community or for the facts of the case laid by the United States before the United Nations. Our case was based entirely upon the putative existence of weapons of mass destruction; a case which has since been proven to be more ideology than substantive fact. Where was Colin Powell standing before the General Assembly pleading for the liberation of Iraq? Where were the impassioned appeals to the U.N. Commission on Human Rights? They were nowhere, which tells me that if liberation was among the reasons for this invasion, it was pretty damned far down the totem pole.

Why do I bring this point up? Because you consistently play the "liberation card." But this war and the public support behind it was never, not ever based upon the prospective liberation of Iraq. It was all about the weapons of mass destruction. With that justification having been revealed as deeply flawed with an increasing likelihood of deliberate deceit, the evidence clearly and increasingly weighs in favor of the attempted gain of political and economic capital by the Bush Administration.

Quote:
Fact: Saddam killed some 20,000 people a year, on average.
Fact: We *accidentally* killed some civilians, as unfortunately happens in wars.
And we killed between 6087 and 7798 (the most well-researched estimates I'm aware of), in three months. And those are just the confirmed dead. There are also estimated to be more than 20,000 wounded. That's an overall casualty rate approaching 30,000 in three months. Would you like me to help you with the math? Your other statistics, by the way, do nothing whatsoever to exculpate the United States for these deaths and injuries.

Quote:
One might say that by invading Iraq, we *saved* 20,000 people a year, on average.
What an absolutely repugnant attempt at justification. Tell me: how, exactly, does that make the ones we killed any less dead?

Quote:
If I remember correctly, *you* weren't willing to support this war, and wouldn't even like it if the UN were to go in.
Actually, what I said was that I would have been disappointed had the U.N. passed a resolution authorizing force. But I would have held my peace and accepted what the world wished to see done. As such, your insulting accusations have been trimmed, and will not be spoken of again, save to say that you've got a rather skewed notion of civility.

Quote:
By the way: why do you keep inflating those numbers every time you mention them?
To balance out your consistent lowballing, that's why.

You've still not addressed my central point. We declared that Saddam Hussein possessed several hundred tons in total of multiple, specific types of weapons of mass destruction, including VX, sarin, and botulinum toxin, as well as the means to fabricate and deploy nuclear weapons. We required him to prove that he did not, in fact, possess them. Given that we did not actually know what we claimed to know, how is our demand that Saddam Hussein produce evidence of the destruction of these materials anything less than a logical fallacy? After all, if he didn't actually have it, if we were in fact incorrect as the current preponderance of evidence would suggest, then he couldn't bloody well prove that he'd destroyed it, now, could he?

Nobody can prove a negative. Saddam Hussein cannot prove something has been destroyed if it never existed in the first place. I'm not saying this isn't the case, but I am saying that it very well may be, given the revelations of the weakness in and erroneousness of our WMD arguments.

Whereas you appear to be stating that it doesn't matter if we know what he has or not; all we need do is state our best guess as a fact and leave the burden of proof upon him. This is a logical fallacy and an invalid reason to invade a sovereign nation.

Have a nice day!
__________________
Mac
"If it's nae Scottish, it's crap!

Last edited by ctembreull; 08-11-2003 at 08:50 PM..
ctembreull is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360