Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
SteveW
Trad climber
State of confusion
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 02:10pm PT
|
That's so true.
I know little.
But that must be disproved too.
|
|
TradIsGood
Chalkless climber
the Gunks end of the country
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 02:19pm PT
|
Eh, that can be stretched to ridulousness [sic] as well. If 200,000-some troops, sophisticated satellites, UN inspectors, as well as millions of citizens don't see them, it's pretty safe to say--not guaranteed, but safe to say--that he didn't have them at the outbreak of the war.
None of the aforementioned has found my car keys. I do not know where they are right now. Did I have car keys at the outbreak of the war. You also do not have evidence about the millions of citizens not seeing them. BTW. I do have car keys. Did back then, also.
You are right. It is "safe to say" - you won't be executed or fined for saying so. But it is really bad logic. Even if we mined Iraq today 1 mile deep, and water-boarded all of its citizens, it would not tell us anything about the non-existence in 2003. (Though it might possibly yield factual evidence of existence)
This is really fundamental logic.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 02:25pm PT
|
No, TIG, it's silliness. Using the same logic, I could argue that it's possible that Santa Claus spends January and Feb in Florida. There is no evidence proving he doesn't. Sure, it's possible he was in Miama, but c'mon.
There have been hundreds of thousands--if not, millions--of eyes looking for WMDs on the ground in Iraq for five years. Even the Bush Ad has given up on that claim. These are not difficult objects to find or to find documents or other clues indicating their presence, unlike your car keys.
|
|
UncleDoug
Social climber
N. lake Tahoe
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 02:40pm PT
|
"Even if we mined Iraq today 1 mile deep, and water-boarded all of its citizens, it would not tell us anything about the non-existence in 2003. (Though it might possibly yield factual evidence of existence) "
TIG,
Existence can be proven but, non-existence can not?
If every living soul in Iraq were to say that there were no WMD's in Iraq in 2003 would you still hold your same position?
|
|
AbeFrohman
Trad climber
new york, NY
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 02:41pm PT
|
"as long as they have wall to wall carpet, cable tv, and fast food around the corner, life's good. "
GODDAMN RIGHT.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 02:47pm PT
|
"There have been hundreds of thousands--if not, millions--of eyes looking for WMDs on the ground in Iraq for five years. Even the Bush Ad has given up on that claim. These are not difficult objects to find or to find documents or other clues indicating their presence, unlike your car keys."
maybe they're not in Iraq. Is it possible they are in a location that nobody is looking?
|
|
Nefarius
Big Wall climber
Fresno, CA
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 02:50pm PT
|
hahaha that's one of the most asinine arguments I've ever heard, TiG!!!
If you submit that on a resume, I bet Bush would hire you. That's along the lines of some of the stupid "logic" they've been force-feeding America for 7 years!
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 02:50pm PT
|
Bluering,
Is there any evidence for that?
And if that was true, then Bush screwed up by not invading the place that actually had them.
|
|
TradIsGood
Chalkless climber
the Gunks end of the country
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 02:57pm PT
|
Uncle D,
Existence can be proven. Non-existence can be disproved. It is as simple as that.
You can assert that I have no car key. I can disprove it, by showing you one. There is nothing you can do to prove that I have no car key. You can say that it is highly probable that I have none.
In Europe, it was "known" that black swans did not exist. Black swans were discovered in Australia. Though it seemed highly probable to Europeans, it is illogical (stupid, if you will) to use absence of evidence to assert evidence of absence.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 03:03pm PT
|
LOL.
TIG, that's some funny stuff. You sure do take some stuff to pretty ILLOGICAL extremes. Maybe we should invade Cuba? They might still have WMDs. We can't prove they don't. Pretty pathetic basis to rationalize a failed foreign policy.
If I get off work early, I still might be able make the flight to Miami. I just know Saint Nick is out there somewhere.
|
|
Nefarius
Big Wall climber
Fresno, CA
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 03:45pm PT
|
The irony, TiG, is that I was thinking about Koolaid, and how it kinda goes hand in hand with the "logic" you're using is sold to people... It's kind of religious...
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 03:56pm PT
|
pssst...they're in Syria..
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 04:02pm PT
|
TIG,
Then where are they? And what credible evidence is there that they were there in the first place?
I'm not interested in mental masturbation/absence of evidence bullsh#t. Where are they, and how come no one has found them or any traces of them after the country has been thoroughly scoured?
You have no answers for that.
Even Bush gave up that claim long ago.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 04:03pm PT
|
And Bluering, you know this because...?
|
|
TradIsGood
Chalkless climber
the Gunks end of the country
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 04:12pm PT
|
dirtbag, last chance.
I am not saying there were any there at the time. I do not know that or have any evidence of it. It is known that Iraq used chemical weapons before 2003. But that is all irrelevant.
I am not claiming that they existed. The claim that they didn't based on lack of evidence of their current existence is a stupid argument.
Remember that guy who posted here whose wife lost her diamond ring. Nobody has been able to find it. Therefore the diamond ring never existed.
Same statement and logic as the WMD argument that you are making.
|
|
bookworm
Social climber
Falls Church, VA
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 04:16pm PT
|
ok, next question
if all the "facts" to prove bush/cheney 1) allowed 9/11 to happen; 2) "wanted" war with iraq; and 3) "lied" about wmd to justify invading iraq are available to anyone with the time or inclination to find them, then why has it taken so long? and why didn't the msm pursue the issue?
steve, your claim that the msm simply likes big parties is banal; we're talking about a conspiracy of global magnitude that would lead not only to the end of the current administration but also the trial, conviction, and execution of bush/cheney for treason, mass murder, and crimes against humanity--that makes watergate look like a jaywalking violation and woodward/bernstein still get to attend the big parties
the nyt/lat/wapo could have used their vast resources of money and manpower to break this open a long time ago resulting in 1) saving, literally, thousands of lives; 2) reclaiming their credibility and boosting their sales; and 3) guaranteeing the election of a democratic persident (possibly even cynthia mckinney) and many more big party invitations
ok, no wmd in iraq...to borrow from trad, that doesn't prove saddam didn't have them prior to the invasion (i'm not going to claim he did, i'm just pointing out the gap in your logic); more importantly, the absence of wmd does not prove bush/cheney "lied"...at most, it proves they were wrong
if you want to argue that they were overzealous in their claims that saddam posed a "real and growing threat" (only one person ever claimed an "imminent threat"--guess who?), then i'll concede...but
"We no longer live in a world where only the actual firing of weapons represents a sufficient challenge to a nation's security to constitute maximum peril."
i'll let you do your own research on who said that (hint: he took us to the brink of nuclear war)
there's also the question as to why saddam defied the un resolutions on inspections all the way to the point of losing his regime...here's what david kay told congress (i direct you, especially to paragraphs 7-12 for starters):
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/01/28/kay.transcript/
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 04:28pm PT
|
"The claim that they didn't based on lack of evidence of their current existence is a stupid argument."
TIG--for the last time too, I said earlier I understood that there is a possibility that WMDs are still there based on that logic.
But after five years and with the exhuastive searching undertaken by hundreds of thousands of trained people and sophisticated detection instruments, and after allowing Iraqis who would be knowledgeable about such activities to talk (and providing plenty of incentives to do so), nothing has turned up. WMDs are simply not THAT hard to find.
Sure, there might be a 1% chance that they were still out there in the Iraqi desert in March 2003. But you are ignoring the fact that exahustive searches have been done while clinging to the one percent chance that they missed something. You're clinging to axioms of logic and pretty unlikely events while downplaying what has been happening in the real world to actually locate the supposed WMDs. Understandable though, if you supported a foreign policy disaster from the get go and like to find some way to rationalize it.
Chasing phantoms that can't be 100% disproven is an illogical and stupid way to conduct foreign policy.
Edit: about the diamond ring--we actually know that it existed. We know Iraq had WMDs in the 80s: we never knew that was a fact in 2003.
|
|
TradIsGood
Chalkless climber
the Gunks end of the country
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 04:31pm PT
|
Hundreds of thousands of trained individuals?
Are you talking about soldiers - trained to fight?!
|
|
nb3000
Social climber
Oakland, CA.
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 04:32pm PT
|
I understand TIG's point...
but, key evidence cited by the administration to the presence of WMD was "misrepresented" (to spin it lightly) to the public. Satellite photos of stuff admin officials (like Powell) swore up-and-down was WMD - turned out not to be. Oops.
The tin-foil hat makes my head look fat. I have an easier time believing 9/11 happened or was allowed to happen as a product of gross ineptitude and negligence rather than "an inside job". We just couldn't get our sh#t in a pile fast enough to stop it.
The more we talk about it the more confusing it gets. Which is probably the point.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!