WoMD ... so where are they? (page 5)

ThiChi

U1:

Double Standard? You can call someone names, "but please don’t do it to me".....you are half right, someone here is a dumb ass!

Sorry ThiChi, but you're obviously so clueless about what constitutes good argumentation that it's not worth bothering myself with further comment. The fact that you failed to answer substantively a single question or challenge I posed proves that you have no objective answers. You don't even seem to understand the notion of "classified". Note that it is only now, nearly 60 years after WWII, that many documents are being declassified -- after all the players who could be hurt by negative disclosures are dead. Some material will never be declassified because, based on what has been revealed so far, it would hurt the interests of the "allied" countries.

As for you Simon, if you think that saying "of course" as you did does not constitute an extremely biased way of expressing a concept, then you need to learn a few things about expressing yourself objectively. But I think that the fact that you are not objective in this matter is evident beyond dispute. Little slips of language prove it. You easily recognize these slips in the "pro-war crowd", but not in yourself or in the "anti-war crowd". But you're not alone. Hardly any Iraq-war-related comments on this board have been particularly objective, any more than most comments in the media have been. Most are dripping with bias, and often show all the poor argumentation techniques that we love to hate in Watchtower publications.

AlanF

ThiChi

Do you know what we were originally discussing?... by your responce (or lack thereof) I did not think so.

Wow, a lot of backtracking and circular reasonings. The issue is not what constitutes classified information or how it is treated by a goverment (it is a given that some issues should be kept secret). The Issue was not trusting information because the Government "controls it." Then, instead of showing proof for your claims, you have now went south on me.

I Refer you to my examples of why your claims are just fallacies and only offer a false choice. I have went off topic to show that "government secretes" or "information the governments don’t want you to know" can and do get revealed without people dying or going to jail, as you claim. Now you want to morf your claim into classified secretes now. Wow, from general news topics to top secret information.....Circular reasoning at its best. I will not chase you any longer. Its all there. Besides pontificating generalities, or giving mental observations, do you ever back it up with examples or facts?

I stand by my statements!

Jayson

This is the sort of mis-information that annoys me. Early on, they announced that SCUD missiles had been fired at Kuwait and later in the "small print" they admitted that they were conventional weapons (fired from the area they already announced were secure).

Simon a SCUD is a conventional weapon if it does not carry a WMD payload. Any missle that flies over 93 miles was banned. There were banned missles called Al-Samuse being distroyed right up until the war. Do they not report that in Europe? I understand that these missles do not constitute WMD but they were under the weapons banned in Iraq. Once there is a delivery system Iraq had the technological know how to produce the chemical weapons. Saddam has shown the will to use these weapons. They also fired on US/UK planes daily. This is enough for me and my country. It should be enough for you guys but your blind hate is getting in the way.

Why are you guys resorting to namecalling. No one else it doing it. "Bush is a dumb ass" that is your response to Simons question? This is what people who have an indefendable stance do. Are you trying to get Simon to close this thread because you have nothing to say accept to call names and dismiss the facts of this case.

Iraqis Ordered to Cover Up Suspect Materials in Advance of Weapons Inspections

(Baghdad, Iraq-AP) -- Iraqi scientists say they were ordered to destroy or hide suspicious materials -- sometimes just hours before U-N weapons inspectors arrived. The scientists say the items were routine bacteria cultures and equipment -- nothing that could produce a chemical or biological weapon. But the stories indicate Saddam Hussein's regime had advance knowledge of some U-N inspections and that officials took steps to destroy some things that might raise suspicion. The U-S has long argued that Iraq was hiding weapons of mass destruction from inspectors. Beginning last November, U-N inspectors toured hundreds of sites around Iraq and did not find anything. Iraqi graduate students and scientists say as the inspections began, officials ordered them to remove anything suspicious from their labs. University officials deny issuing such orders.

I love you guys. Any source of information that does not fit into the "I HATE BUSH" catagory is government propaganda. Is plausable denial all you choose to believe? You are the ones giving no proof to your opinions or point of view. You should be ashamed.

Simon if I understand your postion correctly because WMD have not been found in the few days that we have been in Iraq that is all the proof you need to give you all the proof you will ever need to convience yourself that this war was "illegal" in your mind. If so you don't need us to say anything. I find it very sad that so many people have become so bias against their governments which represents them while swearing allegiance to the UN which does not represent them at all. Why are you defending dictorships? Simon you say people come first. The UN does not represent people. Dictators represent themselves. You are so wrong on this one.

ThiChi

""Hardly any Iraq-war-related comments on this board have been particularly objective, any more than most comments in the media have been. Most are dripping with bias, and often show all the poor argumentation techniques that we love to hate in Watchtower publications. ""

AlanF:

Well, your observation begs the question:

What do you feel is an objective viewpoint in relation to the Iraq war? The JW-ism is that you somehow have the "truth" of the matter......Well? Reasons for your Claim please? Or is this just another one of your "Pronouncements" with little or no substance?

Jayson

I am still confused as to why soldiers are expected to find the existing WMD or their distruction. That is not their job. There is also massive evidence all though be it circumstantial that the weapons do or did exist. Why are some so eager to see the American and British coalition fail? Really how could the UN have done anything better? Better yet why didn't it?

Jayson

Sorry double post

AlanF

ThiChi, I'll answer a couple more of your comments, but unless you can manage a substantive reply, that's it.

You have absolutely no concept of what "circular reasoning" is. I suspect your rudimentary ideas about what constitutes fallacious argument in general are in line with your statement that you "have went off topic" to show something about "government secretes". Example: "Wow, from general news topics to top secret information.....Circular reasoning at its best." Do you want me to explain why your statement is wrong? I.e., that my statement has nothing to do with circular reasoning?

In your last post you finally managed a semblance of a reasonable comment and question:

: What do you feel is an objective viewpoint in relation to the Iraq war?

One of extreme skepticism towards everyone who is not in government. One of fanatically extreme skepticism towards anyone who is in government.

: The JW-ism is that you somehow have the "truth" of the matter......Well?

Have I said anything that constitutes an opinion about the war in Iraq? No. You have merely invented an opinion and labeled me with it. That is another good example of fallacious reasoning on your part. It's known as a "straw man" because you've invented a false problem which you find easy to knock down.

The fact is that you are quite the right wing fanatic, and so you interpret anything that is not right wing as opposing the right wing. That's why you invented an opinion for me. In this you're not different from left wing fanatics. I am in neither wing, and so in keeping with my skepticism I reserve judgment about the war, along with plenty of other things.

: Reasons for your Claim please?

Your own posts are a fine example of what I said. Once again, if you want me to explain it in detail, I will, when I get a bit more time. But I guarantee: you won't like it.

: Or is this just another one of your "Pronouncements" with little or no substance?

Try me.

AlanF

xenawarrior

Simon:

I'm still wondering:

We were told before the war that they knew for certain where they were.

Can you please tell me who told you this? I still do not recall anyone saying that we knew for certain "where" they were.

You seem to be hanging your hat on this as a total lie being told before the war and now we should all be so upset that it hasn't come true. WHO SAID IT? Who said we know for certain "WHERE" they were???? If you are truly interested in "discussing" the topic then please reference your source.

It's easy to banter about a great deal of rhetoric but if you say that we were lied to and you are truly upset about this lie- who said it?

And I'm with dubla on this one-as I said in -I think thread number 2 about this same topic- we've been fighting a war and now we are beginning to look for WoMD and it's a big job-among other very big jobs- GIVE THEM SOME TIME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"Chemical Ali" didn't get his name for nothin

Still needing an answer to the question though- who said this?

XW

patio34

This is an interesting thread.

Xena, I believe it was Colin Powell who told the UN, with satellite maps and all pinpointing where the WMDs were. The way I understand it, according to the current Time magazine, is that yes the Iraqis could move the WMDs, but not hide the buildings that produced and housed them.

There is an embarrassment to the "coalition" forces the longer it goes on that there is no discovery of WMDs.

The fact that they were beaten in such a short time is also evidence that they did not have the alleged WMDs or they would surely have used them when being attacked.

There is a great deal of information available, which is contrary possibly to the "coalition's" wishes. There are many non-embedded journalists writing about the events in Iraq among other writers. The mainstream media is also reporting many negative views of the invasion and occupation.

There are many Americans who are not pro-war and appalled at a "preventive" war, which is illegal.

Pat

WoMD ... so where are they?

Share this