Don Vito Corleone
Elite
- Feb 10, 2000
- 30,029
- 66
- 91
Do you think the "Plan for Victory" itself is inconsequential trivia, or that the fact the White House is falsely claiming it was an actual unclassified strategic document is inconsequential trivia? Assuming the latter, why do you consider it trivial that the White House has fabricated a "plan for victory" more than two years after the war started, then claimed they had been following it all along? Some of my closest friends are in Iraq as I type this - I sure as hell don't think it's trivial that the White House has no apparent plan for protecting them, much less bringing them home (not to mention the fact that they are apparently more interested in securing positive press than victory).
I think that in the "grand scheme of things" what was or was not planned, who knew about it when, where it was documented, and how it was communicated means nothing and is trivia. It's what politicians do, pick at each others scabs.
Victory will be obtained by the soldiers over there, and by support over here. Not by bumbling politicians on either side of the aisle.
Don Vito Corleone
Elite
- Feb 10, 2000
- 30,029
- 66
- 91
"Support" does not, at least in my world, consist of making up fake "plans for victory" years after the fact, to disguise the fact that you didn't have them when it mattered. Moreover, whether you agree or not, any military officer will tell you that planning is key to achieving victory and minimizing friendly casualties and collateral damage. To the extent you consider planning "trivia," you are planning to fail.
The whole "plan for victory" is nothing but a PR thing from both sides anyhow. The plan was a) kick saddams ass b) put in some kind of stable government c) get the heck out of dodge. Everything else should be left to the military commanders.
So you believe that a sitting U.S. president continually falsifying information from a war zone that is in itself the product of his falsification of other information is "inconsequential trivia"?
Do you realize how wrong that is?
We're witnessing the consequences of Bush's "inconsequential trivia" right now in Iraq.
Do you believe that people can escape the consequences of their actions?
That's why you are impossible to discuss a topic with. You take this example, my opinion, and spin it out to apply universally and apply some vague morality question to it, which you view throuh a narrow lens. I see it as no different than your refusal to acknowledge good news when it comes out of Iraq.
As far as the general question of people escaping the consequences of their actions, of course they can. Many do. Many don't.
Do you really lack any concept of right and wrong?
We kicked ass alright. Civilian ass while Saddam is making a mockery of this entire fiasco at his trial. The "stable government" we're putting in is going to be based on Islamic law and closely aligned with Iran. And we can't get out of Dodge because absolutely ZERO planning was put into this. You want to leave everything else to the military commanders but unfortunately the Bush administration over rode them right from the start. Too few troops to begin with, no planning, and no exit strategy. Now we're in a giant clusterfvck and you refuse to hold the people accountable who erroneously and unnecessarily began it in the first place.
There are consequences to actions. They are inescapable even for the world's "only remaining super-power".
No one can do good by doing evil. Lies are still lies. Dead civilians can't be brought back to life. No one can escape the consequences of their actions forever no matter how many PR campaigns or how much propaganda they employ.
Since everything else was a rant, I'll answer your question. No, I think I do not lack a concept of right and wrong. I think I have a very strong concept of right and wrong.
Then how do you explain referring to outright lies by your president as inconsequential trivia? How do you explain justifying a war based on lies? How does your very strong concept of right and wrong apply to all of the dead and wounded? All of the destruction?
IF you have a "very strong" concept of right and wrong, then what is your answer to a simple Yes or No question - should the US government be allowed to systematically lie to it's constituents? What would you teach your children? That it's OK to lie IF they think it's important enough?
Yes or No.
Future Shock
Let's take those 1 by 1:
"Then how do you explain referring to outright lies by your president as inconsequential trivia?" I disagree with your assessment, I don't believe anyone has proven these as lies. I refer to the article as inconsequential trivia because that is my opinion.
"How do you explain justifying a war based on lies?" I disagree with your assessment, and that the war was only based on WMD's (I assume that's the dem party line you are referring to).
"How does your very strong concept of right and wrong apply to all of the dead and wounded?" I don't see the relevance there. I haven't killed or wounded anyone.
"All of the destruction?" Again, relevance? I haven't caused any of the destruction.
This is the crux of America's problem. We are dealing with a society that has largely lost the ability to discern right from wrong. Truth from lies. Fact from fiction. And this is exactly why we are in the state we're in.
It's morning in America and all is right in the world.
Republicans sinking in sleaze
2144
Hmm, that's an interesting one. Systematically lie? No, the government should not be "allowed" to do that, although "allowed" really isn't a right or wrong moral question, that's more "permission/consequences" isn't it?
Where's the WMD? Where is the threat? The only acceptable reason for attacking Iraq or any other nation is self defense. What were we defending ourselves against?
You haven't killed or wounded anyone? You haven't caused any destruction? You and all of the people like you who support and defend the Bush administration made it possible for them to go ahead with their unprovoked attack.
Bush and his propagandists like to compare their invasion of Iraq with WWII. Here's a comparison from WWII that fits. Were the German people who supported Hitler responsible for the death and destruction he caused?
Then how do you justify the actions of the Bush admininstration? The continuing lies about Iraq troop readiness, the propaganda? If you give them permission through your support are you as culpable as they are? Will it be fair to you to share in the consequences?
Those seem to all be generic Sheehan-ish rhetorical questions so I won't answer them.
I would say the 23 democrat senators and 133 democrat reps that voted in favor of the Iraq War Resolution made it quite a bit more possible than I did.
It's 2005 and America still doesn't know the difference between right and wrong.
Don't blame Congress. They're guilty of trusting Bush with a resolution to use force IF NECESSARY that they voted for based on intelligence that was skewed and with information omitted that might make them question their vote as Bush forced the vote before the election, cynically using 9/11, making misleading statements about Saddam and 9/11, Saddam and WMD, Saddam and nuclear material from Africa based on forged documents.
You consciously support Bush and his lies even today after they've all been exposed. Don't blame someone else for your failure to hold Bush responsible for his lies. If Congress is responsible then you are just as responsible as they. Probably more so because your continued support keeps the lies alive to this day.
Don't blame Congress. They're guilty of trusting Bush with a resolution to use force IF NECESSARY that they voted for based on intelligence that was skewed and with information omitted that might make them question their vote as Bush forced the vote before the election, cynically using 9/11, making misleading statements about Saddam and 9/11, Saddam and WMD, Saddam and nuclear material from Africa based on forged documents.
You consciously support Bush and his lies even today after they've all been exposed. Don't blame someone else for your failure to hold Bush responsible for his lies. If Congress is responsible then you are just as responsible as they. Probably more so because your continued support keeps the lies alive to this day.
Alchemize: WTF? Here you are saying the government should not be allowed to lie, but then in THREE seperate responses to the OP, you claimed that allegations (with initial substantiation) of the government lying where "inconsequential trivia"!!!
- 1)
- 2)
- 3)
You can't have it both ways - you can't say that government shouldn't be allowed to lie, but then say that allegations of such behaviour are trivia. These allegations are HIGHLY important, need to be investigated, and either put to bed, or the consequences borne by those issuing them. Unless you just want to engage in head-in-the-sand partisianship behaviour...in which case you are saying you have strong morals, unless it applies to the party you favor (which is, of course, immoral behaviour, as morals are not subjective).
Future Shock
That's my opinion of these specific instances. I don't think anyone has "proven" them to be a lie. Proving something a lie is quite difficult. That's why politicians do so well.
Why can't I say they are trivia? In my opinion, they are trivia. Quite possibly lies, certainly not proven to be. I can point multiple logical conclusions that would make them "not lies".
I never claimed to have strong morals either, rather that I have a good sense of right and wrong.
Great thread for questioning someones behavior based on partisanship though :thumbsup:
Depends who is the hypocrite. There are plenty of inconsequential hypocrites on this inconsquential board.
In Alchemize's world there is no difference between right and wrong, truth and lies, good and evil? He lives in a moral black hole along with Bush/Cheney and company.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 11K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 8K
-
Facebook
Twitter