Iraq is the new Godwin's Law

[Nancy Allen``]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

 

I have noticed, especially here but other places as well, that some referrence to Bush or Iraq is almost guarenteed to arise in a thread. Not surprisingly, such referrences are made in much the same vein as Hitler and Nazis are, regardless of how inaccurate such comparisons are. Had anyone else noticed this? How about having Godwin's Law apply to threads where Bush and Iraq is brought up in threads such as censorship or religion.

[Windu Chi]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

 

I have noticed, especially here but other places as well, that some referrence to Bush or Iraq is almost guarenteed to arise in a thread. Not surprisingly, such referrences are made in much the same vein as Hitler and Nazis are, regardless of how inaccurate such comparisons are. Had anyone else noticed this? How about having Godwin's Law apply to threads where Bush and Iraq is brought up in threads such as censorship or religion.

Ahh, I know what you are talking about, you talking about that argument you and Spider was having in my FCC thread.

When it turned into bush bashing.

 

 

:lol:Godwin's law: As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.

[Spider AL]

Iraq should be mentioned in every discussion on politics really, as it's the single most important issue in the world today. It's the issue of whether as the most powerful nation in the world, the US has a right to go around kicking sand in the faces of other nations.

 

As for comparing Bush to Hitler... you would seem to be the one who's making such comparisons.

 

Incidentally, Bush probably has less influence on US national policy than Hitler did on Nazi policy. You seem to be obsessed with Bush. Bush is an irrelevance.

[Mace MacLeod]

Interesting. Also, I don't recall a single person bashing Bush in the FCC thread.

 

Maybe Godwin should elaborate:

Law II: When pressed for answers or confronted with evidence that the US isn't always the Good Guys, neocons will attempt to say really stupid things like, "If you think the US shouldn't have invaded Iraq, then you hate Bush and think the US shouldn't have fought Hitler either! Oh, and invading Iraq was a mistake. I can throw tantrums about that and not look like an idiot while still slamming anyone who doesn't support the ongoing occupation, right?"

[Nancy Allen``]

Oh, rofl. Yeah, people will say absolutely anything.

 

Just for the record, we should never have gone into Iraq.

[Windu Chi]

Maybe Godwin should elaborate:

Law II: When pressed for answers or confronted with evidence that the US isn't always the Good Guys, neocons will attempt to say really stupid things like, "If you think the US shouldn't have invaded Iraq, then you hate Bush and think the US shouldn't have fought Hitler either! Oh, and invading Iraq was a mistake. I can throw tantrums about that and not look like an idiot while still slamming anyone who doesn't support the ongoing occupation, right?"

That law and yours are bias laws, in scientific terms, Mace.

[Mace MacLeod]

Oh, rofl. Yeah, people will say absolutely anything.

I noticed...

Now that I got that off my chest how many times have I said that ****ing going into ****ing Iraq was a ****ing mistake? Let me reiterate. ****ing going into ****ing Iraq was a ****ing mistake. 与性交的进入与伊拉克性交是一个该死的差错。與性交的進入與伊拉克性交是一個該死的差錯。** **ing die in het ****ing van Irak gaat was een ****ing fout. Das Scheisse Einsteigen in das Bumsen von von dem Irak war ein ****ing Fehler. Το ****ing που πηγαίνει το Ιράκ ήταν ένα ****ing λάθος. Entrare vaffunculo nello scopare Irak era un errore ****ing. イラクの性交に性交に入ることはとても間違いだった。이라크를 성교하기로 성교에게 감것은 지독한 과오 이었다. Entrar fodendo em foder Iraq era um erro do caralho. ****ing идти в ****ing Ирак была ****ing ошибка. Does that make it clearer?

Your eloquence is matched only by your charm.

 

There is a logical error running rampant in American politics in the last few years. It seems to stem from the fact that a lot of Americans are incapable of seeing the world in anything other than black and white, good and evil. "If you accuse us of doing evil things (war, torture, etc), then you're saying we're evil!" This is the logical fallacy that neocons have used to stifle any and all debate regarding the current US administration's military hegemony and abandonment of the Geneva Convention. Good and evil are in every single person, whether muslim, christian, American, Iraqi or whatever. Spider AL and I aren't the ones who automatically reach for this Hitler tag. Go back and have a look at who does.

[Det. Bart Lasiter]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_American_War

 

If I had to compare Bush to a historical figure, it'd be President McKinley, although McKinley's religious fanaticism was no doubt fake.

[Spider AL]

although McKinley's religious fanaticism was no doubt fake.

I'm curious as to what evidence you've seen that makes you believe Bush's religious fanaticism is genuine.

[Det. Bart Lasiter]

I'm curious as to what evidence you've seen that makes you believe Bush's religious fanaticism is genuine.

I've no hard evidence that it is, just a gut hunch that he believes at least part of what's coming out of his mouth.

[Spider AL]

Hmm. There is some cause to believe that the hyper-religiousness of many US politicians is necessary to ensure that they get the bible-belt's vote. I'd say Bush's seeming religiousness could well be as big a fabrication as his "good ole' boy" everyman image. He is, lest we forget, a spoiled Yale fratboy. Not a village idiot in a ten gallon hat- as his handlers like to portray him.

[Nancy Allen``]

There is a logical error running rampant in American politics in the last few years. It seems to stem from the fact that a lot of Americans are incapable of seeing the world in anything other than black and white, good and evil. "If you accuse us of doing evil things (war, torture, etc), then you're saying we're evil!" This is the logical fallacy that neocons have used to stifle any and all debate regarding the current US administration's military hegemony and abandonment of the Geneva Convention. Good and evil are in every single person, whether muslim, christian, American, Iraqi or whatever. Spider AL and I aren't the ones who automatically reach for this Hitler tag. Go back and have a look at who does.

 

It's true that there's a lot of dirty little secrets America wants to keep from the public eye. They have committed both mistakes and atrocities, there is much innocent blood on their hands. I cannot accept however the story that Elvis is one of the Roswell aliens (alongside Jimmy Hoffa) who faked his death to work for the FBI and used his magical singing to fly planes into the World Trade Centre so support would be bolstered for an invasion for Iraq's oil.

 

Okay, I'm not sure if that's the official version of what's meant to have really happened, I get confused when it comes to the debate over remote control vs government agents posing as hijackers.

[Jae Onasi]

Okay, I'm not sure if that's the official version of what's meant to have really happened, I get confused when it comes to the debate over remote control vs government agents posing as hijackers.

 

It's all my fault. The Voices came through the tinfoil antennae on my head and made me do it.

After a nice vacation in Hotel Asylum, however, I'm much better.

[Mace MacLeod]

I cannot accept however the story that Elvis is one of the Roswell aliens (alongside Jimmy Hoffa) who faked his death to work for the FBI and used his magical singing to fly planes into the World Trade Centre so support would be bolstered for an invasion for Iraq's oil.

 

Okay, I'm not sure if that's the official version of what's meant to have really happened, I get confused when it comes to the debate over remote control vs government agents posing as hijackers.

...

 

Uh...okee-dokee then. What do 9/11 nutball conspiracy theories have to do with what I said...? Or the topic of this thread...? Or should I just rather not want to know?

[Jae Onasi]

I'm curious as to what evidence you've seen that makes you believe Bush's religious fanaticism is genuine.

 

Why assume in the first place that their faith is fake? That's quite an accusation of something that none of us can really prove--we can't see into his heart to find out what his level of faith _really_ is. The demands of the Presidency are not really conducive to being able to attend church on a weekly basis

When I lived in TX when Bush was governor and long before he announced his aspirations for the Presidency, the guy went to church and said he read his Bible daily. That does not make him either a 'religious fanatic' or a 'fake religious fanatic'.

 

Probably could have a 'Temporary Godwin's Law' for controversial war decisions. Once the war is over, there can be temporary Godwin's law for some other controversial topic.

[Spider AL]

Originally Posted by Jae Onasi:

Why assume in the first place that their faith is fake? That's quite an accusation of something that none of us can really prove

One person has made assumptions regarding Bush's fundamentalism in this thread, namely Jmac. He assumed that Bush's convictions are genuine.

 

I have not "assumed" anything. I have simply stated that there are some reasons to support the hypothesis that many politicians (not merely Bush) routinely profess deep religious convictions because it's politically expedient to do so. Gaining the fundamentalist vote is important, especially in the US.

 

Originally Posted by Jae Onasi:

When I lived in TX when Bush was governor and long before he announced his aspirations for the Presidency, the guy went to church and said he read his Bible daily. That does not make him either a 'religious fanatic' or a 'fake religious fanatic'.

Neither does it "make" him a genuine Christian. Certainly the policies of his handlers- which he endorses- aren't very Christian. So what's your point?

 

Originally Posted by Jae Onasi:

Probably could have a 'Temporary Godwin's Law' for controversial war decisions. Once the war is over, there can be temporary Godwin's law for some other controversial topic.

The topic of the illegal US invasion of Iraq isn't going to magically disappear when US troops pull out, Jae, no matter how much you would like it to. It will merely take its rightful place in the list of past US atrocities that are constantly cited by every intelligent person campaigning for change in our political systems.

 

--

 

Nancy: You're trying to imply that people who are honest about the US/UK war crimes in Iraq are conspiracy-theory-touting nuts. But it's not so. You're the only one who has brought up the topic of conspiracies here.

[Nancy Allen``]

Not at all. I have said that Iraq wasx a mistake, I've made it as clear as I could that Iraq was a mistake, and that yes America has committed atrocities. The reply? 'NO! NO! NO! I DEMAND YOU SAY THE EVIL BUSH EMPIRE DOES NOT CARE WHO IT HAS TO KILL OR WHAT LAWS IT HAS TO BREAK TO INVADE IRAQ'S OIL! SAY IT! SAY IT! SAY IT! WAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!! WAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!' Even if that's true, and I'm not saying it isn't, not only is it an extrodinarily childish way to act not being able to accept other's opinions and trying to force them to adopt your views is both selfish and will get you nowhere. Case closed.

[Spider AL]

And now you're trying to portray us as hysterical. Reprihensible, especially considering your perpetual outbursts.

 

And for the two-hundredth time, Iraq was not a "mistake". There was nothing accidental about it. It was an intentional invasion to supplant a government unfriendly to US financial interests, with a government that is friendly to those interests.

 

Every time you call it a "mistake", you're excusing it.

 

As for "trying to force you to adopt my views", I've done nothing of the sort. I have tried to show you that all the evidence contradicts your- apparently arbitrary- views on the topic... But that's what rational debate is. The presentation of factual evidence and logical argument. You've done nothing of the sort in return, you've merely made insulting blanket statements over and over again. I strongly urge you to rectify this situation.

[Nancy Allen``]

Well for one thing you have not provided evidence, or answers to questions I have posed. All you've done is say Bush and America is evil for going into Iraq. You go off on an ego trip about how everyone is stupid for not agreeing with you and then attack when backed into a corner. Would you like me to go through each of your posts and point out exactly what I'm talking about? How there seems to be a lot of fiction spread about. You must tell wonderful stories to kiddies at the library. Although they must be confused when they're passed off as fact. I could but I'm really done having a battle of wits with an unarmed person. Harsh words? Well I'm a stubborn bitch, so flame me not, it won't help! So, if this stuff upsets you, please go take a nice warm bath and get all cozy and warm and please forget about me. But, I also know, some half wit will still complain and have to have the last word... Go Figure!

[Spider AL]

Originally Posted by Nancy Allen``:

Well for one thing you have not provided evidence, or answers to questions I have posed.

I have provided evidence to support my views in Iraq-related threads, from independent polls to news reports to government documentation and press-releases. That's what debating is about, supporting your views with evidence and logic.

 

As for questions you've asked, I have tried to provide an answer to every question that has ever been posed to me. If I've missed one of your questions, please, ask it again and I will answer it.

 

Originally Posted by Nancy Allen``:

All you've done is say Bush and America is evil for going into Iraq.

I have never said this, ever. Only you have resorted to gross generalisations, I never have. Once again, show me where I have. I can show you where YOU have.

 

Originally Posted by Nancy Allen``:

You go off on an ego trip about how everyone is stupid for not agreeing with you and then attack when backed into a corner.

I have never said that anyone was "stupid for not agreeing with me", once again you are simply... well, you're simply lying. And frankly, I don't recognise that I've ever been "backed into a corner" on the Iraqi issue. The issue is clear and the truths associated with it are self-evident. It's hard to be backed into a corner when you're merely stating the obvious.

 

Originally Posted by Nancy Allen``:

Would you like me to go through each of your posts and point out exactly what I'm talking about?

Yes! Yes, yes please do. Actually quote something for a change. Use some examples for a change. Please do. I would welcome some civilised debate, for a change.

 

Originally Posted by Nancy Allen``:

How there seems to be a lot of fiction spread about. You must tell wonderful stories to kiddies at the library. Although they must be confused when they're passed off as fact. I could but I'm really done having a battle of wits with an unarmed person. Harsh words? Well I'm a stubborn bitch, so flame me not, it won't help! So, if this stuff upsets you, please go take a nice warm bath and get all cozy and warm and please forget about me. But, I also know, some half wit will still complain and have to have the last word... Go Figure!

... Calm down please.

[Mace MacLeod]

Nancy, do you even read people's posts before responding?

NO! NO! NO! I DEMAND YOU SAY THE EVIL BUSH EMPIRE DOES NOT CARE WHO IT HAS TO KILL OR WHAT LAWS IT HAS TO BREAK TO INVADE IRAQ'S OIL! SAY IT! SAY IT! SAY IT! WAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!

Nobody has ever said anything like this. Not Al, not me, not Dagobahn Eagle, nobody. You're the one who freaks out and posts flaming rubbish, not us. Quote one single line where anyone of the anti-Iraqi War camp has said anything about any "Evil Bush Empire" or America being evil. What, you can't? That's because we haven't. I've said in this very thread the problem seems to be that certain people (ie. you) can't seem to differentiate between criticism and attack. Yes, Spider AL can be a condescending prick when he wants (no hard feelings dude, but there it is...), but he has also stayed within the rules of polite and rational debate where you have completely abandoned them and launched into frothing personal attacks. And Al could out-debate you with one hemisphere of his brain tied behind his back.

 

So Nancy, what the hell is it exactly about the Iraqi War you're trying to say, anyway? You say that "going there was a mistake". Okay, we're on the same page here. Yes, America shouldn't have done that. We all agree on that. Now, I'm defining mistake not in the "Whoops! Didn't mean to invade there!" way, but in the "Our bad, we shouldn't have done that at all..." way. So what's with these hysterical outbursts of yours? Annoyingly, I keep needing to beleager this point: nobody is siding with any terrorist groups or saying Bush = Satan, yet you keep behaving as though we are. Stop it. It's aggravating, juvenile, and it makes you look like a complete idiot.

[Windu Chi]

Well for one thing you have not provided evidence, or answers to questions I have posed. All you've done is say Bush and America is evil for going into Iraq. You go off on an ego trip about how everyone is stupid for not agreeing with you and then attack when backed into a corner. Would you like me to go through each of your posts and point out exactly what I'm talking about? How there seems to be a lot of fiction spread about. You must tell wonderful stories to kiddies at the library. Although they must be confused when they're passed off as fact. I could but I'm really done having a battle of wits with an unarmed person. Harsh words? Well I'm a stubborn bitch, so flame me not, it won't help! So, if this stuff upsets you, please go take a nice warm bath and get all cozy and warm and please forget about me. But, I also know, some half wit will still complain and have to have the last word... Go Figure!

You still got me cracking up, Nancy.

Don't get mad, I'm just laughing at how you commented toward Spider.

[Spider AL]

I've found a very interesting documentary relating to Iraq, the "war on terror" and US/UK foreign policy, stored on Youtube. I actually saw this the first time it was shown on UK TV, and am thoroughly glad to find a copy still extant.

 

John Pilger's "Breaking the Silence" (Youtube)

 

I particularly like the archive footage of Powell and Condi telling the press exactly what Saddam's offensive capabilities were shortly before the invasion plans were drawn up. Oh, and the lovely US ambassador to the UN... what a standup guy.

[Mace MacLeod]

So Nancy, where are those quotes? You know, the ones where AL or I or anyone say Bush is evil or America is evil or anything like that? I'm waiting. And waiting.

[Nancy Allen``]

This is quite obviously not on the original topic, but it's right here.

 

I highly doubt that the US government would have any qualms at all about re-introducing the draft, should they feel the need to invade somewhere else and start a war on a third major front. After all, they'll need the troops in such an eventuality. And frankly, a little propaganda here, a little scare-mongering there... and the US public would shut up and accept it.

 

So in effect, you want to punish committed moralists for being so... so... so MORAL!

 

I may have couched that sentiment in a non-serious way, but I'm very serious, and it's a very serious issue. Anyone who objectively looks at the armed forces of any major world power cannot fail to realise that those armies are literally there to enact the immoral will of corrupt power centres. Therefore anyone who wishes to participate by joining the army is either poorly informed or worse, amoral themselves.

 

Your idea of emulating the policies of other nations that demand national service is tantamount to desiring that those who disagree with the army's perennially immoral acts around the world should be FORCED to participate in those acts. And if they don't wish to participate, they're to be treated like criminals and do community service.

 

Quite reprehensible, in short.

 

Maybe Godwin should elaborate:

Law II: When pressed for answers or confronted with evidence that the US isn't always the Good Guys, neocons will attempt to say really stupid things like, "If you think the US shouldn't have invaded Iraq, then you hate Bush and think the US shouldn't have fought Hitler either! Oh, and invading Iraq was a mistake. I can throw tantrums about that and not look like an idiot while still slamming anyone who doesn't support the ongoing occupation, right?"

 

And for the two-hundredth time, Iraq was not a "mistake". There was nothing accidental about it. It was an intentional invasion to supplant a government unfriendly to US financial interests, with a government that is friendly to those interests.

 

Instead of honouring their sacrifices, the government is sweeping them under the rug and treating them like a dirty little secret that shouldn't ever be shown or mentioned. By doing so, they're just trying to keep the voting public confronted with as few reminders as possible that the war the US started really is a shooting war, not just some abstract concept of something going on "over there", far away from anyone's daily life. And the more remote and abstract it becomes in the public's mind, the less important it becomes to stop it or pay close attention to just what the US government is running around doing.

 

So there are several ways to solve the problem we have created... but we're not going to do it! Oh happy day!

 

The idea that showing anonymous coffins on a news report would decrease your personal safety in any meaningful way is ludicrous, bordering on paranoia. I can only assume that it's indicative of the same culture of fear that resulted in broad US public quiescence when confronted with the totally mis-named "Patriot Act".

 

By concealing such powerful images from the public as pictures of the returning US/UK dead, the US/UK power centres are merely serving their own interests and using the "feelings of the family of the deceased" as a convenient excuse. And why? Because such images might spur more citizens into speaking out against the invasion. That's the last thing they want.

 

Ah! The old "I pay my taxes... so I should get to decide what you can and cannot do and see and watch!" fallacy.

 

I called your statement amounting to "If we show pictures of the soldiers coffins, their family home could well be broken into and the family victimised!" ludicrous, bordering on paranoia. Which it clearly is.

 

Ohhh quote it all, Jae, quote it all. You dared to type "if it means that some anti-war groups aren't able to get their yukks out of seeing a bunch of coffins, too bad." Suggesting that anti-war people would laugh at images of dead American soldiers. Is this REALLY the image you have in your head of the way Anti-war people think and feel? If so, you're deluded. If I were to be uncharitable, I'd suggest that such vitriolic lies totally invalidated any opinions you might hold on all related topics.

 

Wrong once again. And quite a glaring error too. If I'm "railing" against anything, it's the sentencing of Saddam by this immoral and illegal court.

 

I realise that the sentence of the court, the court, and the government that appointed the court are all morally tainted.

 

The fact that I calmly recognise their amorality doesn't mean I'm their rabid foeman. But if YOU don't recognise their amorality, that does rather make you wilfully ignorant.

 

So yes, he "set out to kill the people", in the same way that a mugger who beats people up and steals their cash "sets out to beat people up". Even if he has an ulterior motive for his violence, his violence is intentional and part of his crime.

 

COURSE Bush and his buds intended to kill Iraqi civilians! There was absolutley no way to invade Iraq without doing so! Hell-oooo...! They knew that all along, and they ignored international law to go in anyway. The US invasion has killed far more people than all the suicide bombings in Israel and 9/11 combined.

 

The gassing of the Kurds occurred in the early 90's after Desert Storm, and the US just sat back and watched him do it. They didn't intervene to prevent this, they just trot out Saddam's crimes to justify the war now.

 

And btw, the US did just leave Vietnam to communism in 1973, and it didn't do a damn thing about the Nazi takeover of Europe. The US only entered WWII in December 1941, long after the Nazis had swept through western Europe and were busy fighting the Russians, remember?

 

I said and still say that since the US government were perfectly aware of the potential cost of their invasion in Iraqi civilian lives but went ahead anyway, they are guilty of intentionally causing the deaths of the civilians. They knew the civilians would die en-masse, but they went ahead anyway.

 

As for individual soldiers, they're not guilty of the war crimes the US government is guilty of. Soldiers are only guilty of the lesser immoral act of ignorantly signing up to do the bidding of a clearly corrupt government.

 

Oh believe me, I could have called professional soldiers much worse things. Like "wilfully ignorant puppets who abrogate responsibility for their actions more easily and willingly than they draw breath"... I think "noodle-heads" is a relatively mild- but accurate- description.

 

Is that the best you can do? "Well, half a million Iraqis may be dead because of us in the space of three years... But... umm... YOU CAN'T PROVE THAT SADDAM AND HIS EVIL SONS WOULDN'T HAVE KILLED HALF A MILLION PEOPLE TOO!!!!11"

 

I mean that's what you're implying, isn't it. Quite pathetic. Even when the man was intentionally massacring Kurds, he never broke the 200,000 mark. And as I understand it, that's the Kurds' own estimate of the Kurdish death toll. How the hell was he going to cause the number of deaths we've caused in the same space of time? And WHY would he do it? Your stance is pathologically propagandist in nature.

 

No, they're the people who really have to justify their actions to themselves and others. If you talk to a soldier who is fighting an unjust war, what's he going to tell you? "Oh yeah, I've been shooting people for no good reason." Of course he isn't going to tell you that. He's going to lie to himself and to you. Or better still, he'll just believe and repeat the obvious lies that his government has told him through his superiors. Much easier than making up your own falsehoods.

 

Okay, I admit "Bush is evil" was not once said, but the opinions behind these quotes, not to mention the rather trollish nature of some of them, are very clear.