The Cellar - View Single Post

Undertoad · 05-01-2003, 12:42 AM

Yes, I'm sure it was the anti-war's careful and studied opinion of the military that led Ms Garafolo to wring her hands over 500,000 possible civilian casualties. Of course if she had wrung her hands over a lower number, her ad might not have had such punch. And now that the actual number is actually even lower than Saddam's regime would have effectively killed during the same time period as the war, some people should be wondering where the hell they dropped their moral compass.

But follow me now -- if, as you say, the anti-war folks believed that Saddam DID have NBC, AND believed that his possible use of them would lead to higher civilian casualties, you're simultaneously admitting that the inspections were a farce AND that Saddam was so irrational as to detonate WMD in a city or otherwise kill a huge number of his own people.

Either of which, alone, would be excellent grounds to go to war.

Now, I know this stuff is hard, but you really shouldn't be offering up softballs like that. As far as vindication goes, no, despite what I said earlier I really don't think of this as a competition. Nor do I think I'm a better person if I happen to get something right. It's far more interesting just to see who thinks what and why.

05-01-2003, 12:42 AM	#71
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	Yes, I'm sure it was the anti-war's careful and studied opinion of the military that led Ms Garafolo to wring her hands over 500,000 possible civilian casualties. Of course if she had wrung her hands over a lower number, her ad might not have had such punch. And now that the actual number is actually even lower than Saddam's regime would have effectively killed during the same time period as the war, some people should be wondering where the hell they dropped their moral compass. But follow me now -- if, as you say, the anti-war folks believed that Saddam DID have NBC, AND believed that his possible use of them would lead to higher civilian casualties, you're simultaneously admitting that the inspections were a farce AND that Saddam was so irrational as to detonate WMD in a city or otherwise kill a huge number of his own people. Either of which, alone, would be excellent grounds to go to war. Now, I know this stuff is hard, but you really shouldn't be offering up softballs like that. As far as vindication goes, no, despite what I said earlier I really don't think of this as a competition. Nor do I think I'm a better person if I happen to get something right. It's far more interesting just to see who thinks what and why.