[tomdemaine]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

By this logic every president that has entered into a war is guilty,


[/ QUOTE ]


I agree. I'm not the one advocating hanging Saddam. All I'm saying is don't pretend that your not a massive hypocrite if you think Saddam should be punished but others shouldn't for doing the very same thing!

[/ QUOTE ]

Bush has not done the same thing as Saddam though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actions not words. Knowingly issued orders for an offensive which meant innocent people would die.

[/ QUOTE ]

Innocent people die in any war, and you have no way of knowing how many innocent people were saved because of the war.

[/ QUOTE ]

You have no way of knowing how many innocent people were saved when Saddam had the subversives killed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Most people killed in the Iraq conflict were not a threat to anyone.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Last night when I was participating in this thread, I was on my way to being drunk, but now that I've reread this I understand what you're saying.

I still think the answer is no. Let's say there is the hypothetical situation that when we went into Iraq Saddam really did have or was close to having WMDs and he planned to use them against the U.S. or somewhere in Europe. Also lets say that there was not alterior motives behind the justification for going in. In that scenerio, I think the answer is a resounding no. Am I still being hypocritical?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a fallacy seeing as it is never possible to know someones true intentions however even if it were possible, you must (to avoid being hypocritical) then believe in prior restraint in all circumstances? Or prove why international warcrimes are fundamentally different from bank robberies etc.