# Bewildered Bush-Bashers' Beastly Barrage of Backstabbing **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 7, 2003, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bewildered-bush-bashers-beastly-barrage-of-backstabbing/180323 "2003-06-07T19:19:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2003, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bewildered-bush-bashers-beastly-barrage-of-backstabbing/180323/81 "2003-06-09T20:39:12Z")
> [@](#): > > _from **december** :_ > > [**Mr. Svinlesha** ’s point] moves the burden of proof from Saddam to the war-makers. Excellent! You may be starting to understand. Instead of being comfortable with _war-making_ as a default reaction to uncertainty, some of us are more comfortable withholding our approval until we are presented with actual, verifiable, on-going or eminent actions against our country. Not too long ago, that would’ve been considered a given, even among the most hawkish of conservatives. ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2003, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bewildered-bush-bashers-beastly-barrage-of-backstabbing/180323/82 "2003-06-09T20:46:37Z")
Yet another example of December’s Dimwitted Display of Disingenous Democrat-Drubbing. ---
**Author:** ![Eva\_Luna](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e495f1/32.png) [@Eva\_Luna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eva_Luna)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2003, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bewildered-bush-bashers-beastly-barrage-of-backstabbing/180323/83 "2003-06-09T20:51:21Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by xenophon41 \* > \*\*Excellent! You may be starting to understand. Instead of being comfortable with _war-making_ as a default reaction to uncertainty, some of us are more comfortable withholding our approval until we are presented with actual, verifiable, on-going or eminent actions against our country. > > Not too long ago, that would’ve been considered a given, even among the most hawkish of conservatives. \*\* I think you mean “imminent,” not “eminent.” ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2003, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bewildered-bush-bashers-beastly-barrage-of-backstabbing/180323/84 "2003-06-09T21:06:22Z")
Thanks, **Eva**. One of those… ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2003, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bewildered-bush-bashers-beastly-barrage-of-backstabbing/180323/85 "2003-06-09T21:14:06Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by blowero \* > \*\*Yet another example of December’s Dimwitted Display of Disingenous Democrat-Drubbing. \*\* 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2003, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bewildered-bush-bashers-beastly-barrage-of-backstabbing/180323/86 "2003-06-09T21:14:25Z")
I’m pretty sure he meant “Eminem”, personally. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2003, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bewildered-bush-bashers-beastly-barrage-of-backstabbing/180323/87 "2003-06-09T21:19:46Z")
I’m in favor of disarming Eminem through a regiment of inspection and sanctions. ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2003, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bewildered-bush-bashers-beastly-barrage-of-backstabbing/180323/88 "2003-06-09T21:22:28Z")
_Doh!_ Hey **Eva** ; I meant “regimen”, of course… :o ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2003, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bewildered-bush-bashers-beastly-barrage-of-backstabbing/180323/89 "2003-06-09T21:37:52Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by xenophon41 \* > Instead of being comfortable with _war-making_ as a default reaction to uncertainty, some of us are more comfortable withholding our approval until we are presented with actual, verifiable, on-going or imminent actions against our country. > > Not too long ago, that would’ve been considered a given, even among the most hawkish of conservatives. **wring** made a similar point. “anyone ‘Might’ do something horrendous to us. My next door neighbor might. He has guns. he has dogs. He has shifty eyes. But in the eyes of the law, I may not take aggressive action against him absent a _real_ threat. Not merely that there’s capabilities…” You both have a point. There’s a parallel between law enforcement and, but there are also differences. Countries and regimes are not individuals. International law lacks the clarity of constitutional law. Also, I think judgment should be used to distinguish between different countries and their potential risks. E.g., I wouldn’t be particularly worried if Denmark were suspected of developing nuclear weapons. Denmark hasn’t invaded its neighbors and supported terrorism. [At least, not for several centuries.](http://www.mindwave.co.uk/vikings/index.html) But, I don’t think we should have given Saddam Hussein the benefit of the doubt. YMMV. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2003, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bewildered-bush-bashers-beastly-barrage-of-backstabbing/180323/90 "2003-06-09T21:44:50Z")
ours did, quite substantially. and, apparently, as reality is playing out the mere **appearance** of potential threat, in the case of SH was sufficient in your eyes, vs. a much more **reality based** threat in the case of NK (there’s substantial proof that they’ve got capabilities, and they’re physically quite a bit closer, close enough to reach American soil). ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2003, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bewildered-bush-bashers-beastly-barrage-of-backstabbing/180323/91 "2003-06-09T22:01:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Eva Luna \* > \*\*I think you mean “imminent,” not “eminent.” \*\* Yes, your imminence. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Eva\_Luna](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e495f1/32.png) [@Eva\_Luna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eva_Luna)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2003, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bewildered-bush-bashers-beastly-barrage-of-backstabbing/180323/92 "2003-06-09T22:13:11Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by xenophon41 \* > \*\*_Doh!_ > > Hey **Eva** ; I meant “regimen”, of course… > > :o \*\* Well, the former would certainly have had a whole different meaning. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![3trew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/3/13edae/32.png) [@3trew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/3trew)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2003, 7:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bewildered-bush-bashers-beastly-barrage-of-backstabbing/180323/93 "2003-06-10T07:16:23Z")
If the threat is imminent, it’s eminent, and if a regiment of regimes is required to quell the Eminem enemy, then we must immanentize the eminence! Good heavens, I think I just chanelled Don King. ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2003, 11:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bewildered-bush-bashers-beastly-barrage-of-backstabbing/180323/94 "2003-06-10T11:44:04Z")
\ I threaten the embolism on Eminem, 'cause of the regulating required to condone the ambulatory. \ ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2003, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bewildered-bush-bashers-beastly-barrage-of-backstabbing/180323/95 "2003-06-10T13:34:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > \*\ ***wring** made a similar point. “anyone ‘Might’ do something horrendous to us. My next door neighbor might. He has guns. he has dogs. He has shifty eyes. But in the eyes of the law, I may not take aggressive action against him absent a _real_ threat. Not merely that there’s capabilities…” > > You both have a point. There’s a parallel between law enforcement and, but there are also differences. Countries and regimes are not individuals. International law lacks the clarity of constitutional law.\*\* Then let’s remove the law. Suppose the American government collapsed tomorrow and the Constitution and federal and state law were to be unenforced by any legitimate authority, leaving people to fend for themselves and organize themselves with contracts. A good approximation of international reality. 1. Would you be morally or ethically justified in killing that neighbour now because of his dog, his rifle, and his shifty eyes? 2. If that level of justification for killing one’s neighbour because accepted standard, what do you think would happen? You are of course absolutely correct in stating that a person/state’s track record changes the likelihood of threat. Iraq could not be trusted with nuclear weapons; Denmark could. Iraq could not be trusted with a stockpile of chemical weapons; Canada could. But what you fail to acknowledge is that **the United States had no reason to think Iraq was building nuclear weapons.** It’s becoming pitifully obvious it was all a crock. There was no uranium from Africa. The aluminum rods thing meant zilch. And the much-promised secret evidence of WMDs? Vanished. ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2003, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bewildered-bush-bashers-beastly-barrage-of-backstabbing/180323/96 "2003-06-10T13:52:25Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by RickJay \* > \*\* But what you fail to acknowledge is that **the United States had no reason to think Iraq was building nuclear weapons.** It’s becoming pitifully obvious it was all a crock. There was no uranium from Africa. The aluminum rods thing meant zilch. And the much-promised secret evidence of WMDs? Vanished. \*\* I think you’re overstating the case. I’d agree that the US’s indications of an Iraqi nuclear program were less than fully conclusive. But, we had several indications, such as:[ul][_]The aluminum rods.[_]Their past nuclear efforts.Reports from some defectors[/ul]I would add that our uncertainly was 100% Saddam’s fault. If he really didn’t have WMDs or WMD programs, he could have fully cooperated with the UN inspection program and proved it. His lack of full cooperation suggested that he had something to hide. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2003, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bewildered-bush-bashers-beastly-barrage-of-backstabbing/180323/97 "2003-06-10T13:53:56Z")
**december** , do you work for the Bush Administration? ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2003, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bewildered-bush-bashers-beastly-barrage-of-backstabbing/180323/98 "2003-06-10T14:20:05Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > I think you’re overstating the case. I’d agree that the US’s indications of an Iraqi nuclear program were less than fully conclusive. As usual what you think is fairly worthless, as well as an abuse of the verb to think. > [@](#): > > But, we had several indications, such as:[ul][li]The aluminum rods.[_]Their past nuclear efforts.[_]Reports from some defectors[/ul][/li] Let’s see, the alumimium rods have long been debunked as not in fact useful for nuclear purposes at all, I believe even before this damn fool war the Administration had to admit that. So that leaves us with the past and some unsubstantiated reports by defectors. Well, ain’t it fucking beautiful. Bloody excuse making. ---
**Author:** ![elf6c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c57346/32.png) [@elf6c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elf6c)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2003, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bewildered-bush-bashers-beastly-barrage-of-backstabbing/180323/99 "2003-06-10T14:22:36Z")
Amazing how many of those “indications” turned out to be false. Amazing that some of those were known to be false by the Administration, (African nuclear hoax) were still used by Bush directly. Amazing how we provide Cite after Cite of legitimate information, and yet what do we get back? Far-right Op-ed pieces, and already discredited theories. You do know that repeating a lie **doesn’t make it true** – right? Sure, there was an “imminent threat”- to his re-election. * * * Next on Fox News Channel, administration sources have told us the Eminem nuclear threat is real, and that the Bush Administration is considering massive tax cuts for the wealthy and a media-embedded invasion of Eminem to coinside with the release of the latest record unemployment figures and defict numbers. Halburton has already received a 30 Billion dollar no-bid contract to rebuild Eminem after Operation Rapper Freedom. ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2003, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bewildered-bush-bashers-beastly-barrage-of-backstabbing/180323/100 "2003-06-10T14:35:42Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by RickJay \* > \*\*Then let’s remove the law. Suppose the American government collapsed tomorrow and the Constitution and federal and state law were to be unenforced by any legitimate authority, leaving people to fend for themselves and organize themselves with contracts. A good approximation of international reality. > > 1. Would you be morally or ethically justified in killing that neighbour now because of his dog, his rifle, and his shifty eyes? > > 2. If that level of justification for killing one’s neighbour because accepted standard, what do you think would happen? > > You are of course absolutely correct in stating that a person/state’s track record changes the likelihood of threat. Iraq could not be trusted with nuclear weapons; Denmark could. Iraq could not be trusted with a stockpile of chemical weapons; Canada could. But what you fail to acknowledge is that **the United States had no reason to think Iraq was building nuclear weapons.** It’s becoming pitifully obvious it was all a crock. There was no uranium from Africa. The aluminum rods thing meant zilch. And the much-promised secret evidence of WMDs? Vanished. \*\* No, I’m sorry, i’m going to have to step in here. What you are patently failing to understand is arguing from general principles is not valid. The right to pre-emptive self defence only applies to America, which by definition, can do no wrong and can abrogate itself the right to lay down what are and are not acceptable ways to organise socities and economies. Similarly while you might not be justified in attacking your neighbour, because by your own words you have shown yourself not to be one of the Righteous, December would be. 😉 Is that any clearer? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bewildered-bush-bashers-beastly-barrage-of-backstabbing/180323.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bewildered-bush-bashers-beastly-barrage-of-backstabbing/180323.md?page=6)