Thursday, March 06, 2003

This example of the pro-war lobby's power of argument really should be on Stephen Pollard's blog, but it's not meant to be a discussion board so I thought I would post it here.

Bob Briant made some perfectly reasonable points against the war, of which the first was

(1) A war could easily end up killing many thousands of people - an entirely credible possibility given this report by a mainstream American TV network of the war plan: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/01/24/eveningnews/main537928.shtml
.
A very rude man called David Carr then replied, starting with this 'Pure speculation. If the Americans were that reckless about civilian casualties then why haven't they turned the whole country into molten glass (which they could do without breaking sweat). '

Now that's not an argument, even if you call Mr Briant 'stupid' and sprinkle the word 'fucking' around. Think it through a little -- for a start anything anyone says about this war can be labelled 'pure speculation', but it doesn't really get us anywhere. Much of the rest of your comments was pure speculation. Then the second bit, well that's a bit like saying 'I'm worried US bombing in Vietnam might kill thousands of civilians' and receiveing the response 'Stupid. Fucking. If the US wanted to kill civilians it could have nuked Vietnam already'. Just because something hasn't happened already, doesn't mean it isn't going to happen. Just because the US isn't deliberately targeting civilians, doesn't mean they won't die.

Truly abysmal.