Neither, both present flaws in argument that are too vast to list as they both argue from a personal interest point of view. The fact is neither Tom, Steve, Moby, you or I can speak objectively about these events because none of us have the facts. In WWII Hitler spoke much propaganda as all governments do. The facts we know today lead all rational humans to the conclusion that his actions were wrong and needed to be stopped. Only time will tell us what history will show of these events. The argument that the US helped Hussein gas his people is utterly up surd. If I make a kitchen knife and even if I inform you it can kill someone, I am not responsible for a death when you choose to plunge that knife into another human, only you are.Originally posted by catmando
Who would you want expressing your ideas to a politically neutral person; Tom or Steve1? Which one is the more rational, reasonable and intelligent when it comes to debate?
I'm glad Tom is on my side in these discussions. He would be a formidable opponent for sure.
The truth is we do not live in a direct democracy; we do not get to vote on every action our government takes. We do have the right to discuss and object however the media allows for disproportionate voice to be heard from those that are famous. And far too often that voice takes the form of ignorance. A great example is Hollywood's objection to animal testing while simultaneously supporting AIDS research. You cannot have one without the other. These issues are far to complex for most people to comprehend, the variables are endless. The fact that someone looks good in a bikini, can sing a song or can play a president on TV is not a qualification to deal with foreign policy.
back to boating as I'm sure this thread will be history in short order.