3 ms·

Invading Iraq resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands civilians. Destabilizing the Middle East.

erlehmann_ 10y ago
Starting that war might have advanced some of his goals. Depending on them, it might seem or have seemed clever. I think it is dangerous to confuse “clever” and “evil”.
dongslol 10y ago
Christopher Hitchens also thought invading Iraq was a good idea.
- CoolGuySteve 10y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
  - gozur88 10y ago
    I keep seeing that more and more from people on the left, particularly in contexts where it doesn't make sense. Like this one. You can't believe, at the same time, that Bush was stupid because he invaded Iraq and Hitchens was very intelligent even though he supported the invasion. That's not whataboutism.
    - CoolGuySteve 10y ago
      "attempts to discredit the opponent's position by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with that position, without directly refuting or disproving the opponent's initial argument." Sounds exactly like whataboutism. Look, Bush knew confidential information that no one outside the government could and still made those decisions. Stop trying to deflect this with some unrelated person who wasn't in the government, had no security clearance, and had nothing to do with the invasion. It's simply irrelevant.
      - gozur88 10y ago
        >Sounds exactly like whataboutism. Nope. This is simple inductive reasoning. > Look, Bush knew confidential information that no one outside the government could and still made those decisions. Yes, and they were probably reasonable decisions, given what he knew at the time. >Stop trying to deflect this with some unrelated person who wasn't in the government, had no security clearance, and had nothing to do with the invasion. It's simply irrelevant. It would be irrelevant if people who also don't have information no one outside the government could are using the Iraq war to draw conclusions about Bush's intelligence.
twoodfin 10y ago
The phrase "resulting in" does an awful lot of work in that claim. Who actually killed hundreds of thousands of civilians? Who's to say the hundreds of thousands of civilians who have died in Syria over the past few years might not have been saved if the Western powers had taken more action? Does that make their leaders "profoundly stupid"?
Sharlin 10y ago
Hindsight is always 20/20.

Starting that war might have advanced some of his goals. Depending on them, it might seem or have seemed clever. I think it is dangerous to confuse “clever” and “evil”.

dongslol 10y ago

Christopher Hitchens also thought invading Iraq was a good idea.

CoolGuySteve 10y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
- gozur88 10y ago
  I keep seeing that more and more from people on the left, particularly in contexts where it doesn't make sense. Like this one. You can't believe, at the same time, that Bush was stupid because he invaded Iraq and Hitchens was very intelligent even though he supported the invasion. That's not whataboutism.
  - CoolGuySteve 10y ago
    "attempts to discredit the opponent's position by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with that position, without directly refuting or disproving the opponent's initial argument." Sounds exactly like whataboutism. Look, Bush knew confidential information that no one outside the government could and still made those decisions. Stop trying to deflect this with some unrelated person who wasn't in the government, had no security clearance, and had nothing to do with the invasion. It's simply irrelevant.
    - gozur88 10y ago
      >Sounds exactly like whataboutism. Nope. This is simple inductive reasoning. > Look, Bush knew confidential information that no one outside the government could and still made those decisions. Yes, and they were probably reasonable decisions, given what he knew at the time. >Stop trying to deflect this with some unrelated person who wasn't in the government, had no security clearance, and had nothing to do with the invasion. It's simply irrelevant. It would be irrelevant if people who also don't have information no one outside the government could are using the Iraq war to draw conclusions about Bush's intelligence.

twoodfin 10y ago

The phrase "resulting in" does an awful lot of work in that claim. Who actually killed hundreds of thousands of civilians? Who's to say the hundreds of thousands of civilians who have died in Syria over the past few years might not have been saved if the Western powers had taken more action? Does that make their leaders "profoundly stupid"?

Sharlin 10y ago

Hindsight is always 20/20.