Again you assume that Bush was the only one "generating" political and public pressure. That is the logical conclusion of your argument.

No, I do not make any such assumption. And no, it's not a conclusion of my argument. (You're also confusing 'assumptions' with 'conclusions' in these two sentences.)

If you think it's a logical conclusion, let's see your logical argument reaching that conclusion.

Bush need not be the *only* source of pressure for him to still be *responsible* for the pressure he *did* generate.

But was he *a* source? Was he not, in fact, one of the most *important* sources, being the president and all?

No. Bush wasn't liked a whole lot during this time, but Congress still gave the green light for the Iraq invasion.

Thus the simple explanation that Bush was the ultimate cause for the invasion of Iraq cannot be sustained.

I did not claim he's the 'ultimate cause' for the Iraq War. I don't even think the concept of 'ultimate cause' is useful for much of anything at all, especially in social/political contexts. You are inventing an 'explanation' I didn't make.

He need not be an 'ultimate' cause to still be responsible for *his part* in it.

No. Bush wasn't liked a whole lot during this time, but Congress still gave the green light for the Iraq invasion.

Why did they?

Can a puppet be responsible?

You criticised Jai earlier for not knowing the history of the Iraq war and worded in such a way implying you did. So please by all means, justify Saddam's actions like every other anti Bush liberal of our time

Let me put my argument this way: Bush wasn't the manufacturer of the justifications for the Iraq war. He was just the puppet spokesmen who revealed and explained them to the world.

So, according to *your* theory, Bush was just a puppet? Geez, I couldn't make this stuff up!

So, are you saying that *anybody* who becomes president would automatically become a puppet? Was Bush special or typical in his puppet-hood?

Either way, it doesn't look good for Bush. Or the people who voted for him, or the people who listened to him about the Iraq War. Or the US as a 'democracy'.

Edited 12/31/2015 00:38:15

Bush need not be the *only* source of pressure for him to still be *responsible* for the pressure he *did* generate.

LOL. But I never said he wasn't responsible!!! Again you're not admitting to the fact that external actors would have pushed for an invasion of Iraq regardless of who the president was. That was the crux of my original question. Forget Bush. How would an Al Gore president have differed in terms of the Iraq War question. I understand you have a deep seated hatred for Bush (which may or may not be completely justified). But my question is a hypothetical situation. If you don't like engaging in hypothetical situations just say so lol...no need for a forum war. You just like getting into arguments I feel :P

it doesn't look good for Bush. Or the people who voted for him, or the people who listened to him about the Iraq War.

At this point I don't understand why we're arguing. I agree with this!!! I never supported Bush nor the neocons. I'm not a neocon. I think anyone who though Iraq had a nuke or a WMD is nuts.

Edited 12/31/2015 00:41:19

wct some advice take a trip to America, stay a couple of years, then judge us. If it wasn't for America this entire dam world would be either Fascist or communist

LOL. But I never said he wasn't responsible!!! Again you're not admitting to the fact that external actors would have pushed for an invasion of Iraq regardless of who the president was.

I'm sorry, but this is just a fail.

Other countries, who normally *do* support US wars, such as Canada, did *not* buy the 'bad intelligence', and did *not* make PR campaigns to try to sell the war to their people.

The only way your claim could work is if, as you've just about said already, *any* president would have done exactly as Bush did, because the presidency is just a puppet title.

If that's the case, why do you hate Obama so much? He's just a puppet. Or the Clintons? Puppets. They have no power, apparently, of their own. They just follow the dictates of the secret cabal pulling all the strings behind the curtains.

For that matter, why do you care who gets elected this election?

You yourself don't even believe your own theory. That's how bad it is.

wct some advice take a trip to America, stay a couple of years, then judge us. If it wasn't for America this entire dam world would be either Fascist or communist

Take your own advice and travel the world to meet people of other cultures, to get a better perspective on the reality of this *one* planet we all have to share.

I've been exposed to US media and politics since I was born. If you think no one can have any insight into American culture unless they happen to have US citizenship, you're fooling yourself. Most US citizens aren't even well-informed when it comes to US politics. If they were, they sure as hell wouldn't have voted for Bush *twice*.

You criticised Jai earlier for not knowing the history of the Iraq war and worded in such a way implying you did.

You might want to consider the difference between "Wct you claim you know every single fact about the Iraq war and it's prior history" and "You criticised Jai earlier for not knowing the history of the Iraq war".

did *not* make PR campaigns to try to sell the war to their people.

You do realize all wars (no matter how justified or right) have to be supported by a domestic and international propaganda war to maintain popular support for the overall war?

The only way your claim could work is if, as you've just about said already, *any* president would have done exactly as Bush did, because the presidency is just a puppet title.

Again I was asking you about a hypothetical scenario where Bush would not have been president, but where Al Gore would have been in office. Clearly you can't use facts, critical thinking, historical analysis, or predictive abilities to explain what would have happened. I'm asking you to make a prediction.

If that's the case, why do you hate Obama so much? He's just a puppet. Or the Clintons? Puppets. They have no power, apparently, of their own. They just follow the dictates of the secret cabal pulling all the strings behind the curtains.

"Every candidate for President since 1936 has been nominated by the Chase National Bank” – Sen. Robert A. Taft

Yes every president is a puppet. If you don't believe every president serves or is influenced in every decision by a horde of national security advisers, economists, career bureaucrats, university professors, interest group lobbyists, and other politicians then you have no grip on reality. Obviously the President has some autonomy, but the scope of that autonomy must be severely limited given the amount of pressure these external players can produce. Also I never said I hated Obama so I don't know where you got that. I dislike the policies implemented by Bush. I hate the policies implemented by the Obama administration. I don't hate the man. He's my president. I'm much too patriotic to declare hatred for my executive leader. I'm pretty sure you're allegation that I hate Obama "so much" is what you would call a straw man fallacy. You know there's a wikipedia page I could give you to learn about fallacious arguments ;)

Edited 12/31/2015 01:04:21

At this point I don't understand why we're arguing. I agree with this!!! I never supported Bush nor the neocons. I'm not a neocon. I think anyone who though Iraq had a nuke or a WMD is nuts.

Well I'm glad about this, but I hope you can understand the confusion which arose from your initial reply to my reply to The Conservative who had been going on about how great Bush was at 'uniting' the country after 9/11.

After your reply asking if Gore would have avoided the Iraq War, in this context, it sounds a lot like, "Bush was the better choice anyway, because his worst fuck up would have been made by Gore regardless."

So, instead of assuming that (I apologize for that; hope you can understand why I thought that, in context), let me just ask you straight out: Do you think Bush was a better choice than Gore in their election contest, using all the powers of 20/20 hindsight, having seen the consequences of Bush's presidency? It's a hypothetical.

(Perhaps, if you pretend to believe the puppet theory, you could try to argue that Gore would have made no difference. But I don't want to put words in your mouth.)

You do realize all wars (no matter how justified or right) have to be supported by a domestic and international propaganda war to maintain popular support for the overall war?

And you do realize that generating propaganda for an unjust war is something that one should be held responsible for, right?

Yes every president is a puppet. If you don't believe every president serves or is influenced in every decision by a horde of national security advisers, economists, career bureaucrats, university professors, interest group lobbyists, and other politicians then you have no grip on reality.

This is not what is meant by a puppet. A puppet is not merely 'influenced', but controlled. They have no power. They make no decisions of their own. You could get a tape-recorder to do the puppet's job if only you didn't need a live body to keep the masses fooled.

A president (unless your theory really is true) makes decisions. They listen to their advisers, but *they* make the final decisions. Right? Or do you disagree on even this basic point?

Also I never said I hated Obama so I don't know where you got that.

It brushed off from The Conservative when you replied into our ongoing sub-thread. Sorry.

A fucking failure.

Do you think Bush was a better choice than Gore in their election contest, using all the powers of 20/20 hindsight, having seen the consequences of Bush's presidency? It's a hypothetical.

Is neither an option hahahaha? I supported Pat Buchanan who ran on the Reform Party ticket for 2000. He's a paleoconservative. After the fall of communism and the USSR he was the fiercest opponent on the right for the huge military defense budgets and the expansion of the quasi-American empire. Bush was always an eastern establishment neoconservative, and Pat opposed almost every one of his foreign and economic policies. That being said if you're really forcing me to pick just between Bush and Gore to be honest I would vote Gore. Not because of the Iraq war but because of environmental protectionism. I disagree completely with climate skeptics on the right and I agree with Christians who advocate for stewardship: it is the responsibility of humans to protect and maintain the land provided by God for all natural beings. Although I probably disagree with Gore on how the environment should be protected. I never really saw Bush as a "smart guy" anyway. He was a good man at heart...I just disagree with too much of his political philosophy.

Ok, thanks for that clarification. My assumption was indeed mistaken. Apologies.

[ETA: In return, I'll answer your original question straight out: No, Gore would certainly not have supported the Iraq War if he had been president. It took a lot of effort to push the Iraq War and make it a reality; it was not a forgone conclusion as you seem to think. Bush's administration was one of the primary (if not *the* primary) forces enacting all this effort; and that, by definition, includes Bush himself. Just about any reasonable person in the position of president at that time would not have supported the Iraq War. Obviously, I don't consider Tony Blair a 'reasonable person'.]

Edited 12/31/2015 01:41:39

ehh I never would have voted for gore. i just could never support a pro abortion ticked anyway not to mention his arrogance disgusted me. that's one thing people made fun of bush for being that i never saw....arrogance. heck, i think bill Clinton would do a better job running the country then al gore. Clinton, JFK, Truman, And Andrew Jackson were my fav democrat presidents. Clinton because....well for some odd reason we prospered under him. JFK because his policy against the USSR ( one which you would never see in a modern day democrat ever ) Truman because of his marshal Plan and his willingness to work with conservatives. Jackson because he made some good points even though his braking up of the big banks was illegal

Edited 12/31/2015 01:51:20

So Conservative, you think abortion is terrible in all cases?

Imagine a 13 year old girl who has been impregnated by a horrible paedophilic rapist, and she is in no position to give birth; let alone raise the child. What do you tell her? She can't get an abortion?