The same facts can have different weight depending on what the point of your argument is. for example:
-For those who believe the invasion of Iraq was wrong the recent discovery of old chemical rounds is insignificant and more like a "lucky accident" for the administration than proof that they were telling the truth about WMD's.
-To people such as myself who believed that saddam was evil and needed to go, any evidence that satisfies the requisite justification (in this case that he had WMD's) was good enough.
I'm not stating my reasons for taking the above position here as that was not the question asked.
2006-06-26 20:02:05
·
answer #1
·
answered by RunningOnMT 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Excellent question.
The problem is that many people who get quite vocal and animated about this subject have no "first hand" knowledge of Iraq, Politics, War or many of the other attributed subjects (such as oil).
Therefore you find that the conservative pro war lobby get their information from the press which varies wildly in terms of accuracy, and the left wing liberal anti-war lobby gets its information from the left wing press and the Internet which has become some kind of a bible for conspiracy theorists.
The truth is always going to lie somewhere between the two.
The trouble is that people will form an opinion first and then go and look for the facts to support it, and once they find those "facts" they will not question them.
Regrettably debate in our western society has now become so hate filled and personality driven that people no longer debate or argue to learn, persuade, or be persuaded. Its a battle of dogma's.
I would tend to listen to people who are either there or have been there (first hand and not "as reported"), and to understand and research the wider issues. Having been out there a number of times for various reasons it becomes quite easy to see the more obvious bullshite that people spout.
Also apply some common sense and logic to what you are being told before believing it. For instance the conspiracy theory around the government being responsible for 9/11 and using remote controlled airliners etc. I think we can all agree that 9/11 was not an overnight plan so therefore any government involvement would have had to have involved the Clinton administration and not Bush, so suddenly the theory doesnt help make the case against Bush.
My advice to conservatives would be to understand that the government has other agendas other than WMD's, and we will probably never know what they are.
My advice to the liberals is to learn something about the region, the issues, the combatants and the conflict before swallowing everything you read on the internet.
My advice to all is to leave the comfort of safesville USA, get a passport and travel the world and experience it as it will give you a much better idea of what is going on than a 42 inch T.V screen or a 17 inch monitor.
And finally to everyone please stop repeating the slogans from placards. If you really do think that this is about oil, then be prepared to argue with unimpeachable facts how the production and export of oil from Iraq has changed in the U.S favour since the war, or simply don't say it.
2006-06-26 21:17:40
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Great question; but people obtain the same data and view them differently.
The "right" currently is saying there was weapons of mass destruction found.
The "left" is saying its just old mustard gas.
Neither side is right. The mustard gas was in artillery shells and not really easily configured to be used by terrorist. However they also found sarin gas which can be. The sames facts are out there; but two groups will interpret them differently.
2006-06-26 18:18:59
·
answer #3
·
answered by netjr 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
In some cases it is because people lie. I like to believe that in most cases it is because people interpret a hazy fact in different ways based on their past experiences. and that they are not lying or trying to push something, but rather are merely defending what they truly believe is just.
By the way, why attack the question, guys? This is type of question that begins true and honest discourse. If you can keep your cool.
2006-06-26 18:18:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by nagurski3 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Everyone knows the fact about Iraq; no body wants to accept it, humans are evil.
2006-06-26 18:26:57
·
answer #5
·
answered by kasar777 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Some people just choose to ignore what makes their theory uncomfortable, or tout up other "facts" which don't actually match what is going on. (this second part is a particular favorite of this current Administration).
2006-06-26 18:16:48
·
answer #6
·
answered by PermDude 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
You say that with a hint of self-righteousness. Like your facts are all true and everyone else's facts are false.
Like most on the left your opinions fume with hypocrisy.
2006-06-26 18:18:04
·
answer #7
·
answered by 3rd parties for REAL CHANGE 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because we are not given the facts. We are fed a steady diet of what our govt. and our media wants us to think.This changes colors depending on where you are and who is serving up the news.
I think we recall George W.'s favorite answer,"Due to security reasons-we can't tell ya"
2006-06-26 18:22:05
·
answer #8
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because Liberals lie. So really only Conservatives have facts.
2006-06-26 18:18:09
·
answer #9
·
answered by Boob 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Sometimes people change what they hear to support their opinions. Sometimes facts aren't confirmed true, but broadcast by the media anyway and people believe everything they hear.
2006-06-26 18:21:31
·
answer #10
·
answered by dreamgurl009 2
·
0⤊
0⤋