An analogy asserts that because two things are comparable in some respects, they are comparable in other respects as well.
This analogy false because warfare aims for clear victory over a specific, organized enemy, whereas the complete eradication of illegal drugs is impossible and, in any event the "enemy" isn't well defined: the drugs themselves? users? sellers? producers? the producing nations?
If you agree of disagree please state why.
2007-11-16 15:58:54 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
To clarify I am talking about illegal drugs. To those of you intelligent enough to understand what a false analogy is, I am asking if you think this is one or not. Your opinion on illegal drugs has nothing to do with the question.
2007-11-16 16:20:15 · update #1
Your opinion on what it is supposed to be, is also irrelevant. It is either a false analogy or it is not, explain why you think either or.
2007-11-16 16:29:44 · update #2
Wars rarely result in the complete eradication of an enemy. Even when defeated simmering nationalism and hostility exists and often reassert themselves in more war. This is true of the fight to get rid of illegal drugs so the analogy is apt.
2007-11-16 16:06:36 · answer #1 · answered by Michael da Man 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Considering that most of todays drugs were almost non-existant up till the 1960s and the general population was getting better by the generation up until the 60s, makes you wonder. Ever since then, more and more illegal and harmful drugs have been made and used. And making them legal to the general populace would be a bad thing to do. Considering how many people get addicted to legal drugs often enough, makes you wonder what would happen if Marijuana was legal, or many other drugs.
2007-11-17 00:07:32 · answer #2 · answered by Chase 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I disagree.
Nixon began the war on drugs in order to clear our streets of the hordes of hippies that were scrambling to pick over my half nibbled french fries from the trash can at McDonald's 40 years ago.
(Before I had even a chance of talking a step away.)
I haven't seen one do that in many, many years.
The original war on drugs was very successful.
2007-11-17 00:40:01 · answer #3 · answered by wider scope 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, what do you think of the thought of having a "Drug Czar." I always that that analogy was a bit odd as well. You're right, without a clearly defined goal, achieving it is going to be tough...
2007-11-17 00:05:09 · answer #4 · answered by george p 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It is propaganda from the elite who do not want americans trying drugs as they expand consciousness and enable a person to see past the lies
notice the greatest minds of history were all addicts or recreational users
i do not support addiction but recreational use for creative endeavors
2007-11-17 00:03:30 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
It wasn't created to be accurate. It was created to catch people's attention and gain support. And it worked. And a blank check was handed over.
Makes you wonder about the "War on Terror," too, doesn't it?
2007-11-17 00:02:33 · answer #6 · answered by Buying is Voting 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
you do understand what a "buzz-phrase" is right?
Right-wingers appear to be more responsive to the buzz-word war attached to anything.
Making drugs illegal, only pushed the price of them up, making them more appealing to sell, and also lended to the enticement of the taboo.
2007-11-17 00:18:38 · answer #7 · answered by Boss H 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Agree.
ALL drugs should be legal.
Prohibition in the USA proved that!
2007-11-17 00:07:47 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
look what happened to these two when they tried to stop drug a smuggling suspect
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,311996,00.html
2007-11-17 00:28:47 · answer #9 · answered by screw ball 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Its like the "WAR" on terror.... Repube's always need wars.
2007-11-17 00:12:03 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋