Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: The Realist Perspective of International Relations  (Read 5685 times)

lp4law

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 762
  • super genius
    • View Profile
Re: The Realist Perspective of International Relations
« Reply #110 on: February 27, 2005, 09:34:04 PM »
Well, actually he did lie.  He is quoted as saying that there are WMD in Iraq, and then came back earlier this year and admitted there were none.  That counts as a lie in my mind... Maybe I'm wrong.

I love how you conveniently ignore another very likely possibility, that Bush might have actually made his statements and decisions based upon the best information available at the time, and that information may have turned out to be inaccurate or incomplete.  To me this speaks volumes about your political persuasion.  Am I wrong?
"What we do in life...echoes in eternity." -- Gladiator

VinnyMyCousin

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 314
  • Say you'll do the job.
    • View Profile
Re: The Realist Perspective of International Relations
« Reply #111 on: February 27, 2005, 09:38:20 PM »
Maybe I'm wrong.

You're right here  ;)

vagrant

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 556
    • View Profile
Re: The Realist Perspective of International Relations
« Reply #112 on: February 27, 2005, 09:43:45 PM »
Let's say I'm a president and I am dead set on invading a country.  I want to trump up a reason to go to war.. so I say they have toxic cottage cheese.  If I went to all that trouble to lie, knowing that it would be exposed by my invasion, don't you think the average jr. high kid would at least be smart enough to .. I don't know.. plant fake cottage cheese to make it look like my reason was valid?

Bush may not be the brightest academic in the box, but the guy had street smarts enough to pull out two elections, surround himself with strong advisors, and pick a VP that is the best insurance against assasination in our history.  I think he could figure out that he needed to plant evidence to back his "lie".

LaneSwerver

  • Guest
Re: The Realist Perspective of International Relations
« Reply #113 on: February 27, 2005, 09:45:41 PM »
so I say they have toxic cottage cheese. 

That could just be a nasty yeast infection.

vagrant

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 556
    • View Profile
Re: The Realist Perspective of International Relations
« Reply #114 on: February 27, 2005, 09:47:34 PM »
so I say they have toxic cottage cheese. 

That could just be a nasty yeast infection.

or bad cellulite (sp?)

lawbuddy

  • Guest
Re: The Realist Perspective of International Relations
« Reply #115 on: February 27, 2005, 09:48:46 PM »
Well, actually he did lie.  He is quoted as saying that there are WMD in Iraq, and then came back earlier this year and admitted there were none.  That counts as a lie in my mind...

So if you're on the phone with your mom on a Sunday night during the semester and you say you have to go to bed early to go to class the next day...and then come Monday morning, your roommate informs you that it's a holiday and that there are no classes, did you lie to your mom?

Are you seriously asking that question?  If I say that there is class in the morning, and then there is not, then it was a lie.  I misrepresented the truth.

Now, do I feel bad about it?  No, hell no.  It was an honest mistake, even though it was a lie.

With Bush, he did lie by those guidelines, but more importantly, he didn't have an educated assumption that there were Nuclear weapons programs. In fact, the IAEA--as well as many foreign intelligence communities--had repeatedly stated exactly the opposite.  So basically, he went on a whim supported only by [barely] even circumstancial evidence presented by the CIA, since he figured it "could" be true, if all these other dominoes had fallen.

Let me rephrase that to fit the analogy.  The class schedule/syllabus, upon which everyone else in the class normally relies (think presidents=classmates) specifically stated to him that there was no school on Monday, and then he told his mom (the public) that there was school Monday, so that he could get off the phone (go to war).  Then, the next morning (after the invasion), a friend tells him that there is no class that day (the inspectors confirm no WMD), confirming what he had already known in the first place, but had chosen to disregard.

That's the president we have.

Then again, he's now getting lavished praise by his mother for having gone to bed early for school, even though there was none, because that's what good little boys do, and therefore he must be a good little boy.

I personally think he got off the phone because he had some hooker in the back seat of his car with a pound of coke, promising him the world (that hooker would be special interests including oil, 9/11 reactionaries, the religious right, and halliburton and other nationbuilding corps., to name just a few)

lawbuddy

  • Guest
Re: The Realist Perspective of International Relations
« Reply #116 on: February 27, 2005, 09:50:58 PM »
Let's say I'm a president and I am dead set on invading a country.  I want to trump up a reason to go to war.. so I say they have toxic cottage cheese.  If I went to all that trouble to lie, knowing that it would be exposed by my invasion, don't you think the average jr. high kid would at least be smart enough to .. I don't know.. plant fake cottage cheese to make it look like my reason was valid?

Bush may not be the brightest academic in the box, but the guy had street smarts enough to pull out two elections, surround himself with strong advisors, and pick a VP that is the best insurance against assasination in our history.  I think he could figure out that he needed to plant evidence to back his "lie".

Um, no, sorry.  Not covering up your mistakes is not proof you made no mistake.

That's like saying "hey, if I had killed him, I would have washed the blood off of my clothes.  Since I didn't, I obviously just happened to be standing in the room, soaked in brain matter, with the smoking gun in my hand, at the moment you walked in."

vagrant

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 556
    • View Profile
Re: The Realist Perspective of International Relations
« Reply #117 on: February 27, 2005, 09:51:50 PM »
so first its a lie.. then its a mistake?  you don't even know, do you?

lawbuddy

  • Guest
Re: The Realist Perspective of International Relations
« Reply #118 on: February 27, 2005, 09:53:18 PM »
so first its a lie.. then its a mistake?  you don't even know, do you?

Excuse me?

The word "mistake" can refer to a lie.  My story, nor my opinion, has not changed.

vagrant

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 556
    • View Profile
Re: The Realist Perspective of International Relations
« Reply #119 on: February 27, 2005, 09:56:31 PM »
so first its a lie.. then its a mistake?  you don't even know, do you?

Excuse me?

The word "mistake" can refer to a lie.  My story, nor my opinion, has not changed.

Brainwashing runs deep.

You are making a case for "proof" where there is none.  There are two possibilities that probably both have some merit.  Are you entirelly unable to see that?