pudge's Journal: More Troops in Iraq

Why is everyone up in arms about Bush's plan to send more troops to Iraq when almost no one who has an opinion actually has the remotest idea of whether it's the right thing to do?

Just curious.

Update I am not saying you shouldn't have an opinion. Just ... most people seem to think their opinion on this is Right, when for most of those people, they have no way of knowing. I was convinced many months ago by Senator McCain to support the idea of more troops, but I won't pretend I know it's the right thing to do. How should I, how could I, know?

Depends on how many troops

[NeMon'ess]

If it's 20,000 more troops, they won't be enough to change the way things are going in Iraq. If it's 200,000, that could be enough to effectively secure and stabilize enough of the country. Then the government and Iraqi military could get trained and move out to secure the rest.

Re:

[pudge]

If it's 20,000 more troops, they won't be enough to change the way things are going in Iraq.

And you know this ... how?

Re:

[NeMon'ess]

Ah see, I think I'm right because that's what people who should know what they're talking about are saying.

Re:

[pudge]

Ah see, I think I'm right because that's what people who should know what they're talking about are saying.

Um ... no. Some people who should know what they are talking about are saying that. And some others who should know what they are talking about are saying something the opposite.

Please don't cherry-pick experts to "prove" you are right.

Re:

[NeMon'ess]

Except it makes more sense to cherry-pick based on recent performance. Bush and the people he's been listening to completely screwed up Iraq. That's a strong reason not to listen to his experts.

I cannot "prove" I'm right about these assertions, but I'm telling you why I think I'm right. In retrospect I needent have bothered, because when you said "almost" in the journal entry, you accounted for the small number of people who have an opinion who actually have the remotest idea of whether it's the right th

Re:

[pudge]

Except it makes more sense to cherry-pick based on recent performance.

Uh ... no.

Bush and the people he's been listening to completely screwed up Iraq. That's a strong reason not to listen to his experts.

Yes, people like John Abizaid. Oh wait, he is against more troops. Well, he should listen to people who have disagreed with most of what he's been doing like Joe Biden and John McCain. Oh wait, they agree with him. :-) OK, Biden's saying No now, but he's been suggesting it for years, even leading up to the recent election, and his partisanship on his flip-flop is utterly transparent. Hell, Biden can practically claim Bush's proposal for more troops was his idea.

Sure, you could say Abizaid a

Read your history

[Dark Coder]

Until you've purported to understand the various history regarding wars and conflict and its impact toward today's latest and greatest military tactics (specifically urban warfare,) I'd say you're talking "argumentum ad hominem."

A good starting reading material would be Sun Tzu and Machiavellian. Be sure to finish it off with "Handbookd for Joint Urban Operations [dtic.mil]."

After, you reconcile your oh-so-deep insight of world's humanitarianism with current U.S. military objectives; come back here.

Human nature is ne

Re:

[pudge]

Until you've purported to understand the various history regarding wars and conflict and its impact toward today's latest and greatest military tactics (specifically urban warfare,) I'd say you're talking "argumentum ad hominem."

And I'd say you don't know what "argumentum ad hominem" means. I did not attack him personally, let alone direct my arguments at him instead of the topic at hand.

I was simply asking him to defend his certainty by actually telling me how he knows what he knows. That is a perfectly valid request under any conditions.

After, you reconcile your oh-so-deep insight of world's humanitarianism with current U.S. military objectives; come back here.

I'm sorry, I thought this was MY journal.

And I have no idea what you think you're talking about. World's humanitarianism?

Human nature is never simple.

And I wasn't talking about human nature. I am talking about the fact

Not an uncommon delusion...

[johndiii]

The notion that one's opinion is *Right*, that is. It requires a basic attitude change, one that (in my opinion) marks the change from a child's habit of thought to an adult's - the recognition that there are other people out there, of coequal status with one's self. It is a realization of the appropriate place of the mature self in the world. I think that there are many people who do not fully absorb this.

It also requires some attention, some thought, to discriminate between one's perceptions and reality. Many people are too lazy to do this, or just never worked to acquire the correct habit.

The brain seems to be built for categorization and judgement. Mature thought requires the ability to ignore those first conclusions at times.

That's what I think, anyway. :-) I could be wrong. The fun part is discussing it and learning something, of coming to a better appreciation of the way that the world really is. It's a wonderfully interesting place, if you make the effort to look at what it really is.