Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: geode00 who wrote (200204)	8/30/2006 12:04:51 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) of 281500

The US did provide arms to Saddam but only a small portion of his arms. The USSR provided the majority, and we were not even in the ten of Iraq's arms suppliers command-post.org In any case even if we were Iraq's top arms supplier (rather than a supplier of about 1% of Iraq's weapons) it still wouldn't support sylvester80's "Ronald Reagan gave Saddam the poison gas" which was the original point of debate, and which neither of you have conceded. If you want to say "we gave them helicopters" than yes your correct we sold 60 helicopters to Iraq. But that hardly amounts to giving Iraq chemical weapons or even the moral equivalent of giving Iraq chemical weapons. and change the debate by whining about form. The problem with your form is that you are indeed changing the debate, but pretending your not. You could either stay on topic, or concede the point and raise another but you don't. Instead you put together an argument for one thing and pretend you have proved another. That's not just some obscure technical violation of some artificial debate form, its a fundamental logical fallacy.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next