SI
SI
discoversearch

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 ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: mistermj who wrote (215743)1/31/2007 4:06:24 PM
From: neolib  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
I maintain that any reasonable person would agree that Iraq has nothing at all to do with global warming.

Yes, an obvious observation with which I agree. Question to you: Why do you think I would not agree?

If you want to hold onto that position...go ahead.

I've never said that Iraq had anything to do with global warming. I suppose it does in the sense that oil was a factor in the war, and oil is a factor in global warming. So one might argue that Bush's goal was to continue ensuring that human global warming has a safe future. But I'm not making that claim.

It's a great case study and gives valuable insight into the liberal "logic" of global warming "science".

It's a great case study in how you can't follow a simple discussion.

The question has always been one of Bush's decision making processes. Iraq showcases one for which we have before and after data, on which the vast bulk of intelligent people agree with what the after data is. The pussyfoot answer you have given so far indicates you don't fall in the latter group.

Global warming remains one for which we are largely in the before stage, so nobody gets to play hindsight games.

Be a man and place your bets in public. Will Bush's stance on global warming be vindicated or not?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext