The Blog | David Swanson: Sheehan Breakthroughs, Unbridgeable Divides, and Taboos Unbroken | The Huffington Post: “The big divide here is between those who believe the war was based on good reasons and those who believe it was based on blatant lies that have been extensively documented. “This is binary thinking. It makes for neater graphs. Easier to report when every issue is shoved onto a Home vs Visitors scoreboard. I confess that one of my favorite t-shirts says “There are 10 types of people: those who understand binary and those who don’t”. My favorite college class was Logic 101, where statements are X or non-X (with the added twists of some and all). And Swanson’s premise neatly follows that pattern, although my professor would have made him rewrite it as: No people who believe the war was based on good reasons are people who believe it was based on blatant lies that have been extensively documented. Well, except for those who believe…
- The reasons given to the public do not accurately reflect the reasons that the individuals involved pursued this course
- The reasons given to the public may be good but do not justify military action
- The “real” reasons may be good but do not justify military action
- The reasons given to the public, accurate or inaccurate, do not justify military action; however, the “real” reasons do
- …shall I go on?
I suppose it is difficult to take sides on a polyhedral issue.