Bad Logic

Before getting a gmail account, my main e-mail account used to be People used to wonder at such a bizarre name for an online account and my rationale was that I was attacking bad logic. I had been in a debate on abortion (which I really don’t have a strong opinion about one way or the other) but I kept attacking what I saw as irrational arguments coming from the pro-choice side. The pro-life side had some bad arguments too but the pro-choice side was easier to tear apart.

“It’s my body!”

“Ok, then you’re fair game if you’re in my house.”

“No the same” they would protest. “A fetus is not a person.”

“Ok, so if I kick a pregnant woman in the stomach and make her lose the pregnancy then I should not be charged with murder, right?”

“You should be charged with murder because that’s the pregnant woman’s decision, it’s not up to you.”

“So a fetus is not a person unless the pregnant woman decides it is?”

“You’re being ridiculous and besides the point.”

“No, I should be able to kick as many pregnant women in the stomach as I want to and I should only be charged with assault on the woman. That logically follows from your premise.”

Thus the fetus_punter account was born.

Keep in mind, I’m not actually arguing against abortion rights here. I am simply attacking what I see as faulty logic. I can just as easily pop over to the other side of a debate and argue against the pro-lifers.

It is with this in mind that I’ve been over sniping at the libertarian girl. In addressing whether or not the war on Iraq was justified, she says yes because Sadaam started it by invading Kuwait and that he’s been attacking the US ever since. This is a non sequitor. Kuwait is not the one of the United States (I just checked a map to confirm this). If you contend that we had to free the Kuwaitis, then after kicking Iraq out we should have overthrown the Kuwaiti government and imposed freedom. Under their current government only 10% of their people are allowed to vote.

Now if you say the US was justified in invading Iraq because it was in the US interest to do so, I can buy that argument if the benefits outweigh the costs. Tell me we had to invade because Sadaam was a threat that needed to be eliminated and that’s the basis for a good argument. But neither of those arguments require the invasion of Kuwait as an imprimateur. Those arguments work just as well as stand-alones so to say the invasion of Kuwait justified the war on Iraq is not necessarily so.

That said, I don’t like war but I also see how bad a hostile peace with Cuba has been for the Cuban people. I see how damaging sanctions against Iraq were for the Iraqi people. If more good than bad comes out of the invasion of Iraq (and the ousting of Hussein was a great start), then you can say the ends justifies the means. What Iraq is to become will have a lot to do with that and only time will tell. My point of divergence with the libertarian girl then is that the justifcation for the war is in the ends, not in the beginning.

24 Responses to “Bad Logic”

  1. R says:

    You’re so smart! That’s sexy.

  2. guy in the UNLV jacket says:

    When you dig deep down and look at the causes and effects of most wars liberating opressed peoples is never the reason the first shots were fired. We “liberated” Kuwait in ’91 because of oil. If we were all about liberating conquered peoples we would have jumped on the whole Tibet thing in the 50’s. Liberated the Jews living in Palestine during the ’20s, then turned around and crushed the jews for opressing the Palestinians. The US would have crushed the white South Africans. We might have actually gone to war with Germany, Italy and Japan because of what they were doing to their conquered people instead of waiting to be attacked by the Japanese. The list goes on and on. War is all about socio economic interests right or wrong…..The illinformed American public doesn’t have the stomach to take the truth

  3. Mexigogue says:

    I remember once at the bar I was sitting with this really nice looking slut who was drunk and she was all over me. She said something that offended the guy across from us so he put finger in my face and said “You better check her!” I said “You better get your fucking hand out of my face!” and we almost had a fight.

    Then she was all happy and said “Thanks for defending me!” I was like huh? I wasn’t defending her, I was defending ME!

    I guess you could say I liberated her.

    Moral of the story: sluts can be cool!

  4. guy in the UNLV jacket says:

    Did you score her?

  5. guy in the UNLV jacket says:

    That Libertarian girl isn’t the brightest bulb in the bunch is she? I had to take a little snipe to see how she responds

  6. R says:

    “War is all about socio economic interests right or wrong…..The illinformed American public doesn’t have the stomach to take the truth”


  7. Phelps says:

    What’s sad is I saw the flaw in your Kuwait argument immediately. Voting is not an inherent or natural right. Nothing is inherently imposed upon you by not being able to vote. If your property rights are secure, your right to liberty and movement is secure, and your right to life (freedom from violence) is secure, then it doesn’t matter (from a libertarian standpoint) whether you can vote or not.

    Voting is a good mechanism for keeping those rights, but it isn’t a requirement.

    Also, I think you know my position on abortion. Children are chattel. Kicking a pregnant woman and causing her to miscarry isn’t murder — it’s vandalism.

  8. Mexigogue says:

    Kicking a pregnant woman and causing her to miscarry isn’t murder — it’s vandalism.


    And no I didn’t score with that chick. Right after she thanked me for “defending” her, some other BS almost broke out and she and this other chick ended up slipping out before all heck broke loose.

  9. guy in the UNLV jacket says:

    She must have been a lesbian like those chicks at Leroy’s

  10. Phelps says:

    You know, G, when I saw “she slipped out the back with another chick” I thought lesbian wihthout even thinking about that line.

  11. Phelps says:

    Oh, and after re-reading the original post, I would also say don’t confuse the reason for the war with the casus belli. The casus belli has always been an excuse, and nothing more. (And I mean always as in always, not just this war.)

    The casus belli this war was the failure to comply with the 91 treaty, and the 91 treaty was a result of a war whose casus belli was a resolution of the UN.

    The real reason for the 91 war was that Saddam was using Kuwait as a casus belli for an invasion of Saudi Arabia. The real reason for this war is that the US is using Iraq as a stepping stone for modernizing the middle east through Iraq (along the lines of pre-Syrian invasion Lebanon) and as a battle front for Iran and Syria. Saudi Arabia, since it was complicit in the 9/11 attacks could no longer be relied on, or even considered an ally. We needed real estate for air bases and rear areas, and the SA penninsula was out. Also, look at this map: Syria and Iran, the two big boys, are surrounded and SA is cut off. Anyone who has played Risk can tell you that Syria and Iran are now martially fucked.

    Red and Green for Terrorist and Anti-terorist, darker colors for “leaning that direction but won’t help in any event”:

  12. Mexigogue says:

    I can’t wait until the next time some sucka steps on my foot at Leroy’s. I’ma be like “Yo, what’s up wit the causus belli?”

  13. Jive Turkey says:

    Non sequitor dawg, just because I stepped on your foot don’t mean I meant to do it.

  14. Mexigogue says:

    Naw but you was over there talkin’ smack to me and then you happen to step on my dogs? Ad hoc ergo propter hoc mufucka!

  15. Jive Turkey says:

    I ain’t said I didn’t mean to do it neither. Nolo contendere foo!

  16. Amicusser says:

    Yo yo yo, bitch! That wasn’t his foot, that was my foot, biatch! You better nunc pro tunc his shiznit and get ready for the duces tecum I’m about to deliver on your candy ass!

  17. Mexigogue says:

    I do believed we’ve happened upon an alternate slang for ghetto overachievers!

  18. guy in the UNLV jacket says:

    Way down in Leroy’s deep some Jive Ass Turkey stepped on the Mexigouge’s feet. The Mexigouge said causus belli can’t you see? You’re standing on my GodDamned feet
    The Mexigouge played pool in Leroy’s deep with a cue made from an old oak tree
    Gettin’ drunk every day of the week.
    Everyday before the sun go down
    That Jive Ass Trukey would kick his ass all through the Leroy’s town……

  19. Mexigogue says:

    Hey nice poem guy! that reminds me of my Leroy’s Pool Shooting Poem. I don’t know if it’s bad form to recycle old posts but the newbees haven’t seen this.

  20. MiAn says:

    >>she says yes because Sadaam started it by invading Kuwait and that he’s been attacking the US ever since.

    He has…been attacking the US ever since invading kuwait (until recently, that is). Our planes were rubbing his nose in our 1991 victory by denying him the tasty treat of more kurdish and shiite air slaughters (credible reports indicate that this deeply affected his capacity in the sack: igniting an oil-for-viagra scandal), and he was shooting at us.

    I got your non sequitor right here palie!

  21. MiAn says:

    >>Children are chattel. Kicking a pregnant woman and causing her to miscarry isn’t murder — it’s vandalism.

    Property rights aren’t what they used to be. I don’t necessarily have problem with your comparison, but most people don’t understand how important property is to freedom. Can we agree that the punishment should include getting a cap between the eyes?

    (Why is it I can’t imagine Phelps not being up for a good shooting?)

  22. The "D" says:

    I miss another good post!!! This is becoming a habit. Could it be me? I wonder if the quality of the blog decreases when the “D” is in the house?

    I am crushed!

  23. Jeremy says:

    Isn’t anybody gonna bust on Libertarian Girl?


  24. Amicusser says:

    LG is a gimmick. She’ll get hits from me when she adds an RSS feed or posts some nipplige.