Perspectives on Going to War in Iraq

Former President George Bush used a lot of historical fact to Justify his argument of invading Iraq. He said things such as: Iraq’s technological abilities, their weapons of mass destruction, and Saddam Hussein’s previous threats against the US. He sounds like he has significant evidence to back up his speech, until he said “Many people have asked how close Saddam Hussein is to developing a nuclear weapon. Well, we dont know exactly… This statement only disapproved his previous statements.

David Koehler’s speech only analyzes president Bush’s speech and the arguments presented in it. He seems to believe that our leaders in the government are providing us with arguments with holes in them. He thinks they are doing this with false dilemmas, argument of Ignorance, slippery slope, and ad hominem attacks. Koehler did not use any fallacies in his argument. He simply pointed out the ones that were hidden within the president’s speech.

He points out that the president used an ad hominem attack within his speech by attacking Saddam Hussein rather han focusing on the country and Its Issues. President Bush identified several problems that were occurring with Iraq. One of the problems was that Iraq possesses an d produces chemical and biological weapons, and they are also seeking nuclear weapons. Another problem was: “.. lraq remains the nature of the regime Itself. Saddam Hussein Is a homicidal dictator who is addicted to weapons of mass destruction. ” The claim about the weapons has evidence to support it.

The claim about Saddam Hussein is more ofa fallacy, as they ont know If he has actual weapons or what his entire game plan was. It was used to have people agree with the war. I do not think intervention in Iran was entirely necessary, because it was not a proven fact that they had nuclear weaponry. I do think it was important for Saddam Hussein to be taken under control. I dont agree with starting war and taking lives over here say though. References Boss, Judith A. Think: Critical Thinking and Logic Skills for Everyday Life.

New York: McGraw-Hill, 2012. print. By ashconk July 21, 2013 Well, we don’t know exactly… ” This statement only disapproved his previous false dilemmas, argument of ignorance, slippery slope, and ad hominem attacks. than focusing on the country and its issues. remains the nature of the regime itself. Saddam Hussein is a homicidal dictator who evidence to support it. The claim about Saddam Hussein is more of a fallacy, as they don’t know if he has actual weapons or what his entire game plan was. It was used to Hussein to be taken under control.