Difference between revisions of "Talk:George W. Bush"
(summary of the points; counterpoints next) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | ==Debates== | ||
| + | ===Have Bush's actions in the wake of 9/11 been justified?=== | ||
| + | {{arg.mainpoint|Bush's actions in the wake of 9/11 have been justified.}} | ||
| + | : {{arg.point|key=1|This is a war, and waging war requires some curtailment of freedom.}} | ||
| + | :: {{arg.point|key=1a|We are at war.}} | ||
| + | :: {{arg.point|key=1b|Waging war requires some curtailment of freedom.}} | ||
| + | : {{arg.point|key=2|Bush's abridgments of civil liberties thus far are at least ''within reason'', whether or not you agree on the details.}} | ||
| + | :: {{arg.info|i.e. it's difficult to judge if the current war justifies the curtailments thus far, so why not grant Bush the benefit of the doubt?}} | ||
| + | :: {{arg.point|key=2a|We still have far more freedoms than European countries do, so we don't really have any cause for complaint.}} | ||
| + | :: {{arg.point|key=2b|Some increase in surveillance powers at least seems reasonable.}} | ||
| + | : {{arg.point|key=3|Nobody has been seriously harmed by these curtailments so far.}} | ||
| + | :: {{arg.point|key=3a|The ''potential'' for abuse is there, but Bush would not intentionally abuse the power he has obtained.}} | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Notes== | ||
===#politics 2005-07-22=== | ===#politics 2005-07-22=== | ||
<TheWoozle> Would you consider "pro-big-business" to be a positive or negative side of Republicanism?<br> | <TheWoozle> Would you consider "pro-big-business" to be a positive or negative side of Republicanism?<br> | ||
<TheWoozle> And is pro-big-businessness a Conservative trait too? I wouldn't necessarily *think* so, but maybe I'm confusing Conservative and Libertarian. | <TheWoozle> And is pro-big-businessness a Conservative trait too? I wouldn't necessarily *think* so, but maybe I'm confusing Conservative and Libertarian. | ||
Revision as of 22:43, 12 September 2007
Debates
Have Bush's actions in the wake of 9/11 been justified?
Bush's actions in the wake of 9/11 have been justified.
- <linkedimage>
wikipage=Issuepedia:Debaticons tooltip=claim that is the main subject of a debate img_src=Image:Arrow-button-rt-20px.png img_alt=right arrow debaticon </linkedimage> 1 This is a war, and waging war requires some curtailment of freedom.
- <linkedimage>
wikipage=Issuepedia:Debaticons tooltip=claim that is the main subject of a debate img_src=Image:Arrow-button-rt-20px.png img_alt=right arrow debaticon </linkedimage> 1a We are at war.
- <linkedimage>
wikipage=Issuepedia:Debaticons tooltip=claim that is the main subject of a debate img_src=Image:Arrow-button-rt-20px.png img_alt=right arrow debaticon </linkedimage> 1b Waging war requires some curtailment of freedom.
- <linkedimage>
wikipage=Issuepedia:Debaticons tooltip=claim that is the main subject of a debate img_src=Image:Arrow-button-rt-20px.png img_alt=right arrow debaticon </linkedimage> 2 Bush's abridgments of civil liberties thus far are at least within reason, whether or not you agree on the details.
i.e. it's difficult to judge if the current war justifies the curtailments thus far, so why not grant Bush the benefit of the doubt?- <linkedimage>
wikipage=Issuepedia:Debaticons tooltip=claim that is the main subject of a debate img_src=Image:Arrow-button-rt-20px.png img_alt=right arrow debaticon </linkedimage> 2a We still have far more freedoms than European countries do, so we don't really have any cause for complaint.
- <linkedimage>
wikipage=Issuepedia:Debaticons tooltip=claim that is the main subject of a debate img_src=Image:Arrow-button-rt-20px.png img_alt=right arrow debaticon </linkedimage> 2b Some increase in surveillance powers at least seems reasonable.
- <linkedimage>
wikipage=Issuepedia:Debaticons tooltip=claim that is the main subject of a debate img_src=Image:Arrow-button-rt-20px.png img_alt=right arrow debaticon </linkedimage> 3 Nobody has been seriously harmed by these curtailments so far.
- <linkedimage>
wikipage=Issuepedia:Debaticons tooltip=claim that is the main subject of a debate img_src=Image:Arrow-button-rt-20px.png img_alt=right arrow debaticon </linkedimage> 3a The potential for abuse is there, but Bush would not intentionally abuse the power he has obtained.
Notes
#politics 2005-07-22
<TheWoozle> Would you consider "pro-big-business" to be a positive or negative side of Republicanism?
<TheWoozle> And is pro-big-businessness a Conservative trait too? I wouldn't necessarily *think* so, but maybe I'm confusing Conservative and Libertarian.