Once again the JU Right fails to engage in actual debate, preferring to resort to infantile tactics of "You called me Hitler, you called me Hitler!!", which was not at all what Toblerone did. You all kepp rabbiting on about the killing of the Jews. This quote is nothing at all to do with the atrocities committed by Hitler, it has only to do with rhetorical and propagandfist techniques. It is a debate about language.
Before I go on, Daiwa, apology accepted. It was not after all your fault.
Saying that Bush and his mob have used a rhetorical technique that was identified by Goering is not in any way saying that he is a Nazi. I have written quite a lot about former Australian PM Paul Keating's use of techniques that were identified in Aristotle's Rhetorica Addendum. This does not mean that Keating believes in the superiority of homosexuality, nor does it mean that he believes that only the intellectual elites should govern (Keating never completed high school). Many of the Ancient Greeks believed that, but that is a separate issue. Only a fool would enter politics without studying Aristotle's study of rhetorical techniques. They provide valuable tips on how to convince people of anything.
Have an actual look at the quote, rather than making all sorts of jumps that Toblerone never made. Goering is making an observation about how countries manage to justify war to their people. Being an astute observer, he used the same tactics in justifying the killing of the Jews. But Goering's own statement implies that he is not the first or the last to use these tactics. They are the same in every country according to him. Goering's statement implies that the same tactics were even used by Churchill and Menzies and Curtin etc. Whether his observation is correct is a matter for debate as he does little to substantiate the claim here.
Using the same propaganda techniques as Goering does not even mean that GW2 was unjustified. If I wanted to convince a nation of pacifists to go to a war that I believed to be just, surely I would do well to study how previous world leaders had convinced a nation to go to war. The Nazi propaganda machine were a very clever bunch of people. They understood the power of language very well. Bush's men are perhaps equally intelligent.
This has nothing to do with whether the War was justified or not. I believe removing Saddam was a good goal. I don't believe Bush made the case for it very well, but only in the sense that he did not put forward arguments that would convince me. His tactics convinced many others. So let's for a second leave aside what the real reason for war was and assume that the goal of the Iraq war was to save millions of lives. Is it ethical to use rhetorical techniques that were once used by the Nazis? Is it ethical to lie in order to convince people to fight a war that will save lives? You may not believe that he was lying, but the question still remains, is it ethical?
Personally I don't think it is. I expect politicians to lie, but in the case of war I think they need to be truthful. But others would argue that my naivety, my belief that the truth will convince people to fight for justice would be the ruin of millions of lives.
