Ex President Bush and War
"This incompetent and corrupt administration has led us into an abyss."
George Bush
The premises of this argument the media is not accurately representing this war, by not showing us gruesome war footage, and also that sending more soldiers into Iraq will not help solve the problem of creating a stable Iraqi nation. The author thinks that the US should not send anymore troops to Iraq because they will not do any good over there. However he does not back this up with facts, and his he has no strong agenda other than bashing president Bush.
The author uses the fallacy of hasty generalization when he claims the Bush administration is incompetent and corrupt. By making this statement apply to the whole administration and not picking out a few individuals and backing his claim up with facts, the author has used a hasty generalization which may or may not apply to the Bush administration. It cannot be proved that Bush's entire administration is corrupt and incompetent. Therefore the authors letter is weak and should not be taken seriously.
In order to make his claim stronger, the author should have limited his claim to a few individuals in the administration. Then he should have used evidence to support his claim that they are incompetent and or corrupt. However it is very hard to prove that someone is corrupt do to the discreet nature that goes with it. Also by using an abusive ad hominem against Bush he further weakens his argument, and leaves little room for the serious reader to gain anything of value. Since his premises and conclusions are all over the place it is hard to come to the same conclusions that the author did. How does bashing the Bush administration lead to "sending in more troops would be a waste." The author's argument is poor, incomplete, and based on fallacies.
George Bush
The premises of this argument the media is not accurately representing this war, by not showing us gruesome war footage, and also that sending more soldiers into Iraq will not help solve the problem of creating a stable Iraqi nation. The author thinks that the US should not send anymore troops to Iraq because they will not do any good over there. However he does not back this up with facts, and his he has no strong agenda other than bashing president Bush.
The author uses the fallacy of hasty generalization when he claims the Bush administration is incompetent and corrupt. By making this statement apply to the whole administration and not picking out a few individuals and backing his claim up with facts, the author has used a hasty generalization which may or may not apply to the Bush administration. It cannot be proved that Bush's entire administration is corrupt and incompetent. Therefore the authors letter is weak and should not be taken seriously.
In order to make his claim stronger, the author should have limited his claim to a few individuals in the administration. Then he should have used evidence to support his claim that they are incompetent and or corrupt. However it is very hard to prove that someone is corrupt do to the discreet nature that goes with it. Also by using an abusive ad hominem against Bush he further weakens his argument, and leaves little room for the serious reader to gain anything of value. Since his premises and conclusions are all over the place it is hard to come to the same conclusions that the author did. How does bashing the Bush administration lead to "sending in more troops would be a waste." The author's argument is poor, incomplete, and based on fallacies.
