Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: FairOpinion
I am really annoyed that people claim that just because we didn't find tons of WMD when we went into Iraq, they never existed.

There is a truism in logic:

absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

You can't prove anything becuase you can't find evidence. You can only prove something based on the existance of evidence, not the lack of it. You can infer a conclusion, but you do so at great risk, for exactly the reaons that you put forward.

32 posted on 12/17/2005 6:36:29 PM PST by Phsstpok (There are lies, damned lies, statistics and presentation graphics, in descending order of truth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]


To: Phsstpok

There was a large amount of evidence that Saddam DID have WMD. Based on that evidence everyone was sure he had them.

The fact that we didn't find any proves that we couldn't find them, or that maybe they weren't there WHEN we went in, but it's not proof that they weren't there a month before. Yet people keep insisting, that if we couldn't find them, that's absolute proof that he never had any, despite of all previous evidence.


37 posted on 12/17/2005 6:41:14 PM PST by FairOpinion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson