User talk:Teddy Watson
Thank you for your explanation of your edit. I can see why you put that word in but feel that the use of however in that context did cause unintended bias.
I agree that it is appropriate that his views on both situations should be available on the entry, but would suggest that it is up to the reader to decide if the two decisions are compatible or not. This is why I removed the word.
I personally was not in favour of the Iraq war. And also on the bombing of Syria. But I can clearly see that it is possible to have sincerely held both views as expressed.
There is a story of Charles de Gaulle when he was a teacher at the French Military Academy. One of his students came across one of de Gaulle's answers to a problem he had been set as a student. The student based his answer on the same arguments. Where de Gaulle had got a good grade the student got a poor one. When he protested de Gaulle answered that the answer was right then but not now.
The decision on Syria was taken with the knowledge of what had happened in Iraq. That alone would have been enough to change some people's decision. Stating the facts allows us to make up our own minds... but in my mind adding in the word however pushed the reader in a particular direction.
I realise that you did not intend this and hope this explanation helps!
Start a discussion with Teddy Watson
Talk pages are where people discuss how to make content on Wikipedia the best that it can be. Start a new discussion to connect and collaborate with Teddy Watson. What you say here will be public for others to see.
