I sure hope so, because it's good to hear from the paranoidal folks, after it's the same irrational reasoning and lies that our government used to start two wars, Vietnam and Iraq.
Vietnam was a scam war for sure. Ho Chi Minh always wanted us as a partner for Vietnams independence from the French colonial masters. He was already reaching out to the USA right after WW1 until the late 1950s to have us support Independence and help him build a nation state-that would not have been communist! Socialist yes, but it was his alliance with China & Russia that ended up shaping the country. It really is that simple, the man tried for almost 40 years to have us as his main ally and sponsor.
As far as Iraq goes, I do know that if Al Qaida types infiltrated into Iraq they were quickly put to death. That being said, he was the evilest of men who would get back at his enemies by torturing even their pre school kids. His sons used to hunt down newlyweds and rape them on their honeymoons, quite a sport eh. Hussein need to go, but the war and especially it's aftermath were poorly planed unfortunately.
Yes, we had no business in Viet Nam. Too many young lives stolen from brave youngsters (Who still suffer - that is those who lived through it.) and their families. Viet Nam was a civil war at which we also had no business. Interesting, we have no troops there, yet they are our good trading partner now! Again,. USA supported the dictator.
Reagan shut down my university during finals with police and National guardmen preventing students from entering campus. Those of there were forced to leave by gunpoint. We were peaceful. not dangerous, just trying to get finished for the semester after studying our brains out for weeks. Yet, i did vote for him as President of the US; but later felt deceived by his campaign as I learned more about Iran-Contra and the deals made with Iran's Ayatolla before the 1980 election. There is a mountain of evidence about this in libraries and onthe web. God Bless America. I pray we bring our kids home from everywhere in the world. GLTALs
Sentiment: Strong Buy
Lars, Saddam Hussein was evil, but no more than many other dictators in the world. The facts are that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction, this was all a lie fabricated by GW and his administration to justify going to war. A war that caused the deaths of over 4,000 American soldiers, and over 110,000 Iraqi civlian deaths, along with untold injuries. All this tragedy caused by an unnecessary war. And GW believes he's going to heaven, I think not.
Yes, Hussein was for sure a vicious and mean sadist and dictator of the worst kind but, of course, for many years he was one of our strongest allies in the Middle East until we decided, for no great noble reasons, to jettison him.
Sentiment: Strong Buy
Typical, selective, revisionist, view that only serves to re enforce your narrow interpretation of events while NEVER addressing the challenges of being a leader. Even if I was to accept your conclusion on those two wars, which I don't - they were far more complicated - you seem to require black and white in a mostly gray world. So in your mind, if they get it wrong, (Iraq and VN) you're critical for their interpretation of the intelligence and you're equally critical in Monday morning quarterbacking vague intelligence that came in for years before 9/11. Bottom line is its not as simple as you make it out to be and it also makes it clear that you've never lead or run anything.
Read the excerpt on the latest book on the Iraq intelligence and tell me if you, presented with that same information following 9/11 would have sat on your hands.
Here's the excerpt from the new book that I mentioned and please don't be a DB and suggest that I'm ignoring other information leading up to the war. I'm not and I don't - there clearly were errors made BUT I still think that there is more to come out on this.
The question Keep, which you can't grasp, is how do leaders make decisions with imperfect information. So STOP saying that Bush lied about the WMD. He made the decison based on what information we and other intelligence agncies had - of course the public was then feed a nice, bite sized assesment since that's all we really want.
"Easily the most pervasive and dangerous of all the modern conspiracy theories is the one claiming that President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair knew that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq before nevertheless deciding to invade in 2003. No other misrepresentation in recent times has so damaged the trust between government and the governed. How gratifying, therefore, that as authoritative and respected a commentator as Gordon Corera explodes that myth completely in "The Art of Betrayal," a wide-ranging, thought-provoking and highly readable history of Britain's postwar Secret Intelligence Service, popularly known as MI6.
"Blair was sure that Iraq was developing WMD because his spies believed it always had been," states Mr. Corera, the security correspondent for the BBC. "After the first Gulf War of 1991, MI6, the CIA and UN weapons inspectors had combed over the wreckage of Iraq and had been shocked to find Saddam had been much closer to building a nuclear bomb behind their backs. They vowed never to be caught out again, overlooking the fact that that they had also over-estimated Saddam's stockpile of chemical agents." Furthermore, "Bush and Blair were also receiving secret intelligence briefings about the Pakistani nuclear salesman A.Q. Khan offering countries instructions and parts to make a nuclear bomb." If journalism is the first draft of history, then serious and substantial books like Mr. Corera's are the second. Ultimately history will show that Messrs. Bush and Blair made the correct decision, given what was genuinely believed at the time."
So again I ask you. With this information, following 9/11, would you have just sat on your hands and done nothing?
Theres, it is simply, our government lied us into wars with Vietnam and Iraq! And there's tons of documented proof showing this to be true. Sounds to me like you have "Confirmation biases, which contribute to overconfidence in personal beliefs and can maintain or strengthen beliefs in the face of contrary evidence. Poor decisions due to these biases have been found in military, political, and organizational contexts." So growup and face the facts!