Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Doesn't want to be used, yet he's writing in the NRO, using the possibility of his own death for political purposes...
Not to support the effort in Iraq, either, but merely to attack the other side... cast false attributions and conjecture as to motives...
Sweet, with a spin factor 8 out of 10...
Funny how this whole Iraq fiasco plays out. One the one hand, Iraq was puffed up as a serious threat to our own safety and the stability of the region, but the cost of taking action is being downplayed insofar as possible... the dead and mangled whisked home under shrouds of darkness and obfuscation.
In WW2, pictures of our dead strengthened domestic resolve, reinforced the righteousness of our cause. The public readily accepted huge tax increases and rationing to achieve our ends, too... Now, all we get are news blackouts, censorship, and taxcuts for the wealthy... with official pronouncements similar the "Light at the end of the tunnel" routine so familiar to those of us who lived the Vietnam era...
Look to see a lot more faux rightwing outrage and faux patriotism before it's over....
In 1940, 8% of the population of the US supported going to war. Isolationist fervor from the left was in full swing and the largest anti-war movement the US has ever seen, America First, was ruling the scene. We waited, and waited, and waited, not wanting to get involved, thinking that the Atlantic and Pacific were buffers between the US and that nasty problem over in Europe. So we let millions around the world die to protect our own butts.
December 7, 1941 changed everything. Americans now realized they were vulnerable to attack. Public opinion changed swiftly so now we geared up our military-industrial complex and inducted about 17 million men and women into the military, some of which would never see the US again. Could we have intervened previously and cut Hitler off at the knees and alleviated a lot of suffering in the process and saved a lot of lives? Of course we could have. That doesn't mean lives wouldn't have been lost, but far less would have.
Oh, and let's not forget all the conspiracy nuts of the time who, even in the 30s, contended that greedy industrialists and munitions manufacturers had provoked the United States to enter WWI. These nuts led to the Nye Commission who drafted a report called the "Senate Investigation of the Munitions Industries." According to this report, war-mongering profiteers had popularized gruesome tales of Germany atrocities to convince the United States to join the Allies and to invest heavily in war production. This report helped convince many Americans that they should ignore European "propagandists" who claimed to document the brutalities of Hitler, Mussolini, and Hirohito during the 1930s. Doesn't that kind of rhetoric and outrageous paranoia ring familiar when overlayed on the attitude of the left today?
Cue more than fifty years later, we'd almost forgotten the lessons that the isolationists and the "I don't want to get involved" crew should have taught us in WW2. We were already being attacked by an enemy that has similar goals to the Nazis - world domination - but who do it in a much more insispid and stealthy manner. Yet there are still those willing to allow them to creep along until we absolutely had to do something about it, and would lose far more in the process. Instead we are nipping this problem in the bud right now, which is actually something Clinton should have done in the first damn place.
People will die, innocents will be killed, but in the long run this war is necessary to the survivial of our society. Those focused only on the here and now won't ever try to see that or admit to it. But history will prove me right and in the future this war will be looked back upon as a smart move.