Home | About | Donate

Far from Facing the Truth, the US Is Telling New Lies about Iraq


#1

Far from Facing the Truth, the US Is Telling New Lies about Iraq

Gary Younge

A couple of weeks ago, the Republican presidential hopeful Jeb Bush was asked in an interview with Fox News whether, knowing what he knows now, he would have invaded Iraq. It’s the kind of predictable question for which most people assumed he would have a coherent answer. They were wrong. Jeb blew it. “I would have [authorised the invasion],” he said. “And so would have Hillary Clinton, just to remind everybody.


#2

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#3

"The most important single factor shaping Americans’ opinions about any war is not American casualties, foreign casualties or even expense, but whether they think America will win, says Christopher Gelpi, a political science professor at Duke University who specialises in public attitudes to US foreign policy. Sure enough, on the eve of the invasion two thirds of Americans backed it and a slim majority said they’d supported it without a UN resolution. Support grew once the bombing started and only soured once it was clear no victory was in sight."

I am tired of how this type of "analysis" coheres with corrupt power and the deceptive practices it uses to manufacture the illusion of consent.

When citizens are impacted by trauma--911, and respected religious, academic, and political authorities ALL repeat the same lies and show support for the same fabricated narratives, how is it that citizens--not having the tools to discern the Truth at that time--can do other than support those who LIE to them?

This idea that the public supported the wars MUST be seen in the proper context, and that context was not just a whole-sale fabrication of evidence FIXED around the already decided-upon (by military-govt. elites) "go to war" objective; but also involved a constant drumbeat conflating patriotism with fighting "terrorism" or fighting "them" over "there" in order not to fight them "here."

When society is itself a reflection of hierarchy, then those who possess the most in the way of resources, access, power, clout, and influence have a LOT more to answer for than those innocents they dupe through elaborate PR tactics, mind control repetitions of false narratives, and language memes designed to speak to atavistic impulses--like Holy war, might makes right, "with us or against us" and similar "psychic stock."

ONLY when a populace is genuinely informed can its "collective pulse" be taken and convincing statistics on consent (of the governed FOR specific policies) be accurately ascertained. The rest is smoke and mirrors and after-the-fact permission for those transgressions that elites WILL enact with or without the "proper poll numbers."

This quote from the article is grand and bears repeating:

"The trouble with this is that we did know then. The world knew, which is why majorities in almost every other country opposed it. The United Nations was trying to acquire proof one way or another but was not allowed to finish the job. Politicians were not, in fact, led to war by faulty intelligence; they deliberately commissioned the intelligence that would enable them to go to war."

Millions of people also protested the onset of this armed and dangerous M.E. quagmire, a/k/a CASE FIXED for The Crime Against Humanity (which is what war of aggression represents).


#4

I stopped reading at the word "mistakes".

It just blows my fucking mind.


#5

The quote you mentioned that "bears repeating" is indeed a good one that I missed because I threw up my hands at the word "mistakes".

I always enjoy your succinct analysis as to the delineation of who's most responsible for these crimes against humanity servicing Empire and the Deep State.


#6

None of this should come as even a slight surprise to anyone who tries to find information to counteract efforts made to "formulate" our opinions by reading sites like this one, Counterpunch, Truthdig and other participants in the "the truth is out there" conspiracy. Whether we try to be aware or buy into whatever comforting lie provides some temporary fear relief is irrelevant.

Those who let themselves know don't know what to do about it so they have no activist plans to impart to those who could be awakened sufficiently to get aboard the train if anybody knew where it was going and how to help it get there.

If the stupid war mongering foreign policy a bigger problem that the environmental degradation (including but not limited to global warming) that it is the partial but not the total cause of? Who knows and what good does it do to know?