Just read in the paper today that some key figures who were instrumental in making the case for the invasion of Iraq have now changed their minds, and think it might perhaps have been a bad idea, and maybe, just maybe, the rest of humanity was right. So what are they up to? What do they stand to gain politically?
And on a side point, I suppose you're not supposed to notice, but is it just me, or are these fellows all Jews? Hardly irrelevant when discussing Middle East policy, surely.
The three mentioned in Vanity Fair and the Corriere della Sera were Kenneth Adelman, David Frum, and Richard Perle. Personally, the last two, neo-con d'oc, I would consider smart, yet unsavoury characters whom I recall making their dubious case for war from Washington in interviews with the BBC. These are now the 'pentiti', those who have seen the error of their ways.
Or are they simply manipulative liars?
What's behind all this according to you?
Originally posted by sjegMeans they got new scriptwritters to build stories about how bad the President of the next country to invade on the agenda is.
Just read in the paper today that some key figures who were instrumental in making the case for the invasion of Iraq have now changed their minds, and think it might perhaps have been a bad idea, and maybe, just maybe, the rest of humanity was right. So what are they up to? What do they stand to gain politically?
And on a side point, I suppose you're not sup ...[text shortened]... ays.
Or are they simply manipulative liars?
What's behind all this according to you?
Please explain. What do these politicians stand to gain from admitting they were wrong? It seems a rarity in the world of politics, does it not? (They also seem to be blaming the Presie and Don Rumsfeld, too, but in doing so admit their own guilt. They're not thick. What are they up to?)
Originally posted by sjegThey're trying to cash in on the anti-war sentiment that's going around.
Please explain. What do these politicians stand to gain from admitting they were wrong? It seems a rarity in the world of politics, does it not? (They also seem to be blaming the Presie and Don Rumsfeld, too, but in doing so admit their own guilt. They're not thick. What are they up to?)
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterAlmost certainly. 🙄
Perhaps they've been reading all the anti-America screeds on the RHP debate section?
But, seriously, how can criticism of an unjust war possibly merit the label "anti-American"? How can the occasional anti-American post have any influence over the duped slowly coming to their senses?