"A war based on lies."

[Richardo]

Is this about the most trite phrase ever uttered? It never fails not to fill me with righteous indignation.

Now I'm no historian, but when it comes right down to it, aren't ALL wars based on lies, at least from the standpoint of the aggressor? I'd say 'yes'. Whether it's overblown territorial imperatives, claims of religious or ethnic superiority, manifest destiny: they're all lies. Now we can add 'spreading democracy' to the list.

As Will Durst said: "Wow, a President lied?? What's that, 43 in a row?"

I think most of us would agree that the truth behind wars is almost always economic: access to resources, improved trade routes, increased tax base. No surprise there. But neither is the fact that a regime would not admit to its populace that these were the reasons to send their children to be slaughtered.

Even if you don't concur that the phrase is entirely meaningless, it sure has become tiresome. It is over-used almost as much as 'speaking truth to power'. But I'll save that for another unpopular post.

[edhopper]

1. Yes,

most wars are based on lies. But this the first time we are the lying aggressors who started the war. Unless you include, the First Gulf War and Grenada and Vietnam and The Spanish American War and the Mexican American War and the War of 1812.....

[sandnsea]

2. WMD Lies

We were told Iraq was a grave threat, developing nuclear and bio/chem weapons that could reach our allies in 45 minutes. That was a lie and they knew it was a lie. The 'spreading democracy' rationale has nothing to do with the war lies that these monsters told and do deserve to be held to account, although they never will be.

[Richardo]

3. Doesn't answer my question.

Yes, they're all lies. MY premise is that all aggressors lie about their motives, so where's the big surprise that Bush did too? 'A war based on lies' is the equivalent to saying 'A war that uses ammunition'. Not a differentiator.

[edhopper]

4. Read my post again

A am making a point that many are regarding this as the first time The US has been the one to start a war on lies. Of course that is simply not true since most disregard the other wars I list. So much for tounge in cheek.

[Moochy]

5. Its contrary to the propaganda narrative

Therein lies the surprise. I'm guessing you are steeped in opposition propaganda, thus: No big surprise for you.

[sandnsea]

7. Threat vs Agenda

Everybody knows there are varying political agendas behind any action a government takes. You're talking about real politik propaganda wars. Granted there are too many people who don't question the politics of their government, but that's a very different thing than a military threat of nuclear attack. That is very serious and outrageous that we would be lied to about it. It's still shocking to me that this country is so placated by creature comforts and drugs that we haven't responded.

[KansDem]

6. I think that this time the lying is so blatant...

Many of us knew the truth while the lie was being uttered.

Thanks to the internet...

When America was attacked on 9/11 and Bush did everything he could to point the finger at Saddam, we read reports that indicated 15 of the 19 attackers were from Saudi Arabia, and 2 from UAE, both countries friendly to BushCo. We knew Bush was lying...

When Bush told us Saddam had WMDs and could use them at any moment, we heard reports to the contrary from UN inspectors and other experts. We knew Bush was lying...

When Bush told us he wanted to spread democracy, we read reports to the contrary about how a puppet government was being established and rival groups were fighting for control. We knew Bush was lying...

When Bush told us he invaded Iraq to fight Al Qaeda and terrorism, we heard reports that al Qaeda was never in Iraq until Bush invaded. We knew Bush was lying...

When Bush told us he was after Osama bin Laden, we read reports that told us the bin Laden family and the Bush family were friends and business partners, and had been for decades, so we knew Bush would never "capture" OBL. We knew Bush was lying...

When Bush told us he wanted to rebuild Iraq, we heard reports that told us the oil infrastructure was being rebuilt, along with the world's largest embassy, while the rest of Iraq lay in ruin. We knew Bush was lying...

In previous "wars," the lies eventually surfaced, but only after the war's end. Even decades later, a lie might be revealed, but by then the nation had moved on to something else, and it didn't seem as grievous. The lie had become "history." I don't think the neo-Cons ever imagined how strong and influential the internet would be in thwarting their lies and propaganda. We saw each and every lie unfold--in real time--even as the lie was being disseminated.

I shudder to think where we'd be today if we relied solely on the Corporate Media for our information.