|
the evidence that was presented obviously would be geared around the bushposition: that this evidence was itself manipulated, screened, shaped with policy objectives more like those of the project for a new american century than anything to do with what was happening on the ground is evident.
that the bushcase for war was not compelling--that it was contradicted explicitly by materials available to the un, and to the public, for example--also evident. i dont see you doing much of anything here, pliticophile, except (1) dealing with the reality that the case for war was a sham that the rest of us, those not trapped in the tiny world of conservative politics, have known about since the run-up to this war and (2) rather than address the facts of the matter--even after host presented you with a pretty good resume of it--you choose to narrow the matter along lines that seem to me wholly arbitrary. i see no justifiation for your way of framing the question at hand, nor do i see how even the answers you are looking for would in any way either affirm or falsify the larger problems created not just for you but for all of us by the shabby conduct of this administration with reference to this war.
that the democratic party is in a curious position at this point is also evident--most of the sitting memebers of congress allowed themselves to be persuaded by a case for war that turned out to be wholly false. now that the falseness of this case is clear to anyone who looks, and the centrist nimrods who operate under teh rubric of teh democratic party are reconsidering their positions and wondering how they managed to be "duped" (as a function fo working to save their own political skins--the administration has chosen to stand logic on its head and blame those who allowed themselves to be so "duped" for having been "duped"---you tack within this sorry state of affairs is to pitch the question of falsity of the case for war in such arbitrarily narrow terms that there is no way to respond to you---the entire logic of your position makes no sense to me, i see no reason to accept it, no reason to enter into a debate on this question on your terms--you do not get to set them, particularly not when those terms, once detached from the rightwing talking points of the moment, are abritrary.
so that's that then. maybe we can actually have a discussion about this question of what should happen now that it is obvious to almsot everyone that this war was launched on false pretenses. but in that discussion, try to actually take in the information being presented to you, rather than using arbitrary/unnecessary criteria that allow you to pretend to be discussing something when in fact all you are doing is avoiding a mountain of evidence that you do not like.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|