|
so your take on the bush rationales, such as they were, is as instrumentalized as those fine fellows from the project for a new american century, who are ultimately responsible for this debacle in iraq. they adopted the same line, but without the ridiculous claims that debacle in iraq will serve an edifying function for "muslims every where in the world" and instead were mostly interested in invading iraq as a way of rewinding the first gulf war and effectively telling the united nations to fuck itself, there's a new swaggering amurican sheriff in town blah blah blah--except of course, it's all gone to hell.
but if that's the case, then you really don't care *what* the bush people said at all--and since the end justifies the means, the intelligence was "faulty" rather than knowingly manipulated to justify a decision to invade taken well in advance of any rationale....the end justifies the means.
and of course you would draw no connection between the marketing of this phony case for a debacle and the "democracy" that this farce was supposed to export.
and it seems the you prefer a fantasy scenario as to outcome to anything remotely like an assessment of the actually existing situation. "taking the long view" i think the bush people call that particular type of dissociation.
which would explain why you have no cognizance, seemingly, of the consequences of this debacle for the interests of the united states.
the end justify the means.
and it's all just opinion, man, so anyone can frame in or out whatever information about the world they want.
it's all arbitrary, so the actually existing farce can be referenced as a Giant Edifying Exercise for those benighted "muslims every where in the world."
great.
i'll catch you later, ace.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|