20 years

r/askhistorians had already opened up the Iraq war for discussion. IOW it is part of history. Twenty years ago. For you younger people it may seem like a lifetime, but it's still part of our fabric (the reasons why we went to war, how consent was manufactured etc). But I do understand how it seems so far in the past that it really does seem past. But that only helps those who helped foment the war (and, note that all the cheerleaders are still with us and with cushy jobs while the dissenters are in the periphery). 

The 20 year mark (when I moved to the States, 20 years prior was in the thick of the Vietnam war and Nixon was in charge and to me, it seemed like that was ancient history) is also lots of reassessing, though not in any valuable terms that I see. I do see some name calling, but it's righteous and it doesn't properly deal with the sickness that led us to that war so easily. You know?

But I kinda want to tie in that war (and also the Afghan war) with the current one our leaders are trying to foment and have fomented (Taiwan and Ukraine). Yes there are some bad actors on the other side, but similar language is being used as in that war and the Afghan war. For the most part the people against the US provocations this time were front and center against the previous war (Iraq). 

But there do seem to be people who are at least posturing that they were right and anyone who was wrong was foolish (hint, I was wrong and have come to reevaluate all that brought me to that point). Which is fair, especially those who cheerled the war and were rewarded for it. But note that this man is pro establishment right now. 

When the West struggles and fails, it’s because of its decadence and senility, a sign of its imminent collapse, when it prevails, it’s because of its dastardly wiles and the limitlessness of its ill-gotten resources. Russia’s appeal in the West, which crosses the traditional boundaries of right and left, is irresistible for those who believe the worst crime imaginable is Western hypocrisy. Since this hypocrisy is the only unforgivable sin

[1]

That is vis a vis the Ukraine war. And in that piece he talks of the one thing most dissenting voices were wrong about: that Putin wouldn't invade. But doesn't talk about any other issues that they (Ray McGovern etc) have brought up (missiles, US first strike policy etc etc). IOW, if he was right about Iraq (good for him) in what ways was he right and what did he critique specifically before the war (no known writings available for that time, tbf) or the sanctions before that? 

All this matters and would be great to look into, but all I see is (even with google searching certain time periods) this guy who knows how to be loud and troll and be right for a brief moment on a trending topic and... well fuck, I guess that is what wins, isn't it? Then you get others agreeing with him and stroking their whatever's to seem that smart. All just nuts, you know? Just scream in the right way for the mob to scream with you, doesn't matter what your previous stances were or are and... there's the success button. Maybe it was always this way (see the columnist below... who has been wrong many times, but does a different, less brainstem based scream, called the Times column). 

But for now, I'll leave this other cheerleading fool, who's got plenty of $$ for his troubles. (and I haven't even gotten into SVB which is another crazy thing and means we actually don't have enough $$ to cover even 250k deposits of cash... so? Guess who suffers, right?)

[1] What can I say about the article in that it at least holds its own refutation. In that the author claims that people can make statements and never have to disavow them because they weren't being serious. Sigh. And I'm not even going to start with what seems to be another liberal obsession: Calling Putin a war criminal while hand waving what we've done. Including straight threatening the ICC with invasion if they try something, then laying sanctions on them when they did. The main point that does acknowledge this is that, well that's wrong, but we shouldn't let Putin get away with X. Sure I'm all for that, but with the US using this as a tool, why confer it any legitimacy? Once again, one must look at their own sins first. 

Enjoyed it? Share it via email, facebook, twitter, or one of the buttons below (or through some other method you prefer). Thank you! As always, here's the tip jar. paypal.me/nlowhim Throw some change in there & help cover the costs of running this thing. You can use paypal or a credit card.