But looking at it objectively for a moment - I remember when it happened and I remember being in the minority - in that I saw it as another Vietnam, potentially worse than Vietnam, with no clear end in sight, and it would only make everything worse. But the pundits, most of the people online (who weren't liberal) and a good portion of the public disagreed. Bush's approval rating was very high back then. It wasn't that long after 9/11. At the time the public believed there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, that Al Quada was hidden there and training there - an opinion not helped by the media who pushed this view - partly with repeated showings of Iraq celebrating what happened on 9/11 (whether they really celebrated it or not is another story - that was what aired on the network news broadcasts.) It was not until much later that the media began to show more of the story, and no, I don't mean NPR, BBC, or the media we were looking at - I'm talking about the popular media, which the vast majority of people watched and trusted at the time.
I remember a lot of people comparing the Iraq War to World War II and Suddam Hussein to Hitler. A comparision I found to be ludricous, since Iraq had far more in common with Vietnam from everything I'd read and seen on it. But I had intense arguments with people who thought differently.
What is ironic, is it is now those same people - who believed in Bush, that are now screaming about it. Because the body bags are coming back. The war is not ending. They are going back again, possibly for the fourth time. The violence is escalating. And the management of the situation over there? Chaotic, which is also part of the problem.
It's interesting that the Pentagon and the generals, specifically Colin Powell were never in favor of it. Most of them argued against it. It's also interesting that Bush went around a lot of people - he went around Congress, because the Executive Branch does have the ability to invade and declare war if it is in the nation's best interest and to defend ourselves without the direct consent of Congress. The question is did Congress consent? Can he send more troops in now without Congress's consent? Objectively it is interesting to watch. I try not to think about emotionally too much or I just get upset and angry. I figure I did my job, I voted against him. I signed petitions against the war. I informed people I was against it. But I know I was in the minority, which frustrated me back then and frustrates me know - it's not always great to be looking at the other guy and thinking, ghod, I told you so, you stupid people. Why didn't you vote for Gore and Kerry? But nooo, you had to vote for the dimwit. Ugh! LOL!
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2007-01-27 05:29 pm (UTC)But looking at it objectively for a moment - I remember when it happened and I remember being in the minority - in that I saw it as another Vietnam, potentially worse than Vietnam, with no clear end in sight, and it would only make everything worse. But the pundits, most of the people online (who weren't liberal) and a good portion of the public disagreed. Bush's approval rating was very high back then.
It wasn't that long after 9/11. At the time the public believed there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, that Al Quada was hidden there and training there - an opinion not helped by the media who pushed this view - partly with repeated showings of Iraq celebrating what happened on 9/11 (whether they really celebrated it or not is another story - that was what aired on the network news broadcasts.)
It was not until much later that the media began to show more of the story, and no, I don't mean NPR, BBC, or the media we were looking at - I'm talking about the popular media, which the vast majority of people watched and trusted at the time.
I remember a lot of people comparing the Iraq War to World War II and Suddam Hussein to Hitler. A comparision I found to be ludricous, since Iraq had far more in common with Vietnam from everything I'd read and seen on it. But I had intense arguments with people who thought differently.
What is ironic, is it is now those same people - who believed in Bush, that are now screaming about it. Because the body bags are coming back. The war is not ending. They are going back again, possibly for the fourth time. The violence is escalating. And the management of the situation over there? Chaotic, which is also part of the problem.
It's interesting that the Pentagon and the generals, specifically Colin Powell were never in favor of it. Most of them argued against it. It's also interesting that Bush went around a lot of people - he went around Congress, because the Executive Branch does have the ability to invade and declare war if it is in the nation's best interest and to defend ourselves without the direct consent of Congress. The question is did Congress consent? Can he send more troops in now without Congress's consent? Objectively it is interesting to watch. I try not to think about emotionally too much or I just get upset and angry. I figure I did my job, I voted against him. I signed petitions against the war. I informed people I was against it. But I know I was in the minority, which frustrated me back then and frustrates me know - it's not always great to be looking at the other guy and thinking, ghod, I told you so, you stupid people. Why didn't you vote for Gore and Kerry? But nooo, you had to vote for the dimwit. Ugh! LOL!