posted on Sep, 27 2004 @ 07:55 PM
The way I view it...
The Administration has to give reasons that the public accepts. They are aware of the ability to affect memory and employ it, thus the recitation of
Iraq and 9/11 until the public believes Iraq is responsible for 9/11. This, combined with the public front about WMDs and a litany of other reasons
takes care of the majority of the population.
Then, there are people who understand the actual reasons for going to war, and are complicit because they either benefit, realize the benefits, or
don't see the exercise of resisting the war to be worth the time and energy.
Then, there are people in the margins who constitute a minority of unknown size. They do not see the overall benefits of the war, but are nonetheless
angered about the obvious lies being sold to them by the people they hired and pay to run the government. They are also aghast at the waste of lives,
money, and materiel in what they see as a war based on lies.
Of course, almost all public rationale for any war is based on lies, misconceptions, and selective truth. This brings us to the last party, who
realize the necessity of this, analyze the obvious but unstated objectives, but don't see a means of realistically seeing those objectives achieved
in an economic way. The only way to make their views accepted by the general populace in order to make the Administration's actions politically
untenable is to uncover the 'lies' in the popularly-presented rationale. Of course, they are wide-open to accusations of 'aiding the enemy' and
treason, so their arguments are inherently weaker then those of the officials pushing for war.