What is Digg?279 Comments
- duggtodeath, on 07/31/2008, -11/+135Gulf of Tonkin 2 : Electric Boogaloo
- Scoop0901, on 07/31/2008, -21/+120The attack on Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941 was allowed "to happen" by the president at the time (Roosevelt). Kennedy had his Bay of Pigs. Other presidents likely had similar things to provoke or even push the envelope.
If you need the public's support, you have to have something the public can get on your team about, something to want to be a cheerleader for. In WWII, the American public willingly made all sorts of sacrifices -- in their personal and family lives. It isn't that way now, with the "War on Terror," nor was it that way during Vietnam.
Cheney likes things that are popular. He has a history of coming up with pom-squad things. Look over his resume. He's doing what he knows how to do. What else do you expect?
This idea, though, just like when Cuba was accused of blowing up a U.S. Naval vessel (remember learning of that event?), is one to try to get the American people to go with an idea they are against. Nothing new in politics, but nothing new for this corrupt administration. How many more days until a new president? - Eezyville, on 07/31/2008, -10/+98Well this just ***** up my day. And I was in such a good mood too. >:(
- pckbeta, on 07/31/2008, -8/+92Someone should drop Cheney on the Iraq / Iran boarder and see which way he would run.
- SaraLiberty, on 08/16/2008, -8/+84Leave it to the PNAC manifesto neo-CON war party to cook up a scam like this. Nothing surprises me anymore with these lying, professional deceivers. Yeah, and we can be 'rest assured' they're telling the truth about Iran and being honest about 9/11 events too....
“Naturally the common people don’t want war. But after all, it is the
leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it’s always a
simple matter to drag people along whether it is a democracy or a
fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.
Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of
the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are
being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and
for exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every
country.” -- Hermann Goering, Hitler’s Reich Marshall - ffhc2000, on 07/31/2008, -4/+75But Pelosi said there hasn't been any crimes committed by the Bush administration that she's aware of. I guess that settles things then.
- toddcat, on 07/31/2008, -5/+71This from Mr. Five Deferments ("I have other priorities") during Vietnam Cheney. Chickenhawk.
- fastreporter, on 07/31/2008, -10/+75
On behalf of all people outside the U.S.: please, please, please do something about this totally frightening behavior, no matter how!
Your country is about to drag the whole world in some very dark abyss if this continuous!
To all the good and honest American people: yes, we do love you, just not all of your fellow Americans.
This is madness!
Madness?!?
This is Neocon!
Or something like that :-/ - principle, on 07/31/2008, -8/+65"Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a Fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country." -- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials to Gustave Gilbert on April 18, 1946
If they can concoct plans to start a potential World War, then who is to say that they did not concoct 911. - Dumbledorito, on 07/31/2008, -11/+62Y'know, I long ago thought that Cheney and Co. were just evil bastards ready to bring "freedom through war" with lots of benefits for their corporate-subsidy & no-bid contract teat-sucking masters. Then I heard an interview with (I think) J. Peter Scoblic, where he put forth his view that basically, after 9/11, Bush and Cheney soiled their drawers and became scared and paranoid, seeing enemies everywhere.
Frankly, I can't quite tell which possible motivation for their actions I find to be the more frightening. - rmxz, on 07/31/2008, -5/+41Surprised they don't just use fake terrorism with planes to scare people like the US government planned using in the late 60s in case they needed to drum up support for a war: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods Or are we already numb to that trick?
- GorfTron, on 08/01/2008, -2/+27Can a false flag coming from the top be considered treason?
- inactive, on 07/31/2008, -9/+34Geez, I'm getting Bush War Crimes Fatigue.
- ChloeMS, on 08/01/2008, -3/+25None of this really surprises me. My experience in the military has made me wary of everything our government does.
As for 9/11, the one thing that baffles me the most to this day is Bush's response when Andrew Card told him that our country "was under attack." - iancgi, on 07/31/2008, -10/+32"They would never stage 9/11 the people who hold positions of power in our govt have hearts made of gold!"
Any you naysayers and cowards ready to stand for truth yet? - rz8472, on 07/31/2008, -6/+27I never thought I would resort to Godwin's Law, but I can only think of one incident in history where this has actually been done.
On August 31th, 1939, elite German commandoes sabotaged and destroyed various outposts on the German side of the German-Polish border unbeknownst to either the Polish government or the German population. This incident was the 'justification' that the Germans needed to unleash the blitzkrieg on Poland the very next day while calling it a 'defensive war'.
Regardless, despicable to even consider such a thing, although I wouldn't put anything about the Bush Administration at this point. - kcapxis, on 07/31/2008, -10/+30But he would never have considered running jets full of people into buildings to bring about the same goal on a larger scale. Nuh-uh. No way. There is a clear line, and it's drawn somewhere between dressing up soldiers as the enemy and shooting at them to provoke war for profit and dressing up soldiers as a different enemy and using them to provoke war for profit.
I'm not saying anyone should really believe that's how it went down, but I remember someone saying 9/11 was a "failure of imagination." How is that possible with Cheney on the team? The guy seems to have millions of nasty ideas... - synthpop, on 08/01/2008, -1/+21it sucks when you realize we're the bad guys :/
- Stormwern, on 07/31/2008, -5/+24Holy *****, are they using the Geneva convention as a bucket list or what?? I have prided myself on not being a conspiracy theorist, but the Bush administration has proven my wrong so many times I honestly don't know what to think anymore..
- Adelhas, on 08/01/2008, -1/+19On Sept. 1, 1939, Adolf Hitler revealed to a tearful German nation that a polish commando had attacked a German radio station inside German borders - Sender Gleiwitz - and killed civilians, and that since 3:45 that morning, the Reich was 'fighting back' against the 'aggression'.
The polish commando was of course a crack team of SS forces led by Alfred Naujocks, which broadcast anti-German messages in polish on radio waves. The whole thing was dubbed Operation Himmler. A ridiculous casus belli? Perhaps.
But Hitler himself commented on it's credibility to his General Staff: "I will provide a propagandistic casus belli. Its credibility doesn't matter. The victor will not be asked whether he told the truth."
Some neo-tards have just been doing their homework. - inactive, on 07/31/2008, -2/+20It depends on how high you drop him from; But if it's from just about any high altitude bomber then I would have to say "he would 'run' all over everything."
It's a nice *hypothetical* but we are not supposed to be testing such biological weapons on others. - surendrapathak, on 07/31/2008, -7/+24This is beyond war-mongering. This is pure lust for blood!
- girwen, on 07/31/2008, -11/+28"Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship. ...voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
..-Hermann Göring, george bush, http://www.swiftvets.com/, john mccain - iancgi, on 07/31/2008, -2/+19We are trying our hardest man. We need to wake up more of the people though, too many are still mindless and think this is all ok and good.
- Rikkochet, on 07/31/2008, -1/+17I thought even the Japanese admitted that the reason Pearl Harbor was such a surprise attack was because the declaration of war that they sent to their embassy was marked such top secret that the Ambassador himself had to decode it, and he was so goddamn slow doing it that by the time he delivered the declaration of war Pearl Harbor was already burning.
- pkarpenko, on 07/31/2008, -4/+20Silly me. Here I was, naively thinking that the administration couldn't possibly surprise me anymore. Seriously ... what the *****!?
- spaceman77, on 08/01/2008, -2/+18Ah yes, the false flag specialist at work again.
- wonderbriefs, on 08/01/2008, -1/+16Yeah, Good article but the grammar of the title-link sucks. How about "Cheney proposed Killing Americans to Provoke Iran."
- ciaran036, on 08/01/2008, -5/+20Have we just foiled a false flag before it's even happened? Normally we find out AFTER it happens! This is incredible. If it's no problem to carry out false flag terror, and it's no problem to lie about nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction, then why is it such a problem to question the events of 9/11, 7/7, Madrid bombings and Omagh bombings, which were all quite clearly false flag terrorism.
- Dumbledorito, on 07/31/2008, -3/+17They won't give up any documents to her, either, eh?
- purkel, on 07/31/2008, -8/+22this doesnt suprise me at all... theres even speculation that Bush knew Sept 11th would happen.
- publiclurker, on 07/31/2008, -6/+19Not that I believe Scoops claims, but don't you think dragging dead soldiers into an argument just because you don't have anything intelligent to say is a lot more pathetic than anything he posted?
- swrostmore, on 08/01/2008, -1/+14Starting a war of aggression is considered a war crime.
- Diran, on 07/31/2008, -9/+22That's Navy SEALs, not Seals..
- rz8472, on 07/31/2008, -2/+15No, Pearl Harbor was not a planned event for numerous reasons.
1. Regardless of Roosevelt's real reasons for imposing sanctions on Japan, they were the aggressor and we had every right to impose such sanctions especially on a belligerent nation. Those sanctions would have been lifted if Japan had withdrawn from sovereign territory in Vietnam or China. Japan could even have kept Manchuria - which it had wrongfully taken away from China in 1931 - and still have avoided any sanctions. Saying that it wasn't justified to impose sanctions on Japan would be like saying that imposing sanctions on Sudan over Darfur today would be unjustified.
2. The Japanese leadership was simply incapable of acting in a rational manner. There were many dissenting voices against attacking the United States (even Adm. Yamamoto was among them), but the leadership believed that the Americans would be weak-willed and unable to stomach a war, and didn't weigh alternative options (see #1). The government had been taken over completely by the military, which was in total war-fever at that point.
3. Yes, an attack was expected given #1 and #2. But a military assault was expected to be on the Phillippines and US Bases deep in the Pacific, NOT at Pearl Harbor. The main concern at Pearl Harbor was sabotage, which was why all the planes were arranged wingtip-to-wingtip to make any sabotage attempts look more conspicous. Unfortuantely, that only made the damage worse.
4. Much of the resentment stemming from Japan was due to the Washington Naval Treaty of 1923, which stipulated that Japan could only have 3 battleships for every 5 of the United States. This may have seemed like a raw deal (and the Japanese leadership believed so), but it was actually advantageous for the Japanese for three reasons. First, the US had 10 times the manufacturing capacity of Japan, so it had more of an effect of keeping US naval power down. Second, the US Navy has to patrol both the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, meaning that they would probably be slightly outnumbered by the Japanese at the onset of any war. Finally, Japan was allowed 8 heavy cruisers for every 7 that the US built, so concessions were made. - surendrapathak, on 07/31/2008, -4/+16I bet you don't remember how Cheney reacted to 9/11! He sought for ANY link between 9/11 and Iraq. Someone who is looking for a reason to go to war 24 hours after over 3000 of his countrymen have died of terrorism. This is the kind of people you have voted for and now you reject it without pausing?
- life036, on 08/01/2008, -0/+12Who is this guy's source? Was he in on the meeting? The article provides no source for this information.
I want nothing more than to share this horrible information with my family and friends. But I can't, in good conscience, perpetuate this article if it's just one jackass journalist claiming he "knows" that this meeting took place.
Maybe I'm overlooking something obvious here. Can anyone provide a source for this guy's claims so I can endorse this article? - JonForTheWin, on 08/01/2008, -4/+16The government is the terrorist.
- Horribad, on 08/01/2008, -3/+14So much for being the *righteous* nation - Always criticizing other countries yet so many things are wrong with this one.
- gab00n, on 07/31/2008, -3/+14Please, Cheney soiled his draws in excitement.
- inactive, on 08/01/2008, -2/+13"To prevent war, the galaxy is in Orions belt"
- TheRhinoceros, on 08/01/2008, -2/+12I don't know what bothers me more, that Cheney even thought about putting Americans in the line of fire to make possible an unnecessary war, or, in one of the links in the thinkprogress story, http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/07/07/0807 ... , that said that the "gang of 8", several of them Democrats, decided with the president to put some $400,000,000 into programs to destabilize Iran.... While at the same time speaking of not leaving Iraq until that area is stable.
The present Administration Speaks of stabilizing the middle east from one side of it's mouth, and from the other, speaks of trying to create further instability in the middle east.
Is it me or is that Insane?
that's my 2 cents.
http://election-coverage.com/ - daaaveg, on 08/01/2008, -4/+13Scoop0901: "If you need the public's support, you have to have something the public can get on your team about, something to want to be a cheerleader for."
Sounds eerily similar to the events on 9/11/2001.
How would the bush administration convince 300 million people to invade the middle east? Simple. Allow 9/11 to happen. It's been proven we had knowledge of the attacks prior to 9/11.
What better way to create nationalism and support for a war. Hell, we had the entire world on our side. No wonder there was almost no opposition to invading the middle east. Now look at how many people think we should be there... - Syrisgone, on 07/31/2008, -3/+12Same basic thing happened right before the Vietnam war. The Tongking Incident was more than likely engineered by our government in order to put us in the middle of the conflict. Tho it is just a theory, and has never been proven, every time I read press like this it makes it all the more likely to be true.
- TacoHell, on 08/01/2008, -1/+10Bungled? perhaps from the perspective of a military-industrialist things could not be better.
- Dragotha, on 08/01/2008, -0/+8This almost ***** up A LOT of people's days. We already have 2 senseless wars the country can not afford - why not start a 3rd?
- akchrs, on 07/31/2008, -5/+13America, ***** yeah! Comin' again to save the ***** day, yeah! / America, ***** yeah! Freedom is the only way, yeah! / Terrorists, your game is through, 'cause now you have to answer to / America, ***** yeah! So lick my butt and suck on my balls! / America, ***** yeah! What you gonna do when we come for you now!
- arcangelgabriel, on 08/01/2008, -0/+8I still carry VC shrapnel in my shoulder.
Dear Mr. Vice President,
Please kiss my USMC ass.
Sincerely,
Someone who didn't get a deferment. - pgoetz, on 08/01/2008, -0/+8Welcome to George Bush's America ... and have a nice day!
- LeeJunFan, on 08/01/2008, -0/+8Which is why we are supposed to be a republic [but aren't any longer], which is harder to go to war illegally. However it's obvious our constitution is just a goddamned piece of paper after all. It starts with We the people, and it ends with We the people, it's our decree and if WE don't enforce it, we certainly can't expect the gov't it restricts to follow it.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 281 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is