I've often wondered why it is that some folks who advocate aggressive military action promote the view that the US is considered to be weak. And after the world learns all over again that the US is strong, and perfectly capable, the same folks indicate that we must be aggressive again, because the world thinks we are weak.
Those who counter the argument are then labelled. Identified as liberals, weak, US-haters, ignorant, or whatever. Categorized so they can be dismissed as irrelevant and wrong.
Over time, many of the dismissed reach a point of finding more useful pursuits. They take their arguments to where it might have the influence of ideas on an audience not confined to a single track.
What is left behind is a group of yes-folk, eager to demonstrate the US is not weak, forever. It is not enough to demonstrate that the US can outkill any challenger; we must repeat it often.
And between the conflicts, everything gets repeated often. Because repeating it aloud enough will make it so. Quantity passes as truth, not quality.
I see this a lot, in different places. |
