That's kind of an odd piece. If you object to being lied to, you're showing contempt for those who bought the lies! Kind of a Catch 22.
Confession: I believed them when they said Iraq had WMD. I know lots of people who did, or at least half-did. I was less sure about their repetitive claims that we were in imminent danger of a "mushroom cloud" from them, but couldn't be sure, of course.
And despite the fact that the president says What's the difference? about whether they actually had WMD, and they were perilous to us, or not, I myself think it does make a difference.
This is certainly true:
Of course propaganda can be persuasive, sometimes even decisive, for individuals making up their minds over whether to support a war, a political party, or whatever. But the influence of propaganda is determined by the broader political climate and by the general level of public debate. In a healthy, critical climate, it is likely that Bush and Blair would have received even more ridicule for their Iraqi propaganda. But at a time when serious political debate is hard to find, our leaders can offer dodgy dossiers and half-cocked claims as if they were good coin. In short, it is often the weakness of the opposition that allows leaders to take their chances with paltry propaganda. |
