To me, if the leadership truly believes that the war is worthy and just, and if they’re actually competent — they’d listen to the generals who warned about the need for more troops instead of fire them, and they’d seriously consider draft, and raise tax to pay for the war (instead of push it as debt to pass to the next generation).
I don’t think that I’m that knowledgeable about history and politics, but I generally very good at logic and can follow common sense very well, and I keep my mind open. I read an article very early on about Richard Clarke being pushed out by the current adminsitration (that was before his book, etc), and I had a very bad feeling about our decision makers’ competency level as well as how honest they’re with the public. Unfortunately, the events that unfold since confirmed that bad feeling over and over again. If a top leader only listens to people who agree with him/her, and start to push competent people out because they have a different opinion, watch out! When it happens in business, it’s almost always bad news (and I’m very familiar with that). It seems that in politics it’s not that different.
Anyway, don’t think that anyone’s mind will change after this. Although I consider myself slightly more educated about our national leaders’ personal involvement in the war.
