2006-08-15 21:20:37 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
I thought Alfred E. Neumann said it first. Aeschylus said it was truth, and later in 1918 Senator Hiram Johnson said it. He was an isolationist. Chinese General Sun Tzu said that warfare is based on deception. Which certainly seems to be true in Iraq. President Bush kept coming up with reasons for our being there until he found one the American people would accept. Often the greater the lie the more people will accept it. Truth seems to be sadly missing in our foreign policy. Not just in Iraq and Afghanistan, but now with our involvement with the conflict between Israel and Hezbelloh. Bush can say that Israel was the victor, but no matter how you paint this pig, it is still a pig. Israel did not win peace or security, just a chance for the spin doctors to do their magic.
2006-08-16 07:01:52 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Truth, Yes I do agree. Well look at the mess we are in. And what was the reason for the war. Has there been any truth or evidence to support Weapons of Mass Destruction? No! Continued lies to support this or draw our attention away from this fact.
2006-08-15 21:30:42 · answer #2 · answered by celtic-tides04@sbcglobal.net 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"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 in any country."
Hermann Goering
It figures a Nazi wrote that eh?
Just like beauty, truth is in the eye of the beholder.
2006-08-16 03:20:33 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Truth. Yes I agree. And in the current conflict Truth was tortured, murdered and mutilated before the war even started.
2006-08-15 21:44:18 · answer #4 · answered by Lleh 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I hate seeing our infantrymen death over there yet there are various stable people in that u . s . who we would be signing a death warrant for if we left. on the different hand they don't seem to be doing lots for themselves and Liberal horsesh$# has #$^%ed sh$% all up. What we could do is kick the media out and supply them authentic marvel and awe and a top stable tonk interior the tradesman's front. i think of it relatively is reported as Blitzkreig strategies and we failed at it by utilising making specific that we don't offend each and every physique (even although all people who hate us will hate us and people who do no longer won't exchange their minds). shall we win and end dropping people however the liberals could have us enjoying little sissy sunshine branch of the USA woman scout troop extremely of a militia with a activity that became wrongfully all started and now ought to be rightfully finished. long tale short i think of the conflict became incorrect yet each and every physique with a liberal techniques and/or a vulnerable abdomen is fortunate that it is not me in cost of the conflict via fact it does no longer be particularly, guantanimo bay would decide for greater beneficial, and we would be boosting the financial device in production of boards, shipment of water, and a thank you to integrate them greater efficiently!
2016-11-04 22:18:24 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The TRUTH is the first casualty of war.
2006-08-15 21:38:05 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
truth. i'm not so sure truth isn't dead, or unborn, from the beginning. "dulce et decorum est pro patria mori", it is written - "it is sweet and right to die for your country". is this truth?
2006-08-15 21:37:24 · answer #7 · answered by altgrave 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Truth.
yes i agree. there is always going to be a one sided view
2006-08-15 21:24:28 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
um...i think it was humanity....or innocence...dont remember 100%.
i agree with it.
2006-08-15 21:22:19 · answer #9 · answered by johnny_zondo 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋