2007-09-25 06:45:48 · 25 answers · asked by belle 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Yes.That is totally correct
2007-09-25 07:00:59 · answer #1 · answered by justgoodfolk 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
One would think the warmongers could come up with new propaganda but it is best to stick with what works!!!
The Amerikan public is becoming increasingly tolerant of Fascist tactics in the name of "freedom" and "security" and that is way more scary then anything the government has done thus far. That is what makes it easy to use the same type of lies regarding Vietnam, Iraq or Iran or whomever the greedy war mongers who own this country deem a threat to their power and wealth.
2007-09-25 07:13:37 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
do you like us to respond to your question or is this a one guy prepare with you by way of fact the huge call? you may think of that it somewhat is 9/11, although that is not. look on the bigger image, the humanity concern. i'm not even taking it from the eastern attacking Pearl Harbor viewpoint, however the individuals. The individuals delivered us into the atomic age. on the grounds that that day the destruction of Earth is a real threat. If united states of america is destroyed via terrorist an incredible many countries could proceed to exist. although, if there is yet another worldwide conflict the destruction via atomic potential would be large. what number countries have atomic weapon now?
2016-11-06 08:30:10 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Rhetoric against Iran is definitely being ratcheted up at this point. However, at the same time it should be realized that Ahmedinejad is a dangerous fanatic and that he does have the potential to ignite conflict in the region. No matter what you view as propaganda regarding Iraq and I will agree there was a fair amount, one fact remains. Saddam Hussein was an oppressive, mass murdering dictator who we were justified in removing from power.
Sky King: Based on your comments I would have to say that you have no clue what justification is. So let me enlighten you in this area. Firing on the forces of a sovereign nation is an act of war. Go back and study the history of the conflict. Then come back and tell me how many times Iraqi forces fired on coalition planes patrolling the Southern No Fly Zone in the nineties. Each a distinct and separate act of war. Each a violation of UN resolutions and the cease fire agreement which ended the first gulf conflict. If you want to argue that many of the excuses the Bush administration gave were weak, I would agree with that, but to say we had no justification whatsoever betrays your lack of knowledge on the subject.
2007-09-25 06:54:56 · answer #4 · answered by Bryan 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Man so many who are drinking from the bush cool-aid cup. This is propaganda alright but it's not bad propaganda. The one good thing the bush administration has is they know how to use propaganda. Just look at how many of your answers think that we were justified to go to Iraq. Sheep who think they are wolves.
2007-09-25 06:59:59 · answer #5 · answered by 7crows 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Yes, the administration is beating the drums in the same way.
Yes, Iran could be considered a threat. That does not give us the right to attack them. If we were to attack every country that was a threat to us, we'd be invading North Korea, former Soviet rogue nations, Pakistan, etc. etc.
2007-09-25 06:57:04 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Propanganda??
Of course!
The freely-controlled news media can do nothing, but spew propaganda or useless stuff, such as sports...
Those who profit from war have been itching to use the U.S. military to bomb Iran, for quite a while, now.
2007-09-25 06:56:01 · answer #7 · answered by mrearly2 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Probably some, though the pres of Iran is doing a fine job of it himself. (Unless that's actually Yakov Smirnov who came over to speak.)
Iran would probably be better off without its current government, and Saddam was definitely the bad guy in Iraq. The people who should be initiating that, though, are the people there, not us. If they need our help, fine, but they should take the lead.
2007-09-25 07:23:48 · answer #8 · answered by John's Secret Identity™ 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
No, the bad "propaganda" about Iran has been comming at us for much longer.
2007-09-25 06:48:43 · answer #9 · answered by Lavrenti Beria 6 · 6⤊ 2⤋
Yep -- even some of the exact same phrasing -- it's convenient that the two countries' names are spelled so closely alike -- it allows old press releases to be reused with only minor editing.
2007-09-25 06:57:06 · answer #10 · answered by coragryph 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
The same MO is always used, but some how more people are noticing lately.
2007-09-25 06:56:27 · answer #11 · answered by Jose R 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋