Do you believe this BS? (Bill Moyers and historical content)
 

Americans have been duped by their media into many wars. Here is (by far not the only piece of) damning evidence that rational American public opinion was distorted by the interests of war:

[ QUOTE ]
BILL MOYERS: (Talking about 2002-3) You had Scott Ritter, former weapons inspector. Who was saying that if we invade, it will be a historic blunder.

PHIL DONOHUE: You didn't have him alone. He had to be there with someone else who supported the war. In other words, you couldn't have Scott Ritter alone. You could have Richard Perle alone.

BILL MOYERS: You could have the conservative.

PHIL DONOHUE: You could have the supporters of the President alone. And they would say why this war is important. You couldn't have a dissenter alone. Our producers were instructed to feature two conservatives for every liberal.

BILL MOYERS: You're kidding.

PHIL DONOHUE: No this is absolutely true.

BILL MOYERS: Instructed from above?

PHIL DONOHUE: Yes. I was counted as two liberals. . . . I had to have two . . . . there's just a terrible fear. And I think that's the right word.



[/ QUOTE ]

America has been duped into many wars: WWI, Mexican American War, the Terrorist War on Cuba, Vietnam, Gulf War 2...Did I miss any?

Here is the question: Are these wars worth it for the economic well being of the United States people, even though they couldn't figure it out for themselves?

Does the elite ruling class use mercenaries (the low-hanging fruit) subsidized by the bewildered heard to plunder the natural resources of other continents?

Re: Do you believe this BS? (Bill Moyers and historical content)
 

So you are making the argument that the press is biased as conservatives have maintained for decades? And that jingoism is a reader-pleasing topic for editors? Wow.

Re: Do you believe this BS? (Bill Moyers and historical content)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Are these wars worth it for the economic well being of the United States people?

[/ QUOTE ]

They are to insure full-spectrum dominance of the American empire. The empire being an alliance of the state with the major economic players.

[ QUOTE ]
Does the elite ruling class use mercenaries (the low-hanging fruit) subsidized by the bewildered heard to plunder the natural resources of other continents?

[/ QUOTE ]

I see it in a broader way. Wars are to benefit the American empire, not specific company Ripoff inc. Sure, certain corporations get special deals. The coup against Guatemala seems to have been rather parochial -- that is, benefiting one company (United Fruit).

But Gulf II is not to insure that corporation A pumps the oil. It is so that the empire control's the world's on-off switch. So on any kind of issue, Europe, Japan or anybody else have to defer to the U.S. Sure, Haliburton is given right of first pillage, but the project is bigger than enriching Cheney's cronies.