Hmmmm.
The links or parallels with Iraq and Vietnam are sometimes overstated - largely because many of those who wish to see an end to this current folly, believe it's demise will only come hand-in-hand with a public backlash against the war. Attempting to recreate 'the vietnam spirit' is entirely understandable.
As knifey pointed out:
manipulating public opinion, cherry picking intelligence data, a carefully orchestrated spin machine, exploiting world events, shifting situational rationales for military action, significant intelligence failures, discrediting and demonizing critics, covert political agendas, and the fantasy that we can use military force to socially engineer the world into our own image - these are common characteristics of our government in both Vietnam and Iraq. This is not without substance - knifey has a fair point.
The original article did raise an important point though. A point about conscience and loyalty. The article basically argues that revealing your own government's deceit is a higher priority that your own freedom/life. Interesting point. The counterweight is... at what point does treachery become honesty? At what point do your actions cease to be the acts of a traitor and become the acts of a patriot?
Hypothetically, if, during a time of war and national strife, you can call your government a liar, a thief and a murderer, grab the classified documents to prove it and somehow avaoid being considered as a traitor - then shouldn't such actions apply at all times? Shouldn't that person be listened to, rather than be castigated as traitorous or branded as a 'Hussain-lover'?
Interesting post, greedy.
