4 ms·

> That's the kind of claim you need evidence for Where exactly would such “evidence” come from? Do you think the CEO of Raytheon would ever utter such a statem

> That's the kind of claim you need evidence for Where exactly would such “evidence” come from? Do you think the CEO of Raytheon would ever utter such a statement even if it were 100% true? > Furthermore, even if it is true, it doesn't support the original outlandish claim that "The 'war on terror' was not meant to stop terrorism. It was meant to fan the flames and give the US an endless war that can be fought for generations." I fail to see how anyone could believe that bombing people from the sky and invading a couple countries would win over favor from potential terrorists. In fact, it would seem the exact opposite is true. We should’ve spent the trillions of dollars using economic diplomacy instead. Now, one could argue honestly that our leaders are just complete idiots. I just happen to think they knew exactly what we were doing.

tablespoon 5y ago
> Where exactly would such “evidence” come from? Do you think the CEO of Raytheon would ever utter such a statement even if it were 100% true? Just some examples: a leak or confession. People do sometimes have changes of heart. But until you can actually provide evidence, you're just making up "facts" that are convenient to you. Also, the CEO of Raytheon is very unlikely to be the person that determined what the "war on terror" was meant to do. > I fail to see how anyone could believe that bombing people from the sky and invading a couple countries would win over favor from potential terrorists. We should’ve... That failing is yours. There seems to be a lot of hindsight bias there, as well as some weird misunderstandings. > Now, one could argue honestly that our leaders are just complete idiots. I just happen to think they knew exactly what we were doing. It's far more likely that "our leaders" were high on "end of history" idealism, and spurred to hasty action by a traumatic attack, and are nearly as unable to accurately predict how a complex world will behave as the rest of us.
2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
You're still making a very big claim without evidence. Isn't that often the thing with conspiracy theorists? They always have a reason why they don't have evidence and somehow that means they can claim anything that they want.

tablespoon 5y ago

> Where exactly would such “evidence” come from? Do you think the CEO of Raytheon would ever utter such a statement even if it were 100% true? Just some examples: a leak or confession. People do sometimes have changes of heart. But until you can actually provide evidence, you're just making up "facts" that are convenient to you. Also, the CEO of Raytheon is very unlikely to be the person that determined what the "war on terror" was meant to do. > I fail to see how anyone could believe that bombing people from the sky and invading a couple countries would win over favor from potential terrorists. We should’ve... That failing is yours. There seems to be a lot of hindsight bias there, as well as some weird misunderstandings. > Now, one could argue honestly that our leaders are just complete idiots. I just happen to think they knew exactly what we were doing. It's far more likely that "our leaders" were high on "end of history" idealism, and spurred to hasty action by a traumatic attack, and are nearly as unable to accurately predict how a complex world will behave as the rest of us.

2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago

You're still making a very big claim without evidence. Isn't that often the thing with conspiracy theorists? They always have a reason why they don't have evidence and somehow that means they can claim anything that they want.