4 ms·

They’re just random news sites you’re linking though. They’re not even political news magazines. News editors don’t enact policy. Who cares what they thinks.

nobodyandproud 4y ago
Gaslighting doesn’t work here. I provided my evidence. Show me proof of the contrary.
- thrashh 4y ago
  You didn't provide evidence. Your argument is that "the government didn't take Russia seriously enough" Proper evidence would be an study of government officials in power and their position at the time. It is not 3 hand-picked private industry news articles.
  - nobodyandproud 4y ago
    > Proper evidence would be an study of government officials in power and their position at the time. > It is not 3 hand-picked private industry news articles. It reflects public sentiment. Analysts aren’t the ones in power. Public sentiment and leadership’s will to bend the public sentiment are what matters. See GWB’s bullshit invasion of Iraq.
    - serf 4y ago
      >See GWB’s bullshit invasion of Iraq. on that point, I seem to remember all (most) of the analyst think-tanks for public policy (RAND corporation, etc) pointing the administration at the time towards the idea of war and 'obvious' WMD proliferation. Also public sentiment was pretty on-board with (apparent) retribution after 9/11. The country got tired of the war effort quick, but the trumpets were blowing pretty loud for a long time after 9/11, both from government and the people around me at the time. The analyst groups supporting that decision just sped the steamroller.
      - nobodyandproud 4y ago
        > on that point, I seem to remember all (most) of the analyst think-tanks for public policy (RAND corporation, etc) pointing the administration at the time towards the idea of war and 'obvious' WMD proliferation. I remember the UN inspectors unable to convince the US leaders that evidence was lacking. > Also public sentiment was pretty on-board with (apparent) retribution after 9/11. The country got tired of the war effort quick, but the trumpets were blowing pretty loud for a long time after 9/11, both from government and the people around me at the time. My point exactly. A bullshit war was waged by persuasion with only tenuous evidence: https://www.vice.com/en/article/9kve3z/the-cia-just-declassified-the-document-that-supposedly-justified-the-iraq-invasion https://www.vice.com/en/article/9kve3z/the-cia-just-declassi... It’s leaders and public will, not analysts.

nobodyandproud 4y ago

Gaslighting doesn’t work here. I provided my evidence. Show me proof of the contrary.

thrashh 4y ago
You didn't provide evidence. Your argument is that "the government didn't take Russia seriously enough" Proper evidence would be an study of government officials in power and their position at the time. It is not 3 hand-picked private industry news articles.
- nobodyandproud 4y ago
  > Proper evidence would be an study of government officials in power and their position at the time. > It is not 3 hand-picked private industry news articles. It reflects public sentiment. Analysts aren’t the ones in power. Public sentiment and leadership’s will to bend the public sentiment are what matters. See GWB’s bullshit invasion of Iraq.
  - serf 4y ago
    >See GWB’s bullshit invasion of Iraq. on that point, I seem to remember all (most) of the analyst think-tanks for public policy (RAND corporation, etc) pointing the administration at the time towards the idea of war and 'obvious' WMD proliferation. Also public sentiment was pretty on-board with (apparent) retribution after 9/11. The country got tired of the war effort quick, but the trumpets were blowing pretty loud for a long time after 9/11, both from government and the people around me at the time. The analyst groups supporting that decision just sped the steamroller.
    - nobodyandproud 4y ago
      > on that point, I seem to remember all (most) of the analyst think-tanks for public policy (RAND corporation, etc) pointing the administration at the time towards the idea of war and 'obvious' WMD proliferation. I remember the UN inspectors unable to convince the US leaders that evidence was lacking. > Also public sentiment was pretty on-board with (apparent) retribution after 9/11. The country got tired of the war effort quick, but the trumpets were blowing pretty loud for a long time after 9/11, both from government and the people around me at the time. My point exactly. A bullshit war was waged by persuasion with only tenuous evidence: https://www.vice.com/en/article/9kve3z/the-cia-just-declassified-the-document-that-supposedly-justified-the-iraq-invasion https://www.vice.com/en/article/9kve3z/the-cia-just-declassi... It’s leaders and public will, not analysts.