supported these bullshit wars. And some voters might've gone along. There are also those who pretty much betrayed the party and their voters to pretty much become repukes because they majority of the party wasn't bloodthirsty enough. Lieberman, that duel moron from Georgia, etc. Just like in the 80s some became Reaganites because they felt the party wasn't "anti-communist" enough. Or in the 60s when they felt party leaders weren't racist enough. On and on and on....
We've always had to battle a faction of the party which has been on the wrong side of history. What he fails to mention is that (maybe with the exception of civil rights, before the flip) these are right wing ideas.
I opposed that stupid ass Iraq war when he was all gun-ho for it. I take him at his word that he "evolved" 9n this. But then there is Russia. Where his own staff reporters have debated him and pretty much owned him. He has decided to bury his head in the sand. Reached a conclusion early on and twist the constant emerging facts in order to propagandize.
Do I want US troops to get the fuck out of the Middle East? You bet your ass. But there's 0 nuances in this article. Nowhere is the word Kurds mentioned. They are about to be abandoned to he massacred, in part, because of the clusterfuck his boys Jr. and Cheney created. Sure these things go back hundreds of years before the US even existed. But at the very minimum some NATO forces should remain in order to deter Turks, Syrians or whomever from exterminating the people who have had NATO's back from day one. You just can't run out and say "fuck it" without at least a halfway decent strategy and betray your allies.
When The Intercept was first announced I was all for it. But Greenwald's an asshole troll who always seems to find a way to kiss up to or excuse the Poopy Diaper Toddler supposedly in charge. But that doesn't lump me in with the Lieberman types in the party.
= new reply since forum marked as read
