Majority Of Republicans Support Preemptive Strike On North Korea, Déjà Vu Edition


by Eric Blair, Activist Post:

After just a few short months of being propagandized, a recent poll conducted by Quinnipiac University revealed that a majority of Republicans (46{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} to 41{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}) now support a preemptive strike on North Korea.

Newsweek reports:

An increasingly hostile relationship between the U.S. and North Korea has Americans considering a preemptive strike on the country—and many Republicans are all for it. About 46 percent of Republicans support a preemptive strike on North Korea today—compare that with just 42 percent of Republicans who say they don’t support it, according to a new Quinnipiac University poll.

The poll also showed a large majority of Republicans (63{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} to 29{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}) believe that it’s more important to “take away North Korea’s nuclear weapons” than to “avoid war.”  Nearly opposite views are held by people identifying as Democrats (24{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} to 69{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}).

Previously viewed as aggressive invasion, the United States has normalized preemptive war.

George W. Bush and Dick Cheney argued that Iraq was such a threat that they must be bombed and invaded to prevent a very unlikely attack “at home.”  A majority fell for it.

Remember “45 minutes to a mushroom cloud?” Remember Secretary Powell disgracing himself at the UN with vials of anthrax and diagrams of “mobile chemical weapons labs?”

It’s important to remember the lies that promoted preemptive wars as they’re being rolled out once again.

The change in public policy from a supposed defensive nation to an aggressive war machine was called the “Bush Doctrine.”  Obama continued the policy as if it was standard operating procedure.

When the Obama Administration argued that the US must preemptively strike Libya’s ruler Gaddafi in support of a “rebel” uprising, the majority fell for it. They told us it was a preemptive “humanitarian war.”  They said the operation would only take days. And of course Republicans went along with it because the war machine pays their bills.

Obama, who came into office and received a Nobel Peace Prize after just 8 months, became the first president to spend every day at war. Obama also exported twice as many weapons as the Bush Administration. In his final year as president, the US dropped 26,171 bombs around the world. Some could argue he was the most warlike president ever.

Anti-war activists finally stood up to this preemptive war agenda when Obama wanted to launch yet another in Syria. Using the same script Obama cited “humanitarian reasons,” aka Assad was killing his own people. As it turned out, Assad was fighting Western-backed terrorist militias just as Gaddafi was in Libya. Americans had enough. They called Congress in record numbers to oppose the aggression.

Both Iraq and Libya wars have been absolute disasters. No honest person can claim the people of those nations are better off after the US-backed mass murder and destruction. But if the goal was to weaken stable nations to strengthen certain neighboring opponents, then it may be mission accomplished.

Read More @