Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

eridani

(51,907 posts)
Tue Feb 7, 2012, 06:43 AM Feb 2012

Return of Cheney's 1% doctrine

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/9802-focus-return-of-cheneys-one-percent-doctrine

A weak point in the psyches of many Americans is that they allow their imaginations to run wild about potential threats to their personal safety, no matter how implausible the dangers may be. Perhaps, this is a side effect from watching too many scary movies and violent TV shows.

But this vulnerability also may explain why the current war hysteria against Iran is reviving the sorts of fanciful threats to the United States last seen before the Iraq War. Since right-wing Israelis and their neocon allies are having trouble selling the U.S. public on a new preemptive war in the Middle East, they have again resorted to dreaming up hypothetical scenarios to scare easily frightened Americans.

<snip>

Even after the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the eventual realization that the fear-mongering was based on falsehoods, President Bush kept up the scary talk with claims about Iraq as the "central front" in the "war on terror" and al-Qaeda building a "caliphate" stretching from Indonesia to Spain and thus threatening the United States.

Fear seemed to be the great motivator for getting the American people to line up behind actions that, on balance, often created greater dangers for the United States. Beyond the illegality and immorality of attacking other countries based on such fabrications, there was the practical issue of unintended consequences.

Which is the core logical fallacy of Cheney's "one percent doctrine." Overreacting to an extremely unlikely threat can create additional risks that also exceed the one percent threshold, which, in turn, require more violent responses, thus cascading outward until the country essentially destroys itself in pursuit of the illusion of perfect security.
1 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Return of Cheney's 1% doctrine (Original Post) eridani Feb 2012 OP
I agree with the above. Denninmi Feb 2012 #1

Denninmi

(6,581 posts)
1. I agree with the above.
Tue Feb 7, 2012, 07:10 AM
Feb 2012

I didn't buy into the hype post 911, and I'm not buying it now. It took me all of 6-8 weeks to figure out that 911 was going to be an isolated incident, not the start of a wave. I think the thing that sealed it for me was the ludicrous, probably invented threat that the Golden Gate Bridge was going to be destroyed, which was probably early November of 2001.

But, it was all crazy fun watching people panic over things that were never going to happen, such as when they were all told to create their safe rooms, so they all ran to the store to buy plastic sheeting, duct tape, and bottled water.

And, I wasn't buying it when Powell sat there in front the UN showing the Bush administration's "proof" of all of Saddam's WMD's.

NOT buying it now. Me thinks all of this saber rattling about Iran is curiously time to jack up the price of gas and put the US economy into another tail spin just in time to squelch Obama's chances of re-election. And, its a win-win for the 1%, because they make oodles of money when gas is $4.50 a gallon.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Return of Cheney's 1% doc...