What about Vietnam?
I've been
comparing the current holocaust to previous fake panics and wars, but I haven't considered Vietnam.
Here's a thoughtful comment:
Yes, this is starting to have a Vietnam vibe to it where it's obvious the war was not a great idea and needs to end immediately, but too many egos and people with credentials and titles they need to maintain are way too invested in the claims they made and need to be 'right.'
= = = = =
In some ways Vietnam is a better comparison than 9/11, because Vietnam was tremendously costly to ordinary
innocent Americans. Young men were
forced to participate in a crime that made no sense and had no purpose except evil. The Iraq and Afghan wars were fought by a small all-volunteer military plus profit-driven contractors. Nobody was forced to fight. The fighters
chose to be criminals, and their casualties were fairly small by historical standards.
Now, of course, EVERYONE except the demons is forced to participate in the most monstrous crime in all of human history.
The sunk-cost aspect doesn't work. Demons don't worry about sunk costs and invested credibility. They just kill and kill and kill. Sunk cost might apply to ordinary people who got sucked into the panic by media, but ordinary people
aren't making the decisions in any of these fake wars and fake emergencies. Our beliefs and intellects are irrelevant.
When was the last time we DECIDED to get out of a fake panic? 1952. Truman jumped into Korea, where we had no conceivable interests and no hope of victory. Ike promised to get us out. We elected him (note that I'm not putting the usual quotes around "elected") and he FULFILLED his promise. He began the pullout with reasonable speed. As a general he understood all the strategies and tactics needed to get in or out, so he didn't make any major mistakes in the pullout.
1952 was the last actual election. Since then we've been running the process every four years, but it doesn't have any function. It just makes money for candidates and parties and media.