We know the public is overwhelmingly against their political "leadership;" a 9 to 1 ratio report their government has reneged on their Constitutional contract for representative government, as explained in the 2-minute video below. This ratio will obviously climb when the public who still suffer from corporate media propaganda are fully informed of the crimes enacted with their tax dollars and under their flag.
US universities and colleges could end unlawful US wars and stop banksters' rigged-casino fraud if they taught the central facts of these issues. This four-part series of articles is an open proposal for their action. Feel free to share it.
Some Americans justify the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as well-intended interventions for the good of their people, and the security of our nation and the world. They believe that the President MUST have had evidence of national security risk before taking the last and dire step of invasion.
This is a crucial point. If there was credible evidence of imminent threat to US national security, then the wars were justified under the UN Charter for self-defense. However, if the evidence was not credible, or fabricated, then these wars are illegal Wars of Aggression. So which is it?
Americans and the world no longer need BELIEVE anything; the specific evidence used to justify invading two countries is now public knowledge. All we have to do is match the government's claims to the exact evidence and you can decide for yourself. This article lays it out.
First, as you may recall, there were four basic claims of fact presented by political "leadership" to invade Iraq: