Was Iraq 'Watergate mark two'?

[max_tranmere]

I've just watched Channel 4 news and they are live in Washington covering the discussion about whether the USA should go in to Syria. A number of Senators they've interviewed, and lots of members of the public too, have said the nation is war weary and doesn't want another war following the disaster that was Iraq. On the cover of a magazine I saw today it has Obama's face and a headline saying "fight this war, not the last one" - implying the ghost of Iraq hangs over this possible war too. I also remember the line in Michael Moore's documentary film 'Fahrenheit 9/11', which looks at the lies Bush told in the build-up to Iraq. Michael Moore says in the film "will they ever trust us again?". It would appear not, and it seems the lies over Iraq, the disaster that was, and the shadow it has left of all foreign policy decision-making since, confirms that it has damaged politics. It has been said that Watergate in the 1970's, the lies told by Nixon regarding Vietnam, left a long ugly shadow of mistrust over politics that is still there today. I think Iraq was Watergate II. People's views please.

[Essex Lad]

max_tranmere wrote:

> I've just watched Channel 4 news and they are live in
> Washington covering the discussion about whether the USA should
> go in to Syria. A number of Senators they've interviewed, and
> lots of members of the public too, have said the nation is war
> weary and doesn't want another war following the disaster that
> was Iraq. On the cover of a magazine I saw today it has Obama's
> face and a headline saying "fight this war, not the last one" -
> implying the ghost of Iraq hangs over this possible war too. I
> also remember the line in Michael Moore's documentary film
> 'Fahrenheit 9/11', which looks at the lies Bush told in the
> build-up to Iraq. Michael Moore says in the film "will they
> ever trust us again?". It would appear not, and it seems the
> lies over Iraq, the disaster that was, and the shadow it has
> left of all foreign policy decision-making since, confirms that
> it has damaged politics. It has been said that Watergate in the
> 1970s, the lies told by Nixon regarding Vietnam, left a long
> ugly shadow of mistrust over politics that is still there
> today. I think Iraq was Watergate II. People's views please.

Watergate had nothing to do with Vietnam, nothing to do with US foreign policy. It was a burglary at the Watergate hotel in June 1972 by "plumbers" with a view to getting Nixon re-elected.

[max_tranmere]

I was always under the impression that Watergate was Nixon sending his people in to try and get hold of some papers which may show him having been involved in some underhand dealings, or some kind of deceit, regarding Vietnam. His crew of burglars were sent to try and get hold of incriminating papers so that no one else could see them, then Nixon's bad dealings would not be exposed. From what you've said it involved something different. I must read up on it.

[andy at handiwork]

As Essex Lad says, Watergate was all getting Nixon re-elected. It was organised and paid for by CREEP, the committee to Re-Elect the President.