Gramps, here is why I ask that we all attempt to invest more time into researching these very complex problems. When Bush convinced the nation to invade Iraq, his case relied more on fear an emotion than fact. His case was based not only on poorly supported information but also on a total misunderstanding of Washington's capacity to engage in middle east nation building.
Bush (a.k.a. Washington) took advantage of the fact that citizens didn't do enough research to understand that Hussein didn't attack us on 9/11. His administration later admitted there was absolutely no connection, but he (Bush) was able to keep the insinuation alive long enough to enact his pre-9/11 policy for regime change because, again, voters get their information from non-information sources like the mainstream news.
But Gramps, it goes deeper. Bush (and the Clintons a.k.a. the establishment) asked you to believe that the threat from Hussein (which was arguably contained from Gulf 1 & 10 years of bombing), was worse than the ISIS-enabling chaos that would result from his removal - a chaos that Bush couldn't solve in longer time than it took us to defeat Hitler. [What if Washington doesn't have the competence or budget to rebuild entire Middle East regions in our progressive, modern, Western, Democratic image? Why do we trust Washington to do such big things? What is Washington's involvement actually makes Big Problems worse?]
Gramps, Have you thought of how we can create a lasting, stable, pro-American governments in Iraq and Syria - governments that can defend their borders from groups like ISIS? ISIS, which is a group that gets stronger/bigger every time they can point to American soldiers and American bombs and American control of their region?
Keep in mind. Reagan backed Hussein knowing that he was a madman because he believed that the region needed a brutal strongman to keep the warring tribes in line. I think Reagan was right. He understood that we couldn't build a modern government in the region, one with strong law enforcement and a technologically advanced defense/police apparatus which keeps bad Islamists from gaining control. Reagan understood that Big Government simply didn't have the power to nation build in this region without making things much worse. He and poppy Bush realized that to destabilize this region would unleash a series of conflicts that Washington couldn't fix. It would mean that Washington would have to occupy the region forever, which would drastically increase terrorism (which terrorism is partly caused by Western military bases and involvement in their house). Reagan understood this (despite his rhetorical pandering to national security issues, primarily the Cold War, which gave the US a context for intervention in the economies of resource-rich 3rd world nations, mostly in the global south).
But Gramps - because we don't study actual facts about complex issues; because we let Rush and FOX tempt us into emotionally cathartic bumper sticker simplifications - we were an easy mark for Bush 43, who took advantage of the fact that we didn't understand the actual threat posed by Hussein, nor did we understand what would happen once we radically destabilized the region.
Gramps, you tell us that Washington doesn't have the competence to run a laundromat without ******* it up, but you (we!) gave that same Washington the power/budget to rebuild an entire Arab region. What? Washington can't even manage the 50 states effectively, but you made it big enough and powerful enough to rebuild foreign continents? And you didn't realize that giving Washington the concentrated power to do the biggest possible thing we've ever asked it to do would unleash the biggest possible unintended consequences, and make things much, much, much worse.
Gramps, what if the result is that Washington merely creates an unstable, terrorist-spawning nightmare overseas coupled with an invasive surveillance state at home (which destroys the Constitution along with our civil rights)?
Point is: for all your talk about limiting the power of government, your side - somehow - keeps giving Big Government way too much power and money to do things that it simply can't do. This is why we're scared of electing another Republican. Because Republican voters are all too easily scared by the FOX-Rush nexus into giving Washington the power to make terrorism worse - which terrorism is then used as the very reason we need to elect more Republicans and transfer more concentrated surveillance power to the Federal Government.
It's a toxic cycle - and the cycle relies on scared low-information voters who don't do independent research. You're taught to hate Obama and Muslims, but you don't know the difference between Kurds and Shiites, and you have no plan for creating stable, pro-American governments in Iraq and Syria. You just keep giving Big Government more power to fight terrorism, which Government power only makes things worse.
So yes, we are begging that your anger be supplanted by education, so that you stop electing people who make these problems worse. We want you to understand the complexities of all these issues - from gun violence to nation building - so that you are less vulnerable to bumper sticker logic.
