(Typically) in a political context, the way a policy, course of action, etc. is perceived by the public. Usually (or at least in my life *tear tear*) contrary to the policy’s intentions. Often hilariously so for the people that lean back in their rich people chairs and smirk in an “I told you so” way.
I'm embarrassed, but I don't get the optics joke. Could you please explain
Hussein used chemical weapons against Iran during the Iran/Iraq war; the CIA "helped".
The Iran/Iraq war example illustrates two things that Iran very much does not like; it also illustrates two things that, when convenient to the second item, go very well hand in hand:
america intervening in things
In other words: the Iran/Iraq war is an example of when America was totes cool with chemical weapons because they’re like “we need to balance these fuckas”, while Syria is an example of when America’s like “guys no chemical weapons are totes not cool (like atm anywaaay)”
Hey, everyone. I’d just like to take a moment away from the usual for some words on the bombing in Boston, and some of the responses I’ve been seeing on social media sites. There have been numerous posts that’ve brushed off the bombing with other tragedies that range from the tangentially related to the utterly inane. I get bringing up the bombings in Iraq that have so far killed dozens, days before the vote there. Or the atrocities that scar entire communities on a daily basis, mostly outside the West. Drones are a stretch, although I get the link to hellfire missiles. Western imperialism is where things start to get ridiculous. However, regardless of the strength of the association, I find the reasoning behind it all to be crass and absurd. Such a zero-sum game of comparative suffering is not only ridiculously insensitive but strategically self-mutilating.