Has the U.S. government ever lied to start a war?

[TraceOneInfinite Flat Earther 96']

Look no further than the Vietnam war.

In August 1964, President Johnson launched a war on Vietnam.   This war was launched after secretary of defense McNamera told the American public there was an attack by North Vietnames torpedo boats on American destroyers in the Gulf of Tonkin.

It later turned out that the Gulf of Tonkin episode was fake, that the highest American officials had lied to the public. 

Infact, it was actually the U.S. that had attacked Vietnam unprovoked.  The CIA had engaged in a secret operation attacking North Vietnamese coastal installations-so if there had been an attack, it was not "unprovoked" and it was on Vietnamese territorial waters where the US was conducting spy missions.

[virtuoso]

I have mentioned this before but the U.SS LIberty was another blatant attempt to instigate the nuking of egypt, in fact the fact that it was staged has been admitted and is open to public scrutiny now, it's a well known saga.

[Word to Everything]

They let the people die at Pearl Harbor 

[WestCoasta]

it's funny how the stereotype is that 100% of American citizens love and trust the government, lol

[7even]

it's funny how the stereotype is that 100% of American citizens love and trust the government, lol

bush was re-elected. how are europeans supposed to think you guys dont suck when it comes to judge governments?

[Teddy Roosevelt]

it's funny how the stereotype is that 100% of American citizens love and trust the government, lol

That's just something Infinite falsely portrays so he can give himself a reason to bash American government, so he can say he's trying to open our eyes. Then when people don't take him seriuosly he can think he is better then the rest of us.

[herpes]

it's funny how the stereotype is that 100% of American citizens love and trust the government, lol

bush was re-elected. how are europeans supposed to think you guys dont suck when it comes to judge governments?

when each of election was split 50/50 it should say something.  But I guess that says europeans are just like americans in the aspect there too lazy to look into something and rather just look at the headline.

[7even]

it's funny how the stereotype is that 100% of American citizens love and trust the government, lol

bush was re-elected. how are europeans supposed to think you guys dont suck when it comes to judge governments?

when each of election was split 50/50 it should say something.  But I guess that says europeans are just like americans in the aspect there too lazy to look into something and rather just look at the headline.

i know that, it was embarrassing for your ppl still. bush got more votes than any president before. embarrassing.

[M Dogg™]

America has lied about war for years. Here is the Mexican-American War, which gave the U.S the whole southwest, were white people now want to keep Mexicans out, even legal born people like me, and at the same time, this war lead to the Civil War.

IThe new Mexican government, weakened and virtually bankrupt from the War of Independence found it difficult to administer its distant northern territories, and in particular, to enforce the abolition of slavery in Texas. After the annexation of Texas, newly elected President James K. Polk set out to acquire the Mexican provinces of California and New Mexico (which then covered all of the present-day southwest United States), for up to $30 million. In 1845, Polk sent diplomat John Slidell to negotiate this sale. In January 1846, Polk increased pressure on Mexico to sell by sending troops, under General Zachary Taylor, into the area between the Nueces River and the Rio Grande—territory that was claimed by both Texas and Mexico. The original Mexican province of Texas had the border at the Nueces River and Mexico recognized this as the current border. Whereas the United States recognized the border at the Rio Grande, in accordance with the broken Treaties of Velasco and understandings by Texan and Mexican citizens. Taylor ignored Mexican demands that he withdraw, and marched to the bank of the Rio Grande, where he began to build Fort Brown. The Mexican forces on the opposite side of the river, in Matamoros, commanded by General Mariano Arista prepared for war.

Slidell's arrival in Mexico caused political turmoil after word leaked out that he was there to purchase additional territory and not to offer compensation for the loss of Texas. President Mariano Paredes y Arrillaga, who had seized control of Mexico from José Joaquin de Herrera in a bloodless military coup, refused to receive Slidell, citing a problem with his credentials. Slidell returned to Washington, D.C. at the beginning of May, 1846.

On 24 April 1846, 2,000 Mexican cavalry crossed the Rio Grande, and attacked an American troop of 63 soldiers. This was called, in the USA, the Thornton Affair, named after the commander of these troops. 11 were killed, and most of the rest were captured, although a few escaped and related what occurred back at Fort Brown.
By now Polk had received word of the Thornton attack, and added this to the rejection of Slidell as the casus belli. A message to Congress on May 11, 1846 stated that Mexico had "invaded our territory and shed American blood upon the American soil". A joint session of Congress overwhelmingly approved the declaration of war.

Whigs in both North and South generally opposed the war, while Democrats mostly supported it. Whig Abraham Lincoln contested the causes for the war at that time, and demanded to know the exact spot on which Thornton had been attacked and U.S. blood had been shed.

"This war is a nondescript," declared Whig leader Robert Toombs of Georgia; "we charge the President with usurping the war-making power . . . with seizing a country . . . which had been for centuries, and was then in the possession of the Mexicans. . . . Let us put a check upon this lust of dominion. We had territory enough, Heaven knew."

The outcome:

The annexed territories contained thousands of Mexican families, mostly of mixed Spanish and indigenous descent, as well as many northern Indian tribes. Some opted to return to Mexico and others chose to remain in the U.S. given that the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo contained guarantees (granting citizenship and recognizing property) for them. The United States and Mexico eventually (1889) formed the International Boundary and Water Commission, in order to settle boundary disputes. See the case of El Chamizal. For years after the war, various minor insurrections against the American Government and what many called injustices would continue to flare up in the border states, in areas that had a heavy Mexican pre-war population. See Cortina Troubles and Joaquin Murrieta.

However, this period of national euphoria would not last long. The war had been widely supported by Democrats, and opposed by Whigs. Many Northern abolitionists attacked the war as an attempt by the slave-owners to expand slavery and assure their continued influence in the Federal government. Henry David Thoreau wrote his essay Civil Disobedience and refused to pay taxes because of this war. Former president John Quincy Adams also expressed his belief that the war was an effort to expand slavery. There were Democrats in the South who favored further Southern expansions to expand their region and its political power, to establish a slave empire throughout the hemisphere, a variant on Manifest Destiny called the "Purple Dream". However, historians generally agree that the war was not solely an effort to expand slavery. Polk's diaries show that he wanted a general expansion that favored both North and South alike.

In 1846, Congressman David Wilmot introduced the Wilmot Proviso to prohibit slavery in any new territory acquired from Mexico. Wilmot's proposal did not pass, but it sparked further hostility between the factions.

Ulysses S. Grant, who served in the war under Scott's command, in the 1880s called the conflict as an evil war that brought God's punishment in the form of the American Civil War: "The Southern rebellion was largely the outgrowth of the Mexican war. Nations, like individuals, are punished for their transgressions. We got our punishment in the most sanguinary and expensive war of modern times." [1] Many of the generals of the latter war had fought in the former, including Grant, George B. McClellan, Ambrose Burnside, Stonewall Jackson, James Longstreet, George Meade, and Robert E. Lee, as well as the future Confederate president, Jefferson Davis.

[Kassem]

virtuoso why did the usa wanna nuke egypt

[J Bananas]

boo hoo Americans, especially whites 

[jeromechickenbone]

it's funny how the stereotype is that 100% of American citizens love and trust the government, lol

bush was re-elected. how are europeans supposed to think you guys dont suck when it comes to judge governments?

when each of election was split 50/50 it should say something. But I guess that says europeans are just like americans in the aspect there too lazy to look into something and rather just look at the headline.

i know that, it was embarrassing for your ppl still. bush got more votes than any president before. embarrassing.

That has more to do with the amount of people in the US now compared to past years.  Didn't Kerry receive the 2nd highest tally ever?  If there's 400 million in the US (not sure if thats accurate) 200 million didn't support Bush's re-election.  With the electoral college, a candidate doesn't even have to have the popular vote majority to win.

[herpes]

it's funny how the stereotype is that 100% of American citizens love and trust the government, lol

bush was re-elected. how are europeans supposed to think you guys dont suck when it comes to judge governments?

when each of election was split 50/50 it should say something. But I guess that says europeans are just like americans in the aspect there too lazy to look into something and rather just look at the headline.

i know that, it was embarrassing for your ppl still. bush got more votes than any president before. embarrassing.

With the electoral college, a candidate doesn't even have to have the popular vote majority to win.

which is what happened in 2000... so is safe to say 7 is just as lazy as us americans

[King Tech Quadafi]

it doesnt matter how you twist it

from an outside perspective, and the euros can co sign this 100%, the fact that a candidate like Bush was not LAUGHED OUT of the fukin arena the first time he tried to debate has forever condemned Americans to be retards

now naturally of course not all Americans are retards. but its COMPLETELY inexcusable and fuckin mind boggling that Bush is your president for 2 terms

this fact will never escape the consciousness of the non american

[7even]

it's funny how the stereotype is that 100% of American citizens love and trust the government, lol

bush was re-elected. how are europeans supposed to think you guys dont suck when it comes to judge governments?

when each of election was split 50/50 it should say something. But I guess that says europeans are just like americans in the aspect there too lazy to look into something and rather just look at the headline.

i know that, it was embarrassing for your ppl still. bush got more votes than any president before. embarrassing.

With the electoral college, a candidate doesn't even have to have the popular vote majority to win.

which is what happened in 2000... so is safe to say 7 is just as lazy as us americans

How come you are so fast at assuming I don't know basics? Of course I know about the electoral college, I was making many posts about how much it sucks 2 years ago. I also predicted OHIO to be the important state that decides the election, and I was right. Check my posts around Nov. 2004 if you don't believe me.