Philosophers and Kings

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
All politicians pander to fear and are therefore genetically predisposed not to resist it.

My, version, Corn, though perhaps less flattering, is I think closer to the truth. I think the neocon recruits are coming from the right, not the left.

You are surrounded by your fears... you must recognize and assimilate into your fears... be at one with the neo-con... de feat runs rampant.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
All politicians pander to fear and are therefore genetically predisposed not to resist it.

My, version, Corn, though perhaps less flattering, is I think closer to the truth. I think the neocon recruits are coming from the right, not the left.

neocons are a different breed of republicans. in fact, they're also a different breed of democrats. they take the best of both parties and combine it into sound policies. Your futile focus on fear is misleading you to understand who neoconservatives really are. in the end, you would've made the wrong conclusion and been overwhelmed by their policies, which are fast turning into federal laws.

To understand why neoconservative policies are so successful is to understand what age we live in and our relative strength. Neocons preach the preeminence of american military power, unrivaled economic superiority, and a desire to spread american ideologies to distand shores. the latter re-enforces the formers. Just like how the business world operates, neocons believe that American policies must be ruthless, smart, and dynamic. The tactics may be unflattering, but the results are good for everyone.

Moonbeam, your communal ideologies belongs in theoretical laboratories. Your beliefs may sound great on paper but reality quickly exposes their flaws. You are, by nature, an academic, theorist and a romantic, not a realist. until you stop comparing your fantasies with the real world, your ideas won't go anywhere. You will, undoubtly, end up being the universal critic

if you look around, intellectual laboratories, i.e. think-tanks, are constantly putting neocon ideologies to the test and getting great results. what doesn't work is discarded. as the second article showed, most of the neocons' policies have become mainstream and more will follow.

 

[LunarRay]

Moonbeam needs to fast for forty days and forty nights to cleanse his spirit of all that fear... and venture up Mt Sinai and receive from Dari himself the Ten Suggestions. With this in hand he may go forth with renewed vigor and enlighten the masses. But, that's the end of the story... he must first deal with Pharaoh Bush and his pet asps... the three stooges, Rummy, Wolfie and Rice. He must secure manna to feed and water to quench... and only then may he lay down the Ten Suggestions before the Seat of god themselves... The chief and associate dwarfs of the Supreme Thwart. He must loose the Mad Hatter's Cheney, kiss a Hillary frog, and invade a country of his choice to show his dedication to the cause. He, if successful, will be neo-con. We are truly in the end times... the beast is among us and we fear no evil... the evil is us...

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
All politicians pander to fear and are therefore genetically predisposed not to resist it.

My, version, Corn, though perhaps less flattering, is I think closer to the truth. I think the neocon recruits are coming from the right, not the left.

neocons are a different breed of republicans. in fact, they're also a different breed of democrats. they take the best of both parties and combine it into sound policies. Your futile focus on fear is misleading you to understand who neoconservatives really are. in the end, you would've made the wrong conclusion and been overwhelmed by their policies, which are fast turning into federal laws.

To understand why neoconservative policies are so successful is to understand what age we live in and our relative strength. Neocons preach the preeminence of american military power, unrivaled economic superiority, and a desire to spread american ideologies to distand shores. the latter re-enforces the formers. Just like how the business world operates, neocons believe that American policies must be ruthless, smart, and dynamic. The tactics may be unflattering, but the results are good for everyone.

Moonbeam, your communal ideologies belongs in theoretical laboratories. Your beliefs may sound great on paper but reality quickly exposes their flaws. You are, by nature, an academic, theorist and a romantic, not a realist. until you stop comparing your fantasies with the real world, your ideas won't go anywhere. You will, undoubtly, end up being the universal critic

if you look around, intellectual laboratories, i.e. think-tanks, are constantly putting neocon ideologies to the test and getting great results. what doesn't work is discarded. as the second article showed, most of the neocons' policies have become mainstream and more will follow.

The problem here is that what you describe fits perfectly if you were a Stalinist in Russia, or a Nazi in Germany. I understand the pragmatic use of power. If I wished to put it into practice and decided it was in the best interest, your would be cowering at best in a few mont. If I were predisposed to use the knowlege I have as defined by the Wolfowitz view as "practical" I could go far indeed. As a result, I eschew seeking power. I know the dark side of myself, and do not need to embrace it. We all have that potential. Many of can be like alcoholics in this sense. It is just that I refuse to go to the bar, while many belly up to it justifying what they do in the neocon way.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
All politicians pander to fear and are therefore genetically predisposed not to resist it.

My, version, Corn, though perhaps less flattering, is I think closer to the truth. I think the neocon recruits are coming from the right, not the left.

neocons are a different breed of republicans. in fact, they're also a different breed of democrats. they take the best of both parties and combine it into sound policies. Your futile focus on fear is misleading you to understand who neoconservatives really are. in the end, you would've made the wrong conclusion and been overwhelmed by their policies, which are fast turning into federal laws.

To understand why neoconservative policies are so successful is to understand what age we live in and our relative strength. Neocons preach the preeminence of american military power, unrivaled economic superiority, and a desire to spread american ideologies to distand shores. the latter re-enforces the formers. Just like how the business world operates, neocons believe that American policies must be ruthless, smart, and dynamic. The tactics may be unflattering, but the results are good for everyone.

Moonbeam, your communal ideologies belongs in theoretical laboratories. Your beliefs may sound great on paper but reality quickly exposes their flaws. You are, by nature, an academic, theorist and a romantic, not a realist. until you stop comparing your fantasies with the real world, your ideas won't go anywhere. You will, undoubtly, end up being the universal critic

if you look around, intellectual laboratories, i.e. think-tanks, are constantly putting neocon ideologies to the test and getting great results. what doesn't work is discarded. as the second article showed, most of the neocons' policies have become mainstream and more will follow.

The problem here is that what you describe fits perfectly if you were a Stalinist in Russia, or a Nazi in Germany. I understand the pragmatic use of power. If I wished to put it into practice and decided it was in the best interest, your would be cowering at best in a few mont. If I were predisposed to use the knowlege I have as defined by the Wolfowitz view as "practical" I could go far indeed. As a result, I eschew seeking power. I know the dark side of myself, and do not need to embrace it. We all have that potential. Many of can be like alcoholics in this sense. It is just that I refuse to go to the bar, while many belly up to it justifying what they do in the neocon way.

unfotrunately, I expected a response like that. Your preference to eschew power and be content with yourself shows your lack of understanding of what I'm trying to say. It also shows the difference between an individual and a leader; a countryman and an intellect. The fact is, America cannot eschew seeking power. It is essential that she never sits still. It is essential that she understands her allies and works with them, but from a leadership position. It is essential that our leaders understand human nature and capitalize on his strengths and weaknesses. It is also essential to be dynamic and to know when to say when. The differnce between russia and germany of old and today's america is that the latter has the democratic support of her citizenry, allies, and the destitute. Her decisions, like those of the older powers, may be based on self-interest, but then again, only those that can carry out such policies, do. Furthermore, america's interest has supporters among the people of the world. she doesn't envision slavery for the world, as the old powers did. she envisions prosperity and peace. she envisions democracy. she envisions a world where man is guided by man. a world of free,borderless communication and trade. she envisions a new enlightment for man. Eradicating poverty, ignorance, terrorism and xenophobia can only come about through economic and political engagement.

granted, most americans may be uncomfortable with the internationalization of the american system, but that has been the case for the past 50 years. instead of fearing it, we need to see how it can be made better.

as for those who suspect that neoconservatives are some type of cabal that hold diabolical views, nothing could be further from the truth. fact is, as mentioned earlier, neocons publish their policies before it is ever carried out. a case in point is the current iraqi conflict. the decision was advocated and published well over 7 years ago and presented to Clinton to carry out. however, clinton did not have the guts to carry out that policy. while his economic team was, in my opinion, the best in a generation, clinton was a dissapointment as the Commander-in-Chief successor to George H W Bush.

fact is, there is nothing overtly powerful about neocons. their main advantage is when policies are compared with liberals on the left and conservatives on the right. Most americans have discarded the ideologies of both extremities. And neither side is internationalist enough to understand a changing world. clinton was a sad example. while he may have delighted the french and others by being multilateralist, it was a political disaster that only strenghtened the likes of bin laden and Kim Jong-Il. As in any relationship, their must always be a leader. Even in a marriage. the two sides may be "equal," but one always takes a leadership position in one aspect of the marriage or another. Pure multilateralism is a compromise at best and utter confusion at worst. Even in its best form, multilateralism should never exist in national security.

so, what do we have hear? we have a country with a leadership that is cleaning up the mess left by its predecessor. We have a leadership that is putting american interests first. We have a leadership that is actually leading, which means going into unchartered territory. Anyone that doesn't like a leadership like is encouraged to show alternative ideas, provided that its better.

Hayabusarider, it looks like you identify with this man

 

[Fencer128]

Hi,

I find it very interesting that a country that is so intensely individualistic (willingness for minimum of federal interference, state level government, indidual freedoms) finds the idea of asserting "internationalization of the american system" so appealing.

The problems - the yet immovable notions that have to be embraced - in my mind are these.

1. People may be happier in some countries with their own systems.

2. The US system is not necessarily the best system for everyone outside the US.

For instance, I certainly don't want to live in a country that employs the death penalty is an option for local government - and I wouldn't feel any more free than I do now if it were an option.

All the munificence that is talked about fails to promote the proper scale of one particular point in relation to it. That is that the US will always be more equal then any quasi-US country benefitting from it's "helpful" philanthropic influence. They (neocons I think you refer to them as) don't hide this fact - but nor is it as underlined, in bold and highlighted as much as it should be.

Make no mistake in thinking that this isn't a tactic for global domination via the "good will" back door. I see it now. Everyone dependant on the US more than they are now, with the US essentially dictating terms on everything from economics, trade to "international" law. Freedom is but a watered down definition and govermental free will less so than it is now.

Fine for the US. Quite probably disasterous for everyone else. Put US interests first internally - but keep it international outside of your borders. Is this an extreme interpretation? Maybe - but then this is an extreme policy IMHO. No land of milk and honey for me.

Andy

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
All politicians pander to fear and are therefore genetically predisposed not to resist it.

My, version, Corn, though perhaps less flattering, is I think closer to the truth. I think the neocon recruits are coming from the right, not the left.

neocons are a different breed of republicans. in fact, they're also a different breed of democrats. they take the best of both parties and combine it into sound policies. Your futile focus on fear is misleading you to understand who neoconservatives really are. in the end, you would've made the wrong conclusion and been overwhelmed by their policies, which are fast turning into federal laws.

To understand why neoconservative policies are so successful is to understand what age we live in and our relative strength. Neocons preach the preeminence of american military power, unrivaled economic superiority, and a desire to spread american ideologies to distand shores. the latter re-enforces the formers. Just like how the business world operates, neocons believe that American policies must be ruthless, smart, and dynamic. The tactics may be unflattering, but the results are good for everyone.

Moonbeam, your communal ideologies belongs in theoretical laboratories. Your beliefs may sound great on paper but reality quickly exposes their flaws. You are, by nature, an academic, theorist and a romantic, not a realist. until you stop comparing your fantasies with the real world, your ideas won't go anywhere. You will, undoubtly, end up being the universal critic

if you look around, intellectual laboratories, i.e. think-tanks, are constantly putting neocon ideologies to the test and getting great results. what doesn't work is discarded. as the second article showed, most of the neocons' policies have become mainstream and more will follow.

The problem here is that what you describe fits perfectly if you were a Stalinist in Russia, or a Nazi in Germany. I understand the pragmatic use of power. If I wished to put it into practice and decided it was in the best interest, your would be cowering at best in a few mont. If I were predisposed to use the knowlege I have as defined by the Wolfowitz view as "practical" I could go far indeed. As a result, I eschew seeking power. I know the dark side of myself, and do not need to embrace it. We all have that potential. Many of can be like alcoholics in this sense. It is just that I refuse to go to the bar, while many belly up to it justifying what they do in the neocon way.

unfotrunately, I expected a response like that. Your preference to eschew power and be content with yourself shows your lack of understanding of what I'm trying to say. It also shows the difference between an individual and a leader; a countryman and an intellect. The fact is, America cannot eschew seeking power. It is essential that she never sits still. It is essential that she understands her allies and works with them, but from a leadership position. It is essential that our leaders understand human nature and capitalize on his strengths and weaknesses. It is also essential to be dynamic and to know when to say when. The differnce between russia and germany of old and today's america is that the latter has the democratic support of her citizenry, allies, and the destitute. Her decisions, like those of the older powers, may be based on self-interest, but then again, only those that can carry out such policies, do. Furthermore, america's interest has supporters among the people of the world. she doesn't envision slavery for the world, as the old powers did. she envisions prosperity and peace. she envisions democracy. she envisions a world where man is guided by man. a world of free,borderless communication and trade. she envisions a new enlightment for man. Eradicating poverty, ignorance, terrorism and xenophobia can only come about through economic and political engagement.

granted, most americans may be uncomfortable with the internationalization of the american system, but that has been the case for the past 50 years. instead of fearing it, we need to see how it can be made better.

as for those who suspect that neoconservatives are some type of cabal that hold diabolical views, nothing could be further from the truth. fact is, as mentioned earlier, neocons publish their policies before it is ever carried out. a case in point is the current iraqi conflict. the decision was advocated and published well over 7 years ago and presented to Clinton to carry out. however, clinton did not have the guts to carry out that policy. while his economic team was, in my opinion, the best in a generation, clinton was a dissapointment as the Commander-in-Chief successor to George H W Bush.

fact is, there is nothing overtly powerful about neocons. their main advantage is when policies are compared with liberals on the left and conservatives on the right. Most americans have discarded the ideologies of both extremities. And neither side is internationalist enough to understand a changing world. clinton was a sad example. while he may have delighted the french and others by being multilateralist, it was a political disaster that only strenghtened the likes of bin laden and Kim Jong-Il. As in any relationship, their must always be a leader. Even in a marriage. the two sides may be "equal," but one always takes a leadership position in one aspect of the marriage or another. Pure multilateralism is a compromise at best and utter confusion at worst. Even in its best form, multilateralism should never exist in national security.

so, what do we have hear? we have a country with a leadership that is cleaning up the mess left by its predecessor. We have a leadership that is putting american interests first. We have a leadership that is actually leading, which means going into unchartered territory. Anyone that doesn't like a leadership like is encouraged to show alternative ideas, provided that its better.

Hayabusarider, it looks like you identify with this man

I expected a response like this. I have seen this attitude for longer than you have been alive, so it is no suprise. It does not occur to you that restraint of power is at least as valuable at it's exercise. I have seen two wars where the justification for them is tenuous at best. The argument eventually came down to the one you make. As far as Germany goes, you had ought to review the history of Germany immediately after WWI to understand how the Nazis came to power.

BTW, that guy I supposedly identify with looks like Roy Orbinson. Definitely not my style. I suggest you resemble in spirit someone who announced in advance his beliefs. You can find his work here

He had a vision just the same as you.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

For a country to justify it's heel on another's neck because it is a democracy internally holds no water with me.

 

[Fencer128]

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider
For a country to justify it's heel on another's neck because it is a democracy internally holds no water with me.

 

[Moonbeam]

As an ignorant onlooker of religious phenomenon, Hay, can you explain to me the temptation of Christ. I know really nothing about it except it keeps popping up in my mind. It strikes me were are down to archetypes here and stories of Dari's dementia ought to be ancient indeed. Did the devil offer Christ the neocon religion?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Well M, Jesus was taken to a place and shown the kingdoms of the world in an instant. All Christ would have to have done for all to be his was bow and worship Satan. Satan had been called the Lord of the World. He in fact could have made the promise come true. Christ resisted though and replied with the statement that God alone should be served. Some here on the board seem to believe America should take up Satan on that deal.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider
Well M, Jesus was taken to a place and shown the kingdoms of the world in an instant. All Christ would have to have done for all to be his was bow and worship Satan. Satan had been called the Lord of the World. He in fact could have made the promise come true. Christ resisted though and replied with the statement that God alone should be served. Some here on the board seem to believe America should take up Satan on that deal.

Some even believe that Jesus should have opted for it. They are in the process of procuring it for him because they KNOW Jesus didn't understand the riches that abound. Man, they further know, lives by bread alone and riches are what provide bread... for them and their progeny.

 

[jahawkin]

Dari since you seem to be the neocons #1 fanboy, I was wondering if anyone has been elected to public office running under a neocon platform?

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: jahawkin
Dari since you seem to be the neocons #1 fanboy, I was wondering if anyone has been elected to public office running under a neocon platform?

Uhhh, were you under a rock when Bush was elected? I specifically remembered in the spring of 2000 when Colin Powell and Bush went on TV and outlined american foreign policy if they were elected. I thought this was a bold and audacious move, considering that they weren't guaranteed to win. But it made me confident that they would carry out what they announced that day. There's nothing better than the marriage of intelligence, confidence, and determination.

 

[jahawkin]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: jahawkin
Dari since you seem to be the neocons #1 fanboy, I was wondering if anyone has been elected to public office running under a neocon platform?

Uhhh, were you under a rock when Bush was elected? I specifically remembered in the spring of 2000 when Colin Powell and Bush went on TV and outlined american foreign policy if they were elected. I thought this was a bold and audacious move, considering that they weren't guaranteed to win. But it made me confident that they would carry out what they announced that day.

Since when did bush run on a neocon platform?!? I seem to recall a "humble foreign policy" and like quotes in the presidental debates. And Colin Powell and Bush outlined their fp? Would you consider Colin Powell a neocon? Didn't think so. Oh, wait, this coming from a person who considers McCain and Lieberman to be neocons.

There's nothing better than the marriage of intelligence, confidence, and determination.

And there's no worse example than Bush when talking about the marriage of intelligence, confidence and determination.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: jahawkin

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: jahawkin
Dari since you seem to be the neocons #1 fanboy, I was wondering if anyone has been elected to public office running under a neocon platform?

Uhhh, were you under a rock when Bush was elected? I specifically remembered in the spring of 2000 when Colin Powell and Bush went on TV and outlined american foreign policy if they were elected. I thought this was a bold and audacious move, considering that they weren't guaranteed to win. But it made me confident that they would carry out what they announced that day.

Since when did bush run on a neocon platform?!? I seem to recall a "humble foreign policy" and like quotes in the presidental debates. And Colin Powell and Bush outlined their fp? Would you consider Colin Powell a neocon? Didn't think so. Oh, wait, this coming from a person who considers McCain and Lieberman to be neocons.

There's nothing better than the marriage of intelligence, confidence, and determination.

And there's no worse example than Bush when talking about the marriage of intelligence, confidence and determination.

look around the Bush administration and you will see a marriage of intelligence, confidence, and determination.

 

[jahawkin]

So have you found a neocon who has been elected yet (and has run as a neocon)??

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: jahawkin
So have you found a neocon who has been elected yet (and has run as a neocon)??

the word neocon has never officially been used except to describe some of the people that currently reside in the bush administration. however, if you are looking for those that advocate such policies, there are many. but I doubt if anyone has ran under such a name.

 

[jahawkin]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: jahawkin
So have you found a neocon who has been elected yet (and has run as a neocon)??

the word neocon has never officially been used except to describe some of the people that currently reside in the bush administration. however, if you are looking for those that advocate such policies, there are many. but I doubt if anyone has ran under such a name.

The point I'm trying to make is that if any candidate did run with a neocon foreign policy stance, they wouldn't stand a chance. Have you read some of the PNAC stuff? Its insane! Or Bush's National Security Strategy report for that matter. Pushing for an American empire is not something that is going to win you elections. Neither is the withdrawl and disregard for international institutions and treaties, or pre-emptive attack on perceived threats .
Yet this warped foreign policy becomes American foreign policy when the neocons apply their worldview to Bush when he was a blank slate before the election (after Bush I and Clinton dismiss their policy as crazy). He campaigns advocating for a "humble" foreign policy and then uses 9/11 as an excuse to turn the US into an bullying asshole (what the US has become under neocon foreign policy).

 

[LunarRay]

What do you expect for Ja Ja Bings amongst the Evil Empire of the Neo-Con?

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: jahawkin

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: jahawkin
So have you found a neocon who has been elected yet (and has run as a neocon)??

the word neocon has never officially been used except to describe some of the people that currently reside in the bush administration. however, if you are looking for those that advocate such policies, there are many. but I doubt if anyone has ran under such a name.

The point I'm trying to make is that if any candidate did run with a neocon foreign policy stance, they wouldn't stand a chance. Have you read some of the PNAC stuff? Its insane! Or Bush's National Security Strategy report for that matter. Pushing for an American empire is not something that is going to win you elections. Neither is the withdrawl and disregard for international institutions and treaties, or pre-emptive attack on perceived threats .
Yet this warped foreign policy becomes American foreign policy when the neocons apply their worldview to Bush when he was a blank slate before the election (after Bush I and Clinton dismiss their policy as crazy). He campaigns advocating for a "humble" foreign policy and then uses 9/11 as an excuse to turn the US into an bullying asshole (what the US has become under neocon foreign policy).

read my earlier post and you will see that I mentioned that americans will have to come to term that they have the world's most powerful military and economy. we are, in fact, an empire. the neo-cons just realize that and accept it. granted, we americans, having defeated the british to find our own country, don't like to see ourselves as an empire and will try to dissuade others from seeing us as such. but the reality is we are. besides, no smart potential politician would ever tell voters something they don't want to hear. only a politician in office can/should do that. if bush told the public that we would have to realign the world because it is a dangerous place, many would've been against such a policy.

 

[Moonbeam]

neocons are a different breed of republicans. THE FASCIST LEANING PART OF THE PARTY. in fact, they're also a different breed of democrats, THE PART THAT HAS NO MORAL GROUNDING. they take the best WORST of both parties and combine it into sound INSANE policies. Your futile focus on fear BECAUSE IT FUNDAMENTALLY SCARED ME is misleading you to understand who neoconservatives really are. YES, I FAIL TO BUY INTO YOUR DELUSIONS. in the end, you would've made the wrong RIGHT conclusion and been overwhelmed MAYBE LIKE NAZI GERMANY, by their policies RELIGION, which are fast turning into federal FASCIST laws.

To understand why neoconservative policies are so successful PITIFUL is to understand what THE FEAR THAT POSESSES THE age we live in and our relative strength TERROR. Neocons preach the preeminence of american military power, TO THE CHOIR unrivaled ACCIDENTAL economic superiority, and a desire to spread american ideologies to distand shores USA UBER ALLES. the latter re-enforces the formers THE FORMERS ENVISIONED NO SUCH ILLUSIONS. Just like how the DISEASED business world operates, neocons believe that American policies must be ruthless FEARFUL, smart STUPID, and dynamic MONOMANIACLE. The tactics may be unflattering PATHOLOGICAL, but the results are good for everyone THE ELITE FEAR MONGERS.

Moonbeam, your NONEXISTANT communal ideologies belongs in theoretical laboratories WHERE NEOCON IDEAS COME FROM. Your beliefs YOUR BELIEFS may sound great on paper but reality quickly exposes their flaws. You are, YOU ARE by nature, an academic, theorist and a romantic, not a realist. until you stop comparing your fantasies with the real world, your ideas won't go anywhere. You will, undoubtly, end up being the universal critic

if you look around, intellectual laboratories, i.e. think-tanks, SEE, A BUNCH OF ACADEMIC THEORISTS are constantly putting neocon ideologies to the test and getting great results. THE MEANS JUSTIFIES THE ENDS what doesn't work is discarded KEPT. as the second article showed, most of the neocons' policies have become REMAIN mainstream FRINGE LUNATIC and more will follow.

-------------
unfotrunately, I expected a response like that. SURE DID Your preference to eschew power and be content with yourself shows your lack of understanding of what I'm trying to say. LIKE THERE WOULD BE A REALTIONSHIP It also shows the difference between an individual and a leader NUTCASE; a countryman and an intellect DUNCE. The fact is, America cannot eschew seeking power GESUNDHEIT. It is essential that she never sits still. WORMS WILL DO THAT. It is essential that she understands her allies and works with them, LIKE WE DID WITH FRANCE but from a leadership COWBOY position. It is essential that our leaders understand human nature and capitalize on his strengths and weaknesses. MECHIAVELLIAN MANIPULATION YES IN DEED. It is also essential to be dynamic MONOMANIACLY FIXATED and to know when to say when. SAY CHEESE The differnce between russia and germany of old and today's america is that the latter has the democratic support of her citizenry, allies, and the destitute. SURE IT DOES ESPECIALLY THE DESTITUTE WHO ARE A BIG FACTOR IN OUR DEMOCRACY. Her decisions, like those of the older powers, may be based on self-interest, but then again, only those that can carry out such policies, do. THE GREEDY WHO ARE POWERFUL ARE FIRST PIGS AT THE TABLE. A WONDERFUL IDEAL. Furthermore, america's interest has supporters among the people of the world. THREE OF THEM. she doesn't envision slavery for the world 25 CENTS AN HOUR IS MORE THAN GENEROUS, as the old powers did. she envisions prosperity and peace FOR HER ELITE. she envisions democracy. AS LONG AS THE ELITE CAN MANIPULATE THE VOTE she envisions a world where man is guided by man OTHER LUNATICS WHO FAVE NO CENTER. a world of free,borderless communication and trade. ONE WORLD WHITE BREAD. she envisions a new enlightment for man CORPORATE CONFRMITY. Eradicating poverty, ignorance, terrorism and xenophobia can only come about through economic and political engagement LOVE.

granted, most americans may be uncomfortable with the internationalization of the american system, but that has been the case for the past 50 years. instead of fearing it, we need to see how it can be made better. THE SHEEPLE NEED TO BE HELPED ALONG LIKE WE KNOW WHAT BETTER IS

as for those who suspect that neoconservatives are some type of cabal that hold diabolical views, nothing could be further from CLOSER TO the truth. fact is, as mentioned earlier, neocons publish their policies before it is ever carried out. a case in point is the current iraqi conflict. the decision was advocated and published well over 7 years ago and presented to Clinton to carry out. however, clinton did not have the guts MORONIC STUPIDITY to carry out that policy. while his economic team was, in my opinion, the best in a generation, clinton was a dissapointment SUCCESS as the Commander-in-Chief successor to George H W Bush.

fact is, there is nothing overtly powerful about neocons. NO, ITS JUST THAT THEY WERE APOINTED BY THE DODO TO KEY POSITIONS. their main advantage is when policies are compared with liberals on the left and conservatives on the right. THEY HIDE THERI REAL INTENT THEIR POLICIES ARE SO GOOD. Most americans have discarded the ideologies of both extremities. NEOCON IS THE ULTIMATE IN EXTREME And neither side is internationalist enough to understand a changing world. WE ELITES ARE THE ONLY ONES SMART ENOUGH TO KNOW WHAT IS SCARING US clinton was a sad example. while he may have delighted the french and others by being multilateralist, it was a political disaster that only strenghtened the likes of bin laden and Kim Jong-Il. SURE NEW PROBLEMS NEVER ARISE As in any relationship, their must always be a leader. Even in a marriage. the two sides may be "equal," but one always takes a leadership position in one aspect of the marriage or another. THAT'S WHY IS CALLED A PARTNERSHIP RATHER THAN A MASTER CLIENT STATE Pure multilateralism is a compromise at best and utter confusion at worst. LIKE EVERYTHING ISN'T ULTIMATELY A COMPROMISE Even in its best form, multilateralism should never exist in national security. WE ARE FAR FAR TO AFRAID FOR THAT.

so, what do we have hear? we have a country with a leadership that is cleaning up the mess left by its predecessor. CREATING A MESS FOR GENERATIONS TO COME We have a leadership that is putting american interests first. ITS DISEASED NOTION OF AMERICAN INTERESTS WHICH ARE TO STOP FEAR AND MAKE A BUCK We have a leadership that is actually leading BLINDLY AND STUPIDLY, which means going into unchartered DISASTER territory. Anyone that doesn't like a leadership like is encouraged to show alternative ideas, provided that its better. LIKE YOU WOULD KNOW.
------------------------

 

[LunarRay]

DARI,

Yes.... Smart politicians should lie... especially about what the voters should hear..

Neo-Cons believe we are an empire because we can be or is it because it is the manifest destiny of the Neo-Con States of America?

At this point in time the Dangers lay under the bombs we drop while expanding our influence through out the world as good Imperialist do... Victoria thought that way too!

Should we not allow SOVEREIGN nations to be sovereign and dissuade others from involving us by their recognition of our Super Power?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Well this has been an informative thread. I have learned that neocons are the most dangerous group in politics since the Nazi Party in Germany, and for the same reasons. Now I know who to vote against.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider
Well this has been an informative thread. I have learned that neocons are the most dangerous group in politics since the Nazi Party in Germany, and for the same reasons. Now I know who to vote against.

considering that you're comparing them against Nazis is not surprising. In fact, it seems like everytime there is a republican in office (Nixon, Reagan, Bush senior and junior) Europeans like to compare that administration to nazi germany. Democrats are more welcome. I won't question your intelligence since it's so blatant for all to see.