So, what do we know about the Neoconservative movement?

[Genx87]

All this work for people who can care less.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: AndrewChang
Hey guys, interesting thread. Liberal or Conservative, you may find this interesting.

The Project for the New American Century

This organization, it's members and their beliefs, are the driving force behind this administration. In fact, it's members are the very people running this nation... Dick Cheney, Richard Armitage, Lewis Libby, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz are just a few. Taken from the Wikipedia entry on them:

"The PNAC is a controversial organization. Many have raised concerns that the project has been proposing military and economic, space, cyberspace, and global domination by the United States, so as to establish American dominance in world affairs (Pax Americana) for the future?hence the term "the New American Century", based on the idea that the 20th century was the American Century. Some analysts argue that the American-led 2003 invasion of Iraq, commenced in March of that year under the code name Operation Iraqi Freedom, is the first major step toward implementing these objectives."

It's kind of scary when America has been led to believe that the reasons for war in Iraq were nothing but 'honest' errors in intelligence.

And thats my contribution.

PNAC? Never heard of them!

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: Genx87
All this work for people who can care less.

I know you don't. I blame your upbringing.

 

[shrumpage]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: shrumpage
Trying to tie everything to a big NEOCON plot, is kind of silly.

U.S. has a history of supporting anyone in opposition to communism or the U.S.S.R., that policy goes back to after WWII. The Korean war, Veitnam war, supporting non-savory types like Polipot(sp?). The U.S. could care less about afghanstain and their little invasion - but since the agressor was our enemy U.S.S.R we supported Osma. That is why we titled toward Sadam in the Iraq Iran war.

Not part of some over reachign Neocon plot - it was our policy.

It's not a neocon plot. There's nothing silly about it. America's foreign policy since Reagan has been largely directed by the hands of key neoconservatives. Those are FACTS. Undeniable FACTS.

I love you state that 9/11 was commited by a small group of terrorists, yet cite an article that hints that it was a "strange and mysterious" attack. Alluding that it was part of a neocon plot.

Uh, what article? There were no links in the OP.

The policy didn't change - it was in place before the "neocons" got in power. It was a continuation of the coldwar era - it was not new.

Leo Strauss (1899-1973) was a Jewish-German émigré from the Nazi regime who eventually landed at the University of Chicago where he developed a following that has achieved enormous prominence in American politics. Among his students were Paul Wolfowitz who has openly acknowledged that he is a follower of Straus as has the godfather of neconservatism, Irving Kristol. Irving Kristol begat William Kristol, the director of operation for the DC neocons, editor of the Weekly Standard and "chairman" of the Project for the New American Century, which laid out the plans for the Iraq War. (PNAC also opined in 2000 that a Pearl Harbor-like event would be necessary to take the country to war, and one year later, presto, we had the strange and still mysterious attack of September 11.) For his part Paul Wolfowitz begat Libby, in the intellectual sense, when he taught Libby at Yale. Others stars in the necon firmament are Richard Perle, Douglas Feith and lesser figures like Abram Shulsky, director of the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans, created by Donald Rumsfeld. Shulsky, also a student of Strauss, was responsible for fabricating the lies masquerading as intelligence that were designed to get the U.S. into the war on Iraq. While the neocons have a passion for the Likud party and Zionism, they also count among their number not a few pre-Vatican II Catholics and an assortment of cranks like Newt Gingrich and John Bolton and crypto fascists like Jeanne Kirkpatrick. The list goes on and Justin Raimondo has documented it in great detail over the years on Antiwar.com. But it is enough to note that Cheney's alter ego was Libby, and Rumsfeld's second in command until recently was Wolfowitz. So both Cheney, the de facto president with an apparently ill perfused cerebrum, and the geezer commanding the Pentagon have been managed by younger and very prominent Straussians for the past five years.

didn't say it was in the OP, but something you cite.

 

[conjur]

That was a minor comment in a bio on Strauss...hardly anything one could say represents my position on 9/11.

And, the policy of the US changed with the neocons in power. It's a fact. It's undeniable. The Soviet myth was exaggerated. The myth the Soviets were behind all worldwide terrorism was created. The myth that Iraq had WMDs was created. All of those are neocon-created myths.

 

[shrumpage]

Originally posted by: conjur
That was a minor comment in a bio on Strauss...hardly anything one could say represents my position on 9/11.

And, the policy of the US changed with the neocons in power. It's a fact. It's undeniable. The Soviet myth was exaggerated. The myth the Soviets were behind all worldwide terrorism was created. The myth that Iraq had WMDs was created. All of those are neocon-created myths.

No but it does make me question the said material. If i read material that said the holocaust was didn't happen - i wouldn't take it seriously. Nor would i use it to try to convince the opposition i'm right.

The Soviet 'myth' hmmmm thats odd - i know people who escaped from there - and they would contend with your 'myth' that is the Soviet Union.

So are you saying the neocons came into power in the 1950's? I mean that is when we started to actively oppose the U.S.S.R. in various conflicts in the world. That is why we gave intel to Sadam, that is why we support Osama. Are you saying that is not true?

 

[9748904947]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: AndrewChang
Hey guys, interesting thread. Liberal or Conservative, you may find this interesting.

The Project for the New American Century

This organization, it's members and their beliefs, are the driving force behind this administration. In fact, it's members are the very people running this nation... Dick Cheney, Richard Armitage, Lewis Libby, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz are just a few. Taken from the Wikipedia entry on them:

"The PNAC is a controversial organization. Many have raised concerns that the project has been proposing military and economic, space, cyberspace, and global domination by the United States, so as to establish American dominance in world affairs (Pax Americana) for the future?hence the term "the New American Century", based on the idea that the 20th century was the American Century. Some analysts argue that the American-led 2003 invasion of Iraq, commenced in March of that year under the code name Operation Iraqi Freedom, is the first major step toward implementing these objectives."

It's kind of scary when America has been led to believe that the reasons for war in Iraq were nothing but 'honest' errors in intelligence.

And thats my contribution.

PNAC? Never heard of them!

I'm sure they don't really want you, or the rest of the American people, to know much about them and the grand plans they have for us all. But regardless, now you have heard of them. And hopefully your knowlege of this sinister organization will allow you to formulate more informed opinions on matters that affect us all.

To everyone here, both to those who have seen through the veil of ignorance, and to the skeptics still blinded by a false ideology, take a look at this. It will help put everything into perspective:

http://www.sonyclassics.com/whywefight/

It looks to be a powerful film.


EDIT: Forgot to quote Genx87

 

[MAW1082]

What Trotsky and Lenin were to communism, the Neocons (Perle, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Rove, Cheney, etc.) are to capitalism.

The reasoning behind this has to do with the domino theory. Trotsky and Lenin believed that the world needed to be transformed from capitalism to communism through the use of force. Furthermore, they believed that after they had successfully 'liberated' a few capitalist societies in Europe, others would follow. This became known as the domino theory.

After the fall of the USSR the neocons saw a great opportunity . . . to take over the world much in the same way Lenin and Trotsky had sought to export communism.

The neocons are out for world domination. PERIOD. See the following links:

PNAC Statement of Principles

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: conjur
Wrong because a teenaged keyboard commando like you says so? AH HA HA HA HA HA HA

lol, i wish that were true on so many levels, i really do.

btw, can I please come to your next tinfoil-hat jamboree?

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: AndrewChang

I'm sure they don't really want you, or the rest of the American people, to know much about them and the grand plans they have for us all. But regardless, now you have heard of them. And hopefully your knowlege of this sinister organization will allow you to formulate more informed opinions on matters that affect us all.

Genx was engaging in an activity that rests in that delicate nexus between sarcasm, obfuscation, and lying.

You need to re-calibrate your meter😉

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: MAW1082
What Trotsky and Lenin were to communism, the Neocons (Perle, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Rove, Cheney, etc.) are to capitalism.

The reasoning behind this has to do with the domino theory. Trotsky and Lenin believed that the world needed to be transformed from capitalism to communism through the use of force. Furthermore, they believed that after they had successfully 'liberated' a few capitalist societies in Europe, others would follow. This became known as the domino theory.

After the fall of the USSR the neocons saw a great opportunity . . . to take over the world much in the same way Lenin and Trotsky had sought to export communism.

The neocons are out for world domination. PERIOD. See the following links:

PNAC Statement of Principles

ya, it's completely disgusting how they want the entire world to be free, have equal rights for all races and sexes, and democratically elected leaders as opposed to inhumane scumsucking tyrants! Damn them! Just who do they think they are to promote such crazy concepts?!

lol... MUST...BUY...MORE...TINFOIL!

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: shrumpage

Originally posted by: conjur
That was a minor comment in a bio on Strauss...hardly anything one could say represents my position on 9/11.

And, the policy of the US changed with the neocons in power. It's a fact. It's undeniable. The Soviet myth was exaggerated. The myth the Soviets were behind all worldwide terrorism was created. The myth that Iraq had WMDs was created. All of those are neocon-created myths.

No but it does make me question the said material. If i read material that said the holocaust was didn't happen - i wouldn't take it seriously. Nor would i use it to try to convince the opposition i'm right.

The Soviet 'myth' hmmmm thats odd - i know people who escaped from there - and they would contend with your 'myth' that is the Soviet Union.

So are you saying the neocons came into power in the 1950's? I mean that is when we started to actively oppose the U.S.S.R. in various conflicts in the world. That is why we gave intel to Sadam, that is why we support Osama. Are you saying that is not true?

You obviously didn't read the OP or you'd know the Soviet myth I'm talking about.

Your trolling is duly noted.

And so is Palehorse74's. I'm surprised he's still posting. More proof of the double-standards and hypocritical moderation of this forum.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: shrumpage

Originally posted by: conjur
That was a minor comment in a bio on Strauss...hardly anything one could say represents my position on 9/11.

And, the policy of the US changed with the neocons in power. It's a fact. It's undeniable. The Soviet myth was exaggerated. The myth the Soviets were behind all worldwide terrorism was created. The myth that Iraq had WMDs was created. All of those are neocon-created myths.

No but it does make me question the said material. If i read material that said the holocaust was didn't happen - i wouldn't take it seriously. Nor would i use it to try to convince the opposition i'm right.

The Soviet 'myth' hmmmm thats odd - i know people who escaped from there - and they would contend with your 'myth' that is the Soviet Union.

So are you saying the neocons came into power in the 1950's? I mean that is when we started to actively oppose the U.S.S.R. in various conflicts in the world. That is why we gave intel to Sadam, that is why we support Osama. Are you saying that is not true?

You obviously didn't read the OP or you'd know the Soviet myth I'm talking about.

Your trolling is duly noted.

And so is Palehorse74's. I'm surprised he's still posting. More proof of the double-standards and hypocritical moderation of this forum.

do you ever get the urge to kick your own a$$ Conjur? just curious...

Shrumpage> dont worry about Conjur.. according to him, anyone that disagrees with his global conspiracy theory is a "troll;" when, in fact, he himself basically defines the word! I think that deep down inside Conjur believes that "whining" is an artform! lol..

Just laugh at him and his collection of tinfoil hats, and then move on like the rest of us do...lol.

 

[9748904947]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: AndrewChang

I'm sure they don't really want you, or the rest of the American people, to know much about them and the grand plans they have for us all. But regardless, now you have heard of them. And hopefully your knowlege of this sinister organization will allow you to formulate more informed opinions on matters that affect us all.

Genx was engaging in an activity that rests in that delicate nexus between sarcasm, obfuscation, and lying.

You need to re-calibrate your meter😉

Haha, thanks... Re-calibrated and degaussed 🙂

 

[Polish3d]

Originally posted by: Uhtrinity

Originally posted by: 1prophet
Their is one key flaw in the Strauss philosophy, according to the videos he said those who promote his ideas don't have to believe in them as opposed to Sayyid Qutb and his followers who believe in his teachings and are willing to sacrifice everything including their lives to promote their version of Islam which in the long run makes them far more dangerous.

Not a flaw. The promoters don't have to believe all the ideas, just the followers. In the end the effect is the same. In fact it works out better as the promoters don't have to ever do any of the grunt work or even die for their cause, the sheep will do it for them.

They don't say that explicity, but an interesting, and fairly plausible extension

 

[Polish3d]

Originally posted by: MAW1082
What Trotsky and Lenin were to communism, the Neocons (Perle, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Rove, Cheney, etc.) are to capitalism.

Being a little Straussian yourself there aren't you; telling a little lie to accomplish something that is IYO noble perhaps?

Anyway, reason I say that is you say "Neocons are to CAPITALISM" when you should say, to be accurate, DEMOCRACY, but of course to the crowd here, Capitalism = bad and so you decide to distort for your own noble purposes.

 

[Polish3d]

Again I must say this (OP TOPIC) is one topic that warrants serious, rational discussion as we are all affected by this and one would hope most of us genuinely do wish for "good," so as Americans and those around the world impacted by American FP, we ought to calm down a tad and think this over a bit with a bit of camaraderie.

:beer: :beer: :beer:

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Frackal

Originally posted by: MAW1082
What Trotsky and Lenin were to communism, the Neocons (Perle, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Rove, Cheney, etc.) are to capitalism.

Being a little Straussian yourself there aren't you; telling a little lie to accomplish something that is IYO noble perhaps?

Anyway, reason I say that is you say "Neocons are to CAPITALISM" when you should say, to be accurate, DEMOCRACY, but of course to the crowd here, Capitalism = bad and so you decide to distort for your own noble purposes.

Agreed. The neocons are not economists (which begs the question as to how the fck Wolfowitz became the President of the World Bank). They're idealists that just want to flex US power to exert control over the rest of the world.

The Norquist camp would be a better representative of the corporatist stance.

 

[shrumpage]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: shrumpage

Originally posted by: conjur
That was a minor comment in a bio on Strauss...hardly anything one could say represents my position on 9/11.

And, the policy of the US changed with the neocons in power. It's a fact. It's undeniable. The Soviet myth was exaggerated. The myth the Soviets were behind all worldwide terrorism was created. The myth that Iraq had WMDs was created. All of those are neocon-created myths.

No but it does make me question the said material. If i read material that said the holocaust was didn't happen - i wouldn't take it seriously. Nor would i use it to try to convince the opposition i'm right.

The Soviet 'myth' hmmmm thats odd - i know people who escaped from there - and they would contend with your 'myth' that is the Soviet Union.

So are you saying the neocons came into power in the 1950's? I mean that is when we started to actively oppose the U.S.S.R. in various conflicts in the world. That is why we gave intel to Sadam, that is why we support Osama. Are you saying that is not true?

You obviously didn't read the OP or you'd know the Soviet myth I'm talking about.

Your trolling is duly noted.

And so is Palehorse74's. I'm surprised he's still posting. More proof of the double-standards and hypocritical moderation of this forum.

Trolling is your reply?

I read your OP and respond thusly. But if you want to talk aboutthe Sovit myth - how my Nuclear weapons did they have pointed at us? And what was the big fisco with cuba and the missles? or is that part of the "Sovit Myth"?

Can you answer the simple question i put forth?

So are you saying the neocons came into power in the 1950's? I mean that is when we started to actively oppose the U.S.S.R. in various conflicts in the world. That is why we gave intel to Sadam, that is why we support Osama. Are you saying that is not true?

 

[conjur]

And, look at this, FRANCIS FUKUYAMA laments the Neoconservative movement, says it's in shambles
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/19/magaz...r=1&incamp=article_popular&oref=slogin

As we approach the third anniversary of the onset of the Iraq war, it seems very unlikely that history will judge either the intervention itself or the ideas animating it kindly. By invading Iraq, the Bush administration created a self-fulfilling prophecy: Iraq has now replaced Afghanistan as a magnet, a training ground and an operational base for jihadist terrorists, with plenty of American targets to shoot at. The United States still has a chance of creating a Shiite-dominated democratic Iraq, but the new government will be very weak for years to come; the resulting power vacuum will invite outside influence from all of Iraq's neighbors, including Iran. There are clear benefits to the Iraqi people from the removal of Saddam Hussein's dictatorship, and perhaps some positive spillover effects in Lebanon and Syria. But it is very hard to see how these developments in themselves justify the blood and treasure that the United States has spent on the project to this point.

The so-called Bush Doctrine that set the framework for the administration's first term is now in shambles. The doctrine (elaborated, among other places, in the 2002 National Security Strategy of the United States) argued that, in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, America would have to launch periodic preventive wars to defend itself against rogue states and terrorists with weapons of mass destruction; that it would do this alone, if necessary; and that it would work to democratize the greater Middle East as a long-term solution to the terrorist problem. But successful pre-emption depends on the ability to predict the future accurately and on good intelligence, which was not forthcoming, while America's perceived unilateralism has isolated it as never before. It is not surprising that in its second term, the administration has been distancing itself from these policies and is in the process of rewriting the National Security Strategy document.

But it is the idealistic effort to use American power to promote democracy and human rights abroad that may suffer the greatest setback. Perceived failure in Iraq has restored the authority of foreign policy "realists" in the tradition of Henry Kissinger. Already there is a host of books and articles decrying America's naïve Wilsonianism and attacking the notion of trying to democratize the world. The administration's second-term efforts to push for greater Middle Eastern democracy, introduced with the soaring rhetoric of Bush's second Inaugural Address, have borne very problematic fruits. The Islamist Muslim Brotherhood made a strong showing in Egypt's parliamentary elections in November and December. While the holding of elections in Iraq this past December was an achievement in itself, the vote led to the ascendance of a Shiite bloc with close ties to Iran (following on the election of the conservative Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as president of Iran in June). But the clincher was the decisive Hamas victory in the Palestinian election last month, which brought to power a movement overtly dedicated to the destruction of Israel. In his second inaugural, Bush said that "America's vital interests and our deepest beliefs are now one," but the charge will be made with increasing frequency that the Bush administration made a big mistake when it stirred the pot, and that the United States would have done better to stick by its traditional authoritarian friends in the Middle East. Indeed, the effort to promote democracy around the world has been attacked as an illegitimate activity both by people on the left like Jeffrey Sachs and by traditional conservatives like Pat Buchanan.

...

The Bush administration and its neoconservative supporters did not simply underestimate the difficulty of bringing about congenial political outcomes in places like Iraq; they also misunderstood the way the world would react to the use of American power. Of course, the cold war was replete with instances of what the foreign policy analyst Stephen Sestanovich calls American maximalism, wherein Washington acted first and sought legitimacy and support from its allies only after the fact. But in the post-cold-war period, the structural situation of world politics changed in ways that made this kind of exercise of power much more problematic in the eyes of even close allies. After the fall of the Soviet Union, various neoconservative authors like Charles Krauthammer, William Kristol and Robert Kagan suggested that the United States would use its margin of power to exert a kind of "benevolent hegemony" over the rest of the world, fixing problems like rogue states with W.M.D., human rights abuses and terrorist threats as they came up. Writing before the Iraq war, Kristol and Kagan considered whether this posture would provoke resistance from the rest of the world, and concluded, "It is precisely because American foreign policy is infused with an unusually high degree of morality that other nations find they have less to fear from its otherwise daunting power."

Is it just Mr. Fukuyama trying to distance himself from the criminals pushing this failed ideology or have pigs actually taken flight?


(long article, well worth the read)

 

[shurato]

Interesting read. Peaks my interest to watch that BBC document.

 

[imported_Crusader]

Originally posted by: conjur
Let's take a quick review of what facts we DO know:

* Neoconservative movement forms in the wake of Leo Strauss.

* Neocons are disgusted with liberalism and a society promoting individualism and want a return to a "national identity". They determine they need to frame the struggle as a fight by America (good) against the evil in the world. Classic good vs. evil tale.

* Neocons latch onto the Soviets as their boogeyman. They exaggerate claims that the Soviets are ramping up nuclear arms production. I believe Rumsfeld (when he was Secretary of Defense under Gerald Ford) said about the Soviets' nuclear weapons programs, "They've been busy, busy, busy, busy." (Yes, I'm reminded of the evil magician from the animated Frosty the Snowman). This gets the US to start outspending the Soviets and leading to a cottage industry in Hollywood (ie. - War Games). Soviets invade Afghanistan and the US joins forces with the Mujahedeen, calling them freedom fighters (keep that in mind). The US gives the CIA $1billion and a crapload of Stinger missiles and funnels the cash thru Pakistan's ISI to the Mujahedeen. Along comes bin Laden who's just itching to burn thru his wad of familial money. The others let him play along as he's loaded. We also have Zawahiri who's really the hard-nosed Islamist and wants to install Islamic states all over the Mideast and SW Asia (Zawahiri being a follower of the executed Sayyid Qutb who, like the neocons, saw the liberal societies of the west as a virus against a nationalistic society).

The Soviet/Afghani war wages on for a few years. The US supplied training, satellite photos of Soviet troop locations (keep that in mind, too), etc. Gorbachev enters the scene and he sees the Soviet Union as it really is: a decrepit, failing state and decides to withdraw from Afghanistan in some manner as to still honor the tens of thousands who've died in Afghanistan (ring any bells there?). Vladimir Pozner tried to negotiate a settlement with the US to install a stable government in Afghanistan. The Soviets knew an Islamic state would result and they didn't want that. However, Richard Perle said, "They arrived in a matter of days, on Christmas Eve; they can leave by Christmas Eve" (paraphrasing). The Soviets eventually withdraw and the war is over.

Mujahedeen declares victory over a Superpower and feel their ideology has been validated. Now they can install an Islamic state in Afghanistan.
:woohoo:

The neocons also declare victory in that their training and support helped defeat the Soviets. They also feel their ideology was validated in that "evil" was defeated. Neocons leave Mujahedeen behind in the dust.

* Iran/Iraq war flares up. Rumsfeld shakes Saddam's hand. US supplies Iraq with satellite imagery of Iranian troop placement (ah HA). US companies supply Iraq with chemical weapon pre-cursors.

* Concurrently, the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic Jihad ramp up their violence and start attacking govts. When that fails to topple the western-friendly governments, they move to attacking fellow Muslims as obviously it is *they* who are infected with liberal individualism and don't understand Islamic states must be setup in order to "save" the soul and live righteously. Their violence escalates and creates a backlash against them which mutes their efforts for a while.

* Saddam invades Kuwait. Neocons want to continue on into Baghdad but Poppy Bush ain't playing along.

* The neocons need a new boogeyman. The Soviet Union is gone but they latch onto something they think will work. Apparently, the Soviet remnants are behind all of the terror attacks in the world. Documentation is obtained to prove their point and they go to the CIA to take it to the President. Trouble is, the CIA recognizes the "documentation" as their own propaganda! They know it's a farce and tell the neocons to fack off. Along comes William Casey, freshly appointed to head the CIA and he falls for the neocons' "proof" hook, line, and sinker.

* Meanwhile, the neocons try to entrench their power in the US by enlisting the mindless sheep of the Religious Right. This turns the 1992 RNC into something nearer a Salem witch trial than a political convention in the Land of the Free. The quick move to the far-right scares the bejeezus out of moderate Republicans and Bill "Big Dog" Clinton becomes President.

* Obviously, a Democratic President is an affront to the neocon mentality and the work begins quickly and in earnest to destroy Clinton. Lies are concocted re: Whitewater, Vince Foster, etc. (David Brock even comes forward later to declare they were all lies). Ken Starr (of the Federalist Society) spends $70 million to find wrongdoing re: Whitewater but only finds Monica and the infamous cigar. The Mighty Clenis is born! And impeached. The "moral depravity" of the liberals is shown before the whole world. (We'll choose to ignore the moral depravity of the aforementioned Religious Right - <ahem> Jim Bakker? Jimmy Swaggart?)

* Terror attacks hit the US in 1993, Khobar Towers attacked in 1996 and US embassies in Africa attacked in 1998. The neocons have their new boogeyman and start pushing for "regime change" in the Middle East and form the Project for a New American Century (the infamous PNAC). It's comprised of the same Straussians (Perle, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Ledeen, Kristol, Fukiyama, Feith, Hadley, etc.) that have flitted in and out of power since the Nixon administration and have so far struck out on the truth in every aspect of their machinations. They create Al Qaeda as a worldwide network organized by bin Laden in order that they can bring the fight to bin Laden under US laws meant to snare mafia types.

* 2000 and the Fortunate Son (our dear catapaulting Propagandist who previously stated no nation-building) reaches the White House. The neocons are in like Flynn and grab the top spots at the Pentagon, in the White House, and throughout the Cabinet. The war machine starts warming up. But, trouble is, where will it go? What they need is a target. BOOM! Sept. 11. "Al Qaeda" strikes the US. "Al Qaeda" is in tiny little Afghanistan. Easy pickings. Neocons contract out the job to Islamists' local enemies, Afghani warlords and the Northern Alliance. Some Tomahawks are launched for good TV back in the States. bin Laden is allowed to escape (don't want to kill off that boogeyman just yet) while "Al Qaeda" (which in reality is mostly just the Mujahedeen which don't care about the US...they're fighting for Islamic states in the Middle East) get rounded up by the Northen Alliance and the US kills them or ships them to Gitmo to rot w/o trial for years.

* War on Terror is loosening its grip on American minds. The public needs a new bad guy. Ah HA! Saddam! He's been sitting over there, contained, for a decade. Let's bomb his ass! Neocons go on a major propaganda spree, bringing in professional catapaulters like Chalabi. Hadley works up some fake documents in Italy to make it look like Saddam wants to buy yellowcake and Chalabi feeds "defectors" to the neocons for some unearned million$ All kinds of side activity go on with various members of the Republican party in Congress and outside of Congress, the details of which we're slowly uncovering (Valerie Plame, Sibel Edmonds, warrantless wiretaps, etc.) Iraq was supposed to greet the US with flowers and kisses and then the next step on the roadway to democracy would be Iran. However, the Islamists who've been lying dormant for the last several years and either survived Afghanistan or weren't there start flocking to Iraq to fight the western evil directly. This leads to a protracted "insurgency" in Iraq (comprised of the very same freedom fighters that were neocon allies in Afghanistan in the 1980s!) which delays the plans to invade Iran (John Bolton must have the worst case of blue balls in the history of the human race).


That pretty much leads us up to today's propaganda directed at Iran.


It's the Neocons (PNAC) that are behind our govt's foreign policy. The Presidents come and go but the neocons remain entrenched in power. It is THEY who must be stopped. And they must be stopped now!

There's another twist to this in that an Unholy Trinity has converged (Neocons, Norquist/small gov't camp/Religious Right). They are at their peak of power now and they aren't going to relent easily.

Add in the cessation of the publication of M3, the propping up of the stock and bond markets, the twisting of employment numbers to make it look good, rising inflation, rising trade deficits, rising fiscal deficits, decreasing wage earning power for average Americans, negative savings rates and a host of other economic issues and the writing is on the wall: the neocon dream is a complete and utter failure and the convergence of the Unholy Trinity is leading the United States of America right over the precipice and into economic collapse.

Ready for soup lines? Grab a copy of Grapes of Wrath to bide your time while you wait.



2/19

And, look at this, FRANCIS FUKUYAMA laments the Neoconservative movement, says it's in shambles
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/19/magaz...r=1&incamp=article_popular&oref=slogin

Wow. Someone might have a lot of time on their hands. LOL.

I consider myself a Christian conservative, so I guess I'm part of your "trinity".. but can someone describe what is a "neo" con?

My opinion is that we are looking at a good 50 years of conservative domination in American politics, and will slowly sweep across the world (including into liberal Euro gov'ts). You can see it how liberals always move to the center like Clinton.

But Republicans can go right of center and still get elected. Its true.
You might see liberals or democrats get elected into office, but disguising their leftist agenda.

Myself, I like the right wing and the Christian right. Soon we'll have abortion banned.
The not relenting part is true, Christians wont stop and they pretty much have more drive than anyone because its our faith and not just some political ideology like leftists.

Look at our brothers in Islam, they arent exactly giving up. I do have some faith in the individualistic liberal western society, but I dont think they have what it takes to stand up to religous onslaught from western Christians and the Muslims who are running over Europe.
In either using force to stop subversion of the system, or defeating religon with a relatively weak arguement centered on being 'individual'.

Islam will probably take over European governments like Christians have taken the USA.
I view them as brothers and call for unity between our religons as we have a common end with different means.

The western liberals (apparantly conjur is one), are being very foolish in throwing away possible Christian support for their 'freedom' cause. But it makes sense for them to not want to enlist us in supporting western individualism, the age-old socialists were true enemies of religon too.. I suppose its too much asking for change.
Can't fight a war on two fronts!

 

[piasabird]

What is a Neo Conservative?

This sounds like some kind of term for a conservative boogyman!

Hide under your bed Democrats the Neo-Con Monsters are in the closet.

Get a grip!

They are going to starve your grandparents, take away your kids free school lunch, and poisin the air and the water!

This is just a bunch of tired phoney baloney the democratic party has been spewing out to scare voters into becoming Democrats.

The idea is that if you tell lies long enough and often enough that people begin to believe this clap-trap.

If you live in a mostly democratic country and are forced to either not get a newspaper or get the local paper with its leftist brainwashing techniques, it is hard to have any kind of freedom of speech or even to get anything resembling the ideal of journalism. My local paper is so one-sided, to read it makes me want to vomit! The network news is not much better; they just seem to be better at doing it in a much slicker manner.

Be careful America, because there is no free press! I urge people to cast off idealog ideas and to learn to think for yourself. Wether you are a conservative, liberal, or some other brand of political persuasion, you need to question what you see on the TV and read in Print or on the Internet, as well as what your elected officials have to say. Call me jaded, but I consider anything any elected official or so-called journalist says to be a lie.

Gov Blagoyovich or whatever his name is (Democrat IL) came to my community college trying to sell what he was trying to push. After he got back to chicago or wherever he was from he tried to cut the Southern Illinois University Retirement System (SURS). Kind of hard to get behind any person that wants to slit your throat by stealing your benefits and reirement. This guy is doing the same thing that the Democratic Party is blaming on Republicans. It is easy to be for Education when it is popular, but it is another thing to actually follow through with actions to back up your flowery speech.

 

[imported_Condor]

Originally posted by: conjur
I had a one week vacation about a month ago. I've been busy at work since...just had the time to put this together today.

Now, is ANYONE GOING TO ADDRESS THE OP??
'

Jesus Christ it's no wonder I debated even posting this here. Everytime I post something well thought-out I get the typical childish trolls coming out and fluffing each other left and right.


Freakin jokes they are.

You once posted something well thought out? Link?

 

[bamacre]

Conjur,

As a Christian, and a leaning Republican, I cannot agree more with your OP. Props, and ignore the others, they have their heads in the sand.

"If the band you're in starts playing different tunes," is exactly how I feel at times in regards to the Republicans and Christians in this country.