Why isn't this scaring anyone else sh1tless?

Oct 16, 1999
10,490
4
0
Knowing this group is running the country? Even with their own spin it reaks of emperialism.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/

June 3, 1997

American foreign and defense policy is adrift. Conservatives have criticized the incoherent policies of the Clinton Administration. They have also resisted isolationist impulses from within their own ranks. But conservatives have not confidently advanced a strategic vision of America's role in the world. They have not set forth guiding principles for American foreign policy. They have allowed differences over tactics to obscure potential agreement on strategic objectives. And they have not fought for a defense budget that would maintain American security and advance American interests in the new century.

We aim to change this. We aim to make the case and rally support for American global leadership.


As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world's preeminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?


We are in danger of squandering the opportunity and failing the challenge. We are living off the capital -- both the military investments and the foreign policy achievements -- built up by past administrations. Cuts in foreign affairs and defense spending, inattention to the tools of statecraft, and inconstant leadership are making it increasingly difficult to sustain American influence around the world. And the promise of short-term commercial benefits threatens to override strategic considerations. As a consequence, we are jeopardizing the nation's ability to meet present threats and to deal with potentially greater challenges that lie ahead.

We seem to have forgotten the essential elements of the Reagan Administration's success: a military that is strong and ready to meet both present and future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles abroad; and national leadership that accepts the United States' global responsibilities.


Of course, the United States must be prudent in how it exercises its power. But we cannot safely avoid the responsibilities of global leadership or the costs that are associated with its exercise. America has a vital role in maintaining peace and security in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. If we shirk our responsibilities, we invite challenges to our fundamental interests. The history of the 20th century should have taught us that it is important to shape circumstances before crises emerge, and to meet threats before they become dire. The history of this century should have taught us to embrace the cause of American leadership.

Our aim is to remind Americans of these lessons and to draw their consequences for today. Here are four consequences:

? we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global
responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;


? we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;


? we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;


? we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.

Such a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity may not be fashionable today. But it is necessary if the United States is to build on the successes of this past century and to ensure our security and our greatness in the next.

Elliott Abrams Gary Bauer William J. Bennett Jeb Bush

Dick Cheney Eliot A. Cohen Midge Decter Paula Dobriansky Steve Forbes

Aaron Friedberg Francis Fukuyama Frank Gaffney Fred C. Ikle

Donald Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad I. Lewis Libby Norman Podhoretz

Dan Quayle Peter W. Rodman Stephen P. Rosen Henry S. Rowen

Donald Rumsfeld Vin Weber George Weigel Paul Wolfowitz
 

Tripleshot

Elite Member
Jan 29, 2000
7,218
1
0
It sounds like those names on the bottom that are signatories to this "plan" are after total world domination. It is "my way or the highway " by the sounds of it.

Yes, people should be concerned about this crap. We area diverse nation. We accept diversity. We accept the world community and embrace different cultures. These A-holes want the world to speak english and read left to right. Pretty fricken' arrogant of this group.

I think they aredoomed to failure, as long as we do not allow them the power they seek to enact such policies. That comes from voting the bastyards out of office, and out of the sphere of influence Bush has allowed them.

US foriegn policy under Bush Jr. is a joke. Get someone else in the White House that can forment coherent policy that doesn't threaten nations by its very nature. This crap from PNAC is pathetic.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
I don't know, why are you upset about it?

If all goes well the whole world be be relegated to serving americans. Don't act so innocent, the life you enjoy is made possible though the suffering of others in the world. There are limited resources thankfully our team has the vison to see we get the most.
 

UltraQuiet

Banned
Sep 22, 2001
5,755
0
0
? we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global
responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;


? we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;


? we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;


? we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.

What's wrong with these goals? You may question the methods to get us there (and you should) but there is nothing wrong with these goals.

Nothing.
 

Fencer128

Platinum Member
Jun 18, 2001
2,700
1
91
"We aim to make the case and rally support for American global leadership"

"Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?"

"...a foreign policy that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles abroad..."

"The history of this century should have taught us to embrace the cause of American leadership."

"...we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;..."

"Such a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity..."

As a foreigner I can say that the tone of some of this language is ambiguous at best and scary at worst. I can see how it can be meant in a positive way - but then I can also see some possibly very negative interpretations too. The language makes me wary.

Cheers,

Andy
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,490
4
0
Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
? we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global
responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;


? we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;


? we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;


? we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.

What's wrong with these goals? You may question the methods to get us there (and you should) but there is nothing wrong with these goals.

Nothing.


What's wrong here is that achieving these goals requires giving too much power to too few select individuals. And the negatives of that could far, far outweigh any benefits from achieving those goals. And we are already seeing the methods being used to achieve them - bribery, intimidation, and brute force.
 

UltraQuiet

Banned
Sep 22, 2001
5,755
0
0
What's wrong here is that achieving these goals requires giving too much power to too few select individuals. And the negatives of that could far, far outweigh any benefits from achieving those goals. And we are already seeing the methods being used to achieve them - bribery, intimidation, and brute force

How exactly do goals put power in the hands of too few? There's power in the hands of the few because Congress won't do it's fscking job.

The negatives could outweigh the benefits? Only if the methods are wrong and I already spoke about that. When we get out of this "megaphone diplomacy" mode that we're currently in we'll be able to accomplish these goals. And we should.

Those goals should be the goals of everyone in D.C. If they're not the goal of someone, that someone should be impeached or recalled and run out of D.C. on a rail.
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,490
4
0
Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
What's wrong here is that achieving these goals requires giving too much power to too few select individuals. And the negatives of that could far, far outweigh any benefits from achieving those goals. And we are already seeing the methods being used to achieve them - bribery, intimidation, and brute force

How exactly do goals put power in the hands of too few? There's power in the hands of the few because Congress won't do it's fscking job.

The negatives could outweigh the benefits? Only if the methods are wrong and I already spoke about that. When we get out of this "megaphone diplomacy" mode that we're currently in we'll be able to accomplish these goals. And we should.

Those goals should be the goals of everyone in D.C. If they're not the goal of someone, that someone should be impeached or recalled and run out of D.C. on a rail.

I didn't say anything was inherently wrong with the goals as stated. But having the US dictate policy for the rest of the world IS putting too much power in the hands of the US administration. And that is exactly what these people are attempting to make happen, as evidenced by their behavior thus far, by using the exact methods as I stated. These goals are certainly important, and I would much rather them be based on a solid foundation of diplomacy than the bullying tactics that have been used thus far. Allies are made and broken by shared interests, not intimidation. Europe SHOULD be an ally in damn near everything the US does, we are too much alike not to be, but this adminstration has done everything it can to alienate and demonize them because they have differing opionions on a few points.
 

UltraQuiet

Banned
Sep 22, 2001
5,755
0
0
be based on a solid foundation of diplomacy than the bullying tactics that have been used thus far

I think we agree on more than you realize. I have stated it is our methods that are bad, not our goals.

I think anyone would concede that it may sometimes take more than diplomacy to achieve these goals. When that is the case a broad coalition is better than one country that may be perceived as a bully or empiralistic.
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,490
4
0
Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
be based on a solid foundation of diplomacy than the bullying tactics that have been used thus far

I think we agree on more than you realize. I have stated it is our methods that are bad, not our goals.

I think anyone would concede that it may sometimes take more than diplomacy to achieve these goals. When that is the case a broad coalition is better than one country that may be perceived as a bully or empiralistic.

We probably do. I'm just tired of these people hiding behind their goals, using them to justify any means they use, and ignoring the negative results of those means. It's like me saying' hey, I'm going to cure every disease on the planet' and neglecting to say I'm going to do it by killing every living thing on it.
 

Czar

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
28,510
0
0
Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
Originally posted by: LocutusX
LOL Bahaha. Another PNAC post. Where's DaveSohmer?


That guy's a friggin' idiot. :|
3. Please respect your fellow members. PERSONAL ATTACKS WILL NOT BE TOLERATED.
 

Czar

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
28,510
0
0
Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
Originally posted by: Czar
Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
Originally posted by: LocutusX
LOL Bahaha. Another PNAC post. Where's DaveSohmer?


That guy's a friggin' idiot. :|
3. Please respect your fellow members. PERSONAL ATTACKS WILL NOT BE TOLERATED.


Get a life.
number two eh..... there are a few very simple rules on this forum to keep this civil try to follow them

 

UltraQuiet

Banned
Sep 22, 2001
5,755
0
0
Originally posted by: Czar
Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
Originally posted by: Czar
Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
Originally posted by: LocutusX
LOL Bahaha. Another PNAC post. Where's DaveSohmer?


That guy's a friggin' idiot. :|
3. Please respect your fellow members. PERSONAL ATTACKS WILL NOT BE TOLERATED.


Get a life.
number two eh..... there are a few very simple rules on this forum to keep this civil try to follow them

When I want or need your advice I'll let you know. Don't hold your breath.

On second thought, please hold your breath.
 

Czar

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
28,510
0
0
Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
Originally posted by: Czar
Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
Originally posted by: Czar
Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
Originally posted by: LocutusX
LOL Bahaha. Another PNAC post. Where's DaveSohmer?


That guy's a friggin' idiot. :|
3. Please respect your fellow members. PERSONAL ATTACKS WILL NOT BE TOLERATED.


Get a life.
number two eh..... there are a few very simple rules on this forum to keep this civil try to follow them

When I want or need your advice I'll let you know. Don't hold your breath.

On second thought, please hold your breath.
rolleye.gif
 

Fencer128

Platinum Member
Jun 18, 2001
2,700
1
91
"why isn't this scaring anyone else sh1tess?"

I imagine becuase most of the readers here are American and don't see the same possible perspective on the comments as foreigners do.

Cheers,

Andy
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,133
38
91
The Project for A New American Century is one of the best and most forward-looking paper I've ever read (you guys are over 6 years late). If all of these policies are enacted by future administrations, the world will be a better place. Global leadership eminating from Washington D.C. is the epitome of the new utopia.


EDIT: The signatories are the Who's Who of advocates for a stronger American foreign policy.
 

Squisher

Lifer
Aug 17, 2000
21,204
66
91
What we have here is a plan to further the United States' interests.

Every nation should have one, if they don't then they're short changing their people.



 
Oct 16, 1999
10,490
4
0
Originally posted by: Dari
The Project for A New American Century is one of the best and most forward-looking paper I've ever read (you guys are over 6 years late). If all of these policies are enacted by future administrations, the world will be a better place. Global leadership eminating from Washington D.C. is the epitome of the new utopia.


EDIT: The signatories are the Who's Who of advocates for a stronger American foreign policy.

To hear you tell it, I think we're 19 years late. A true utopia eminating out of D.C. is about as likely to happen as potpourri eminating from my ass.
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,133
38
91
Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
Originally posted by: Dari
The Project for A New American Century is one of the best and most forward-looking paper I've ever read (you guys are over 6 years late). If all of these policies are enacted by future administrations, the world will be a better place. Global leadership eminating from Washington D.C. is the epitome of the new utopia.


EDIT: The signatories are the Who's Who of advocates for a stronger American foreign policy.

To hear you tell it, I think we're 19 years late. A true utopia eminating out of D.C. is about as likely to happen as potpourri eminating from my ass.

Look at Western Europe, South Korea, and Japan. Those regions/countries have followed American leadership for the past 50 years. While they were under our wings, democracy flourished and poverty dissapated. Now, region by region, we will extend the wings of our benelovent empire across the globe. Nothing could be better.