End of the Neo-Cons

[The Count]

End of the Neo-Cons
Nov. 5, 2006. 08:16 AM
DAVID OLIVE
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1162595434813&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154&t=TS_Home

Whether or not the Republicans lose control of one or both houses of the U.S. Congress on Tuesday, the neo-conservative vision that has guided American foreign policy since 2001 has run its course. The neo-cons' grand design lies in ruins, having accomplished nothing other than to shrink America's stature in the world.
snip
By Christmas or soon thereafter, a White House that has run out of options on Iraq will begin to cut and run, pronouncing favourably on an exit plan that is now in the final stages of completion by a team led by James Baker, former U.S. secretary of state and a close friend of the Bush family, and Lee Hamilton, a respected former congressman and Democrat who co-chaired the 9/11 Commission.
snip
It's possible that, after its humbling in Iraq, America will retreat into itself instead of rejoining the community of nations and the pursuit of truly consensual solutions to the crises of global injustice, impoverishment and environmental degradation.

In that case, the neo-cons will have earned their place in one of the inner circles of hell.

[razors edge]

1. Better late than never. n/t

[Nostradammit]

2. Their place in the inner circles of hell is quite secure.

And "respected former congressman Lee Hamilton."

I got no respect for him.

[Tuttle]

4. it should say this

formerly respected congressman Lee Hamilton

Tut-tut

[JudyM]

3. R.I.P. (or not)

[MrPrax]

5. Spin...

That's right -- blow up the neo-con influence, while ignoring everyone else. (Hello! Christian Right, neo-liberals and the usual interests of the MIC) Talk about re-positioning...

This piece starts out stupidly; "Whether or not"? Well if they DON'T lose one or both, then your thesis is a little dubious...obviously the neo-con vision isn't in ruins, then.

In fact this fellow would have us believe that Iraq and ONLY Iraq is the culmination of the neo-con vision and can't really bring himself to admit that things like the Carter Doctrine, 'top cop to the world', corporate oil control, disregard for international law and it's various treaties, extrajudiciality, trade blocs, etc etc are some how 'neo-con' inventions. Please...these have been major planks in American foreign policy for decades...well before...who? Bill Kristol.

I remember these boring liberals were writing this shit in '86 about Buckley, Stockman and the National Review during the 80s. (too much influence in the Reagan administration...it will spell their doom!!...nawh...the Cons simply loaded all the mistakes into the 'flaws' of Reaganomics, the Contras, recession and then rehabilitated themselves, so guys like Olive can write about there demise allover again 15 years later)

While Gen. Odom's comment about Kristol is pure gold; Lebanon, Syria, Iran, North Korea (add to it: Venezuela and 'Our BackYard') and there is very little neo-con left anyway. Projection of 'power' and dominance is hardly a 'neo-con' trait in and of itself. There are tons of people in the US that truly believe in the American miracle and constantly seek validation because it is necessary for their countries' internal controls and self-perception as a nation...the US and it's economy can't exist in some void. It has to proselytize and control. That isn't neo-con; that's 'manifest destiny'.

David Olive sounds exactly like a liberal who probably does read Commentary and WJS and handicaps them, just like a good little navel-gazing elite should -- they never look beyond the 'thesis' or even take a moral stand, they will hop a ride and then make sure they jump when one set of 'strategies' becomes 'unfashionable' in their social circles.