"Neocons inciting yet another war"!!!

[Flying_Pig]

Neocons inciting yet another war!!!

The following is from an article in Newsday. I read it in the Sacramento Bee, so it was syndicated. Link(s) provided. Please take the time to read this, as it points out how some of the neocons are operating in the White House, and, how they are trying to ram through their fascist policies. Interesting to note, the connection between the PNAC/Neocons, and Democratic Rep. Eliot Engle (D-NY). Engle is a die-hard Likud supporter, and is co-sponsoring this latest PNAC adventure!

The story tells of new U.S. efforts against Syria, developed by the neocons. The Newsday site carries this story with 2 different dates, and each are, interestingly, slightly different. The 09/11 version, states that the State Department (Powell) does not favor these efforts, but the 9/12 copy deleted this reference. Why?

Since the invasion of Iraq, there have been weekly stories about Syria and Iran, all pretty much in this same war-mongering vein. It appears the neocons (PNAC) aren't hesitating one bit, despite their failures in Iraq and Afghanistan, and are determined to incite total war in the Middle East, ending in U.S. world domination. I find it very disturbing, that some Democrats, especially those with close ties to Israel, are allied with the neocons. These bastards must be stopped!!!! Here's a few snips, from both dates. Links to both versions to follow:

<snip>
With new intelligence showing involvement by key members of the Syrian government in weapons sales to Saddam Hussein, the Bush administration is on the verge of imposing potentially devastating economic sanctions against Syria, administration officials say.

All the pertinent agencies of the government, except for the State Department, are in favor of sanctions, and Secretary of State Colin Powell is not likely to try to block them, the officials said.

<snip>
But Edward Walker, a former top State Department official for the Middle East, said sanctions against Syria would be useless and were part of an "outrageous ivory tower ideology cooked up 10 years ago" by some members of the current Bush administration. (neocons!)

Douglas Feith, now the No. 3 official at the Pentagon, co-authored a report in the 1990s saying the U.S. should invade Iraq as a first step toward toppling the Assad regime in Syria. <snip>

*** It's probably worth it to read both versions, and then ask yourself why they would change the story so much?

Link to 9/12 version:
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/ny-wosyri0912,0,640473.story

Link to 09/11 version: http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/world/ny-wosyri123451495sep12,0,1291285.story

[alexwcovington]

1. Woot. Our very own Babylonian Empire

[AntiCoup2K4]

2. As "McCarthyist" as this may sound....

I think it's time we expunged all PNAC influence from the Democratic party. Because unlike Tailgunner Joe's commie paranoia, PNAC is a very real threat to this country, and to the world, as we have all obviously seen since the 12/12/00 coup.

Whether it's a big name Senator like Lieberman or Kerry, or a little known congressman, or whatever, these fuckers have no place in our party.

Is it "fascist" of me to not want any part of the shitheads who are doing their damndest to destroy this country and create global fascism?

[Flying_Pig]

4. I agree, (except about Kerry) but the extent of PNAC/Likud/Israel

influence goes from the top of our party (Pelosi/Lieberman), to the bottom (Engle/Lantos), and in some cases, is more rabid than many Republicans!! It certainly shows the power of AIPAC and other pro-Likud outfits. The bottom line, is that anyone supporting the PNAC fascist vison, is not acting in the best interests of the United States, but rather the best interests of Israel, and perhaps the oil companies. I call it treason, when our kids in the armed forces are used to further the fascist aims of this regime and, their PNAC/Likud/AIPAC masters.

:grr:

[Classical_Liberal]

9. Likud ain't in the best interests of Israel either

but I guess that is besides the point.

[Flying_Pig]

11. A point well taken....

Thank you....

:hi:

[salin]

3. I don't know how to find it - but about two weeks ago

there was an excellent article that detailed how the NEOcons were actively trying to thwart efforts in Syria and Iran (diplomatic - related to getting info and arrests on terrorists) and more urgently in North Korea. So while State and others are working with the countries (or in diplomatic negotiations - think North Korea) - these folks are going around trying to blow those efforts up to serve there own needs. If someone remembers this article and can link it here - it would be great.

Then note several items on the North Korea front over the past 2 1/2 weeks (or three?).

1. Key negotiator from US Resigns... news items say he is PUSHED out by John Bolten (NeoCon State), because Bolten had been making exceptionally inflamatory - public remarks about North Korea, and the negotiator tried to ease the tension in negotiations by down playing the statements as not representative of the US position (and that Bolten was just prone to be a tad hypberbolic - or something to that effect).

2. Bolten keeps being inflamatory to the point that N Korea will not continue discussions with Bolten being present.

3. Today a "high administration official" (and no other source) says that North Korea missles (re: nukes) can strike interior (i believe) US targets.

Put these items together with the article I can not find - and it is like reading a script.

Note - we have had troops in place in the region - for months.

It appears that Bolten is trying to provoke some kind of action from the twitchy and unpredictable N Korea leader - that would allow for US military response... without having to get any international or UN support.

[Flying_Pig]

5. "It appears that Bolton is trying to provoke some....

kind of action from the twitchy and unpredictable N Korea leader - that would allow for US military response... without having to get any international or UN support." That seems like an accurate take on the matter Salin. The question is, given their failure in Iraq, why are they being allowed to continue to steer our policies? Apparently, they have THAT much power and say over Bush/Cheney.

[ewagner]

6. Over Bush for sure,

Cheney, on the other hand, is the leader of the pack.

I deleted the above mentioned article from my bookmarks a few days ago, and now wish I had saved it. IIRC, the article mentioned that a Pentagon representative was caught negotiating, or at least talking, with an arms dealer who had connections to the Iran-Contra/Guns for Hostages deal and deliberately undermining "quiet, diplomatic efforts" by the State Department.

There is no doubt that Rummy and the boys (say NECON PNACers) are running the show. I doubt seriously if Bush knows what's going on and Powell can't go running to him too often without forcing Dubya to make a choice between him and Rummy. (And we all know what choice shrub would make.)

Dismantaling that group of yahoooos in the Pentagon is a major priority. They're flat-ass dangerous.

[Flying_Pig]

8. Yes, Cheney is certainly one of their leaders....

I also beleive that you are correct that it has been Cheney who has been "operating" the ship, while Junior is trotted out to say whatever they tell him to say. I am also convinced though, that Daddy Bush, is one of the real "kingpins", along with a handful of others.

[ewagner]

14. I don't know about that...

Is it possible that "daddy" was just as much as a "useful tool" as Junior?

I don't know...just bringing it up for discussion.......

[Flying_Pig]

16. It's certainly possible....

"Is it possible that "daddy" was just as much as a "useful tool" as Junior?"

[hang a left]

21. Not a chance, he is the tool maker

[RainDog]

37. Ghorbanifar and Feith

edited to add link to article

found the article, or one of them. from Aug. 2003--also talks about Ledeen, who is at the American Enterprise Institute, along with Kristol and Wolfie (advocating genocide)...great bunch of guys Bush has sending us all to hell...

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0808-12.htm

Pentagon hardliners pressing for regime change in Iran have held secret and unauthorized meetings in Paris with a controversial arms dealer who was a major figure in the Iran-contra scandal, according to administration officials.

The officials said at least two Pentagon officials working for Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith have held "several" meetings with Manucher Ghorbanifar, the Iranian middleman in U.S. arms-for-hostage shipments to Iran in the mid-1980s.

...


Ledeen once described him as "one of the most honest, educated, honorable men I have ever known." But the CIA, noting he had failed four polygraph tests administered during the arms-for-hostages deals, warned its officers not to deal with him, asserting he "should be regarded as an intelligence fabricator and nuisance."

The senior administration official said he was puzzled by the resurfacing of Ghorbanifar after all these years. "It would be amazing if anybody in government hadn't learned the lessons of last time around," he said. "These guys should have learned it, 'cause they lived it."

[RainDog]

18. Bush and Cheney are part of the ideology

No doubt for their own self-serving reasons...oil and all that, as well as making the fundie right in America deliriously happy as they contemplete the destruction of the earth (they hope).

PNAC has already stated their intention to establish US hegemony in the Middle East...no matter what they tell the American people, they will only settle for puppet regimes, or they will continue to occupy Iraq, and the other countries they will no doubt invade if Congress doesn't stop them.

...and Congress will not be likely to stop them, especially with a presidential election campaign coming up.

The conservative magazine American Chronicles had an article by Srdja Trifkovic in the Aug. 03 edition. He contemplates the possible reasons for the war on Iraq and the occupation now.

"If we pretend the purpose was to disarm Iraq," -mission accomplished, let's go home.

"If the primary purpose was to replace the regime in Baghdad it is also possible to declare victory and to leave the place to its own devices."

(he goes on to call the state of Iraq artificial anyway...it was constructed by Britain..)

"If the war was primarily, albeit not exclusively about oil- a reasonable supposition, considering that Iraq has 17 percent of the world's known reserves--then (paraphrase) America would need to control areas with wells, not Baghdad, or other cities...and he calls this reason amoral and cynical (that would include the Bushies exclusive drilling rights, 99 year leases, and infrastructure reconstruction contracts.)

so the guy says that if the reason was oil, we only need troops to control those places where America wants to steal from the Iraqis (my wording, not his.)

If democracy was the goal- the writer mentions the well-known Bush-Rummy blunders- we "have a serious problem" and calls it a no-win situation.

"It is possible our continued occupation has nothing to do with American interest" ---and rather may be for the purpose of changing the balance in the region for the benefit of Israel.

The writer notes this is something which is too flammable to say in the US, but it also explains why the dems went along with the WMD lies, and why they now don't scream for impeachment, which Bush and Cheney rightly deserve...as well as charges for conspiring against the American people, I say...

He quotes a Washington insider saying that the dems knew the war would be good for Israel (I would question that, myself, since Israel is not Sharon), Israel wanted it, it was a no-brainer, politically.

The writer goes on to warn that the next stage is Iran, set to coincide with the collapse of the "road map" next winter..well, it already collapsed, but...

Paul Krugman, in this NYTimes editorial today, also warned that the Bush junta will make things MUCH WORSE in order to maintain power and to keep their crimes hidden from the American people.

I think that Iran is more likely than Syria in the near future. We have Iran in our sights on two sides in theory, if not fact, by our troops stationed in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

Salin makes an excellent point about Korea...something I was not aware of. America fought a war on two fronts in the 1940s, so I'm sure that's part of the thinking of the PNAC-ers as well.

[Flying_Pig]

19. More great comments RD, especially....

"It is possible our continued occupation has nothing to do with American interest" ---and rather may be for the purpose of changing the balance in the region for the benefit of Israel.

The writer notes this is something which is too flammable to say in the US, but it also explains why the dems went along with the WMD lies, and why they now don't scream for impeachment, which Bush and Cheney rightly deserve...as well as charges for conspiring against the American people, I say..."

That gets to the heart of the matter quite nicely....

[Flying_Pig]

22. To add to this, if it is going to be our policy to...

overthrow governments that bring danger to the United States, or have caused American deaths, then overthrowing the Likud government in Israel should be one of our top priorities. If one believes that one of the main reasons were are in Iraq, is Israel, then it is costing us hundreds of billons, and to date, has cost 312 American deaths, and thousands of wounded. I don't remember Syria, Iraq, or Iran, ever costing us so much in lives, damage, and money, do you?

[CHIMO]

20. Could Be

But the banker is still the boss.

But who controls the banker?

[Classical_Liberal]

7. If he is from Liberal NY and a DLCer we can do a primary challenge

We should also take a run at Lieberman in Liberal Connecticut.

[Flying_Pig]

10. I agree, if it can be done without losing focus or seats....

or in any way, affecting the efforts to remove Bush. After the election, we, as a party, and as a nation, would be making a horrible mistake if we fail to go after all those who have and are supporting the PNAC neocons, whether they are Republican, ....or Democrat. We need to drive a silver stake through the heart of these evil bastards, in an effort to make sure they will never be in a position of power in this country again!

[RainDog]

12. ch-ch-ch-changes

September 11, 2003, 6:56 PM EDT

graph 3. ..."The offices are officially closed but still active, according to numerous sources ( numerous sources changed to government sources and Middle East experts)."

edited for specificity...and, of course, to make the assessment sound more valid.

graph 4 edited to correct a verb error "shipped" for "were shipped"

graph 6 changed adjective from "particular" to "close"

graph 9 some members of the (current) Bush administration. -edited to clarify it's Jr, not Sr.'s administration.

Douglas Feith, (now) the number three...

Henri Barkey, () said that sanctions would have an impact on Syria at least indirectly, making financial transactions (much more) <-(these words were removed) complicated and doing business with other countries more expensive.

the( fledgling) <- (removed this adjective) regime,

**This paragraph was omitted*
Syria recently recalled its ambassador from Washington, and has no plans to send him back or replace him.

*This paragraph was omitted*
Hezbollah conducted a successful guerrilla campaign against Israeli forces occupying southern Lebanon, forcing an Israeli withdrawal three years ago. It is said recently to have become influential with Palestinian militants in the West Bank, and is possibly supplying them new, longer range weapons that are a threat to Israeli cities.

... Syrian intelligence has cooperated with the CIA against (Osama bin Laden's) <- OBL's name omitted, perhaps thought unnecessary, or to make AQ more than a single figure) al- Qaida, providing critical information that may have prevented an attack against U.S. sailors in the Gulf state of Bahrain. Walker said that sanctions would "turn off all the cooperation the CIA has been getting from Syria."

---so, those are the changes. must have way too much time on my hands tonight. Maybe the two omitted paragraphs made too much of the benefit to Israel if the US govt starts in on Syria, which might seem to be at odds with US foreign policy because it could hamper our intelligence gathering. (Shades of Iraq??)

[CHIMO]

15. Thanks

A Canadian passport can get one sent to Syria by the US of A and then they turn around and state that it is none of their concern.

How to make friends and influence neighbours.

How long does one expect to have co-operation?

[Flying_Pig]

17. Wow! Thanks for that RainDog. It's the kind of effort....

and analysis that makes DU members so special. I'll bet the freepers never analyze a story like that, knowing how they prefer their propaganda "staight up".

[RainDog]

23. my pleasure

these neo-cons are really, really disturbing. did you see Now on PBS tonight? it's a must see...9-11 widows with facts and questions and George Soros, rightly calling the Bush administration full of extremists.

There is a NOW thread in GD and Wonk posted the links online to watch. Soros' comments tie into the report here about the world war the Bushies seem determined to have...along with bin Laden. Why are there goals so similar? The difference is in name only...what they call god.

the extremism and indifference to humanity is the same.

[CHIMO]

13. $87 Billion

As soon as the UN supports the effort in Iraq then it will free troops for Iran and/or Syria.

[Arianrhod]

24. I have never doubted,

right from the beginning of the Iraq invasion, that Syria was our next target.

It only makes sense. Get the oil, then protect Israel by destroying its enemies. Of course, with Iraq, you get both for your buck.

This occupation of the ME has been planned for decades. It's well thought-out and is being executed virtually flawlessly. Americans have long stuck our heads in the sand regarding anything outside of our own counties, so we don't really care what the government does overseas. That, IMO, is why Fox et al. are able to sway the masses so easily. It won't be long before we start hearing about how we need to "liberate" the Syrians from tyranny. . . .

That the "neo"cons are hyping this in the midst of the Iraq fiasco and falling * numbers is an indication both of how arrogant, and of how confident, they are in their thirst for power.

< edited for syntax >

[Flying_Pig]

25. They aren't just arrogant,...

they are insane, like the Nazis and the Stalinists before them. I do not believe most people really understand how very dangerous they are to the world, and especialy to our country. We must get the message out, and work to put them all behind bars, where they belong.

[htuttle]

27. I would differ with you on one important point

While their little plans for world domination have been planned for decades, recent actions have proven several things:
1) It's NOT well thought-out. It's built on a foundation of rosy assumptions and 'faith'.
2) It is NOT being executed virtually flawlessly. The US military is holding on by a fingernail in Iraq, and it's getting worse.

It appears to me that the bulk of their planning went into creating pretexts to get us INTO these wars, and almost none went into how these wars would actually be fought, and absolutely no time spent on considering what comes after. Except for how the contracts would be divvied up.

These people aren't just imperialists (which would be nothing new, really).
They are INCOMPETENT imperialists, bred by a culture that doesn't hold them responsible for their own actions.

Their plans aren't simply morally and ethically wrong (although they are, no doubt). They are unfeasible, unworkable, and will get us into trouble that will take decades to extricate ourselves from. Long term damage to the US has already been done.

[Flying_Pig]

29. Despite their "incompetence", as the article indicates,.....

they are moving ahead with their plans anyway! It also appears Bush is willing to overlook their incompetence, and will continue to support their efforts. So, incompetent or not, until we drive a silver stake through their hearts, our nation, and the world, continues to be at risk.

[Arianrhod]

34. While I agree with you that it appears liitle planning went into this,

I've come to the conclusion that the hanging-by-a-fingernail position of the US troops is exactly what the "neo"cons want. How better to promulgate the fear of terrorism at home than by actually having our troops attacked by terrorists on a daily basis? How better to impose on an unwilling public a new draft--possibly of women as well--than by "bringing them on" against an increasingly thinning military presence? How better to foist upon us an interminable succession of PATRIOT Acts than by keeping us fretting about our safety? How better to get public support for another invasion than by hinting that the WMDs we failed to find in Iraq were actually moved to another country before we got there? How better to keep the populace on the edge of their seats in anticipation of the capture of bin Laden/Hussein than by never quite catching them? How better to drain the Treasury into the pockets of big business than by perpetual war?

No, I have a deepening suspicion that things in the ME are going pretty much according to plan. :(

[Flying_Pig]

35. You've got it right...

And appearances are deceiving. I actually think they planned quite well, and as you pointed out, everything is going according to plan. The biggest sign of incompetence, is simply from the fact they didn't manage it all well enough to keep many of us from desiphering the truth of the matter.

[Arianrhod]

36. Incompetence, perhaps,

or perhaps merely arrogance. They may feel that they can do or say anything they want to without fear of retribution, so it doesn't matter to them what anyone thinks. They certainly seem to be behaving with such impertinence in all other areas. . . .

< edited to correct my incompetent spelling >

[Q]

26. You didn't think they were going to stop with Iraq...did you?

- And if Bush* stays in office after 2004...you can count on other countries being attacked.

[Pepperbelly]

28. I don't think they can go any farther ....

they just don't have enough people to do so.

[Flying_Pig]

32. Then why are they still trying to incite war in...

Syria and Iran? Although these are mostly civilians in PNAC, the neocons have to know we are stretched, so why are they continuing with this strategy? Personally, I don't think they give adamn about resources, military, human, or otherwise. They are very sick puppies.

My dream would be to see the lot of them, along with Bush and Cheney, marched out of the White House in chains....... Think Wesley might have enough gumption to pull that off Pepper?

[Flying_Pig]

30. That's a given "Q" .....

which makes it all the more important to educate people about these evil bastards, their links to PNAC, the Likud, and their fascist intent. A vote for Bush, is a vote for PNAC/Likud, simple as that.

[davhill]

31. So this is why

They are backtracking against principle to have the UN foreign troops take over Iraq security. It will free up U.S. Forces to attack Iran.

[Flying_Pig]

33. Bingo!!

:evilgrin: