PNAC agenda

[LuckyTheDog]

What IS their deal, anyway?

In some ways, they seem to be superficially like the Italian fascists... driven by dreams of empire and glory. Scooter and the rest of the team don't advocate authoritarian government (at least not openly). But they certainly seem to look at the U.S. as a "new Rome" -- similar to the way Mussolini and his crowd looked at their regime.

When we invaded Iraq, a lot of people were saying to me "it's all about oil." But I think that is only half right.

I think a lot of folks pushing the war DID see dollar signs. Others, however, I think really were taken in my the idea that the U.S. has some kind of destiny to control and re-make the world. I think a lot of them really believed their own bullshit about the Iraqis "hailing us as liberators" and the rest of the Middle East falling into line.

This war was, I think, about arrogance, hubris and a crazy zeal to shape history as anything else. And, oh yes, if they could pass out a fe hundred billion dollars to the "right" people and control some vast oil reserves, all the better.

In short: I think the Bush folks are more than just cynical and greedy. They are INSANE. :crazy:

Am I over-stating things?

[AntiFascist]

1. Not at all...

It doesn't take any tin foil to remember Bush I speaking about a "New World Order" when he first bombed the hell out of Iraq. Democracy is ultimately a good thing for the Middle East, and it was probably a good thing for Iran before we interferred and installed the Shah. The problem is, the way we are going about it now, not only are we alienating the U.S. but Fundamentalist religions are getting stirred up and taking everyone backward. Global corporations have a much higher priority with this admin than the interests of the U.S. Only the shareholders benefit.

[Clark2008]

10. And Bush I stated it on Sept. 11, 1991.

He actually first uttered the words, "New World Order" on that date, 10 years before the fruition.

I always found that interesting.

[LunaC]

2. "Pax Americana" lust for power and world domination

see link in sig line for full details

[liam_laddie]

3. Dead ON, LuckyTheDog

No matter their "philosophy," they've made a ruin of the USA in
all respects of their policies. Treason by arrogance, stupidity, whatever. The hubris of these PhD's is immense. We'd be truly
better off with random selections from a phone book. Maybe not a Texas phone book, though...sorry, LoneStarStaters, but there
have been a bunch of asshole crony rethugs outta there lately. Is it the barbeque? Jes' kiddin'...but only sorta.

[LuckyTheDog]

11. It's a motley bunch

I really see the Bush Adm. more and more as a convergence of several tendencies, including, but not limited to: The PNAC crowd, which I addressed above; The Christian dominionists, who seek to have a Taliban-like impact on domestic life and a foreign policy designed to being about the Rapture; traditional corporate interests; the radical, anti-government far right; a sort of "Texas mafia" of friends and hangers-on of the Bush family; and the Saudi royal family, which has an uncomfortably close relationship with Bush.

[frogmarch]

4. You're not over-stating anything

The neocons' organization PNAC, is a band of crazies...crazies whose agenda it is to dominate the world.

Anyone can learn about their agenda at the PNAC website. One of the many things I've read at the website that gives me chills is this:

From Page 60 of PNAC's "Rebuilding America's Defenses" (RAD) document:

"And advanced forms of biological warfare that can target specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool."

[AntiFascist]

6. OMG!!!!

It makes one wonder how many government pathologists are working on the avian flu.....in a bad way!

[johnaries]

5. PNAC stated that Iraq was strategically important in "policing"

the Mid-East, and that we needed to have military bases there.

We are now building 14, FOURTEEN permanent military bases in Iraq.

No, it wasn't just about the oil.

[Palladin]

7. History of PNAC

goes clear back to Henry "Scoop" Jackson, longtime Senator from Washington state, and Richard Perle-

The leading light of the neoconservatives was Richard Perle, whom Packer describes as the Iraq war's "impresario, with one degree of separation from everyone who mattered." A partisan of Israel's hard-line Likud Party and a protégé of neocon Democrat Scoop Jackson, Perle recruited two other staunch advocates of Israel, Douglas Feith and Elliott Abrams, to work for Jackson and hawkish Democrat Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Packer writes, "When I half jokingly suggested that the Iraq War began in Scoop Jackson's office, Perle said, 'There's an element of that.'" In 1985, Perle had met and become friends with an Iraqi exile named Ahmad Chalabi. "By the time of the PNAC letter in January 1998, Perle knew exactly how Saddam could be overthrown: Put Ahmad Chalabi at the head of an army of Iraqi insurgents and back him with American military power and cash."

--snip----

Perle chaired a study group of eight pro-Likud Americans, including Douglas Feith, who had worked under Perle in the Reagan administration, and David Wurmser, who was the author of the paper produced under the group's auspices ... Afterwards the group was pleased enough with its work to send the paper to the newly elected Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu." The paper, "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm," advocated smashing the Palestinians militarily, removing Saddam from power, and installing a Hashemite king on the Iraq throne.

http://www.salon.com/books/review/2005/10/07/packer/

[mzmolly]

9. Welcome to DU!

:toast:

[Marie26]

8. That's what's scary

You're right, they do seem to be motivated as much by a misguided sense of idealism as any need for money or oil. That's what makes them dangerous. A straight-out crook will look to see if an action is profitable, or realistic. But these guys will follow their vision no matter how unrealistic or damaging it is. They're talking about invading Syria or Iran when we can't even manage Iraq. Reality doesn't seem to faze them. I almost WISH they only were motivated by money - then the huge losses this country faces might make them hesitate. But they seem to see themselves instead as some sort of modern Crusaders who will bring freedom and democracy to the Mideast. They're kind of fanatics. The weirdest thing about the neocons to me is that they have NO BASE, yet they've manage to run the country. Normal Republicans are businesspeople, or religious conservatives. But do you know many lay Republicans who want to create an "American Empire" to rule the Mideast? The "neoconservative movement" seems to be limited to a handful of right-wing intellectuals who've somehow managed to get power without any popular support for their policies. That's not democratic, and I don't understand exactly how that happened.