Conflict within the Pentagon (PNAC vs military)

[neverforget]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6814437/
--snip--
In the movies, it’s usually the military eager for war and combat, and the civilians and the defense department pressing for restraint. But it hasn’t been that way with the war in Iraq.

Long before President Bush gave the orders, using force to topple Saddam was a glint in the eye of the civilians who would become key players in the Bush administration.

In 1998, a neoconservative think tank called the Project for the New American Century wrote to President Clinton, “The only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction. In the near term, this means a willingness to ‘undertake military action.’”

A list of those who signed the 1998 letter include Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Elliot Abrams, and John Bolton.
--snip--

Now they start to report what we've known all along: this war was a wet dream for the neo-cons and all they needed was the Presidency to do it. A little slow on the uptake there MSM? :eyes: If they'd reported this plan before the invasion, maybe, just maybe, this war could've been stopped before hand.

[Botany]

1. PNAC

Project for a New American Century go to their web site and look around.

In Oct. of 2000 they asked for a "New Pearl Harbor," to get the country to attack
Iraq. Anybody going to D.C. should visit their offices.


:nuke:

[complain jane]

2. Ok is it me or

are actual shreds of sanity/reality beginning to ever so slightly creep into the news?

[Vincardog]

3. But But But it was the 'Pearl Harbor like attack' that aWoL allowed

on the WTC that got us all up and armed for the 'WAR ON TERROR' and that includes anything else that aWoL wants to do. Cause we don't know what he will do to us next but we know it would be BAD. aWoL and his death cult have no respect for life or anyones liberty except their own.

[ixion]

4. yeah, way to go with that rapid response, MSM

why not report it now that the glorious leader has been duly re-crowned. :eyes:

[shraby]

5. I think we will see more of this kind of reporting.

They are all afraid they will be painted with the same brush as Armstrong Williams.

[ixion]

8. if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck

well, you know.

I personally hold the MSM in part responsible for the mess that is now the US foriegn policy. They have acted as enablers for this fiasco, and I think that any agency that knowingly withheld information that could have stopped the illegal invasion of Iraq, the passage of the unPATRIOTic Act, or the re-selection of the Mad Chimp should be held accountable. Just because they decide to mention this plan -- something we've been talking about for YEARS, doesn't forgive their unethical breaches.

If it continues, great. I would love to see Freedom of the Press restored to our republic. But I'm not holding my breath. :eyes:

[complain jane]

11. I'm thinking the same thing- let's just hope it continues.

[ewagner]

6. What's with MSNBC all of a sudden?

First Tweety (Chris Mathews) starts talking about the "pencil-necked geeks" who started this war and now they're running a mini-expose' on the PNAC....

in the meantime.........

the SAME NETWORK allows Joe(What dead intern?)Scarborough to mouth RW talking points without any dispute at all ....

Has the network gone schizo????????????

[KerryReallyWon]

7. PNAC = 9/11

The mission statement is not just about Iraq. Google the website and read!! It is about world dominance, that our way is the best way, and we must force our way on the rest of the world. This is to be acheived militarily they say. But, as the statement reads, ( pg.53,par3),"the citizens will never accept pre-emptive attack, minus some catostrophic event on American soil."

The commission investigating 9/11 learned that Bush and Co. knew it was going to happen, that morning. Many flying canceled commercial flights. Condi called the Mayor of San Fran and told him not to fly. Many issues with 9/11 and that is how they got "their war"

[complain jane]

12. Do you have a link for the info in your 2nd paragraph?

I'd love to read more about that... I didn't know about that part

[Botany]

9. Their Statement of Principals

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?


SNIP




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.

SNIP

Elliott Abrams Gary Bauer William J. Bennett Jeb Bush

Dick Cheney Elliot 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


This info has ALWAYS been out there.

[aden_nak]

10. MSM now reporting on fall of Soviet Union. "We're Playing Catch-Up".