PNAC agenda 2004: Who's next on the list?

[gottaB]

Poll question: PNAC agenda 2004: Who's next on the list?

Despite being bogged down in the quagmire formerly known as Iraq, there's little sign that the Bush administration has given up on its policy of pre-emptive strikes, its uncompromising attitude towards international codes of conduct, and its infatuation with the hypermacho. In other words, it's just about time for another who's next poll.

I'm picking Oregon. They don't have any petroleum to speak of, but there's a history going back to Bush 41 who refered to Portland as "Little Beirut" after being not so kindly recieved there. Bush is nothing if not vengeful.

Whaddya think? Who's it going to be?

(On Edit: Changed Nigeria to Syria.)

[Toucano]

1. I say Iran

It's so conveniently situated right there on the same street!

We'll see what Putin says at Camp David this weekend.

On edit: Of course we'll never actually "see". But I'll bet it's on the agenda.

[Pastiche423]

2. I am moving to my underground

accessible bunker next month.

[thebigidea]

3. I ran, he ran, she ran - PNAC all ran into Iran...

the perle mob is going to increase volume on Iran, though Syria sounds so much simpler. So many choices, so little sense.

[gottaB]

7. So many choices, so little sense

You can say that again.

Syria probably should have been up there. It's really tragic imo, the fact that we had been gaining co-operation from them in the fight against terrorists up until this stupid invasion. Diplomatic and pressure and economic incentives would have been far less costly and yielded better results. WTF has happened to American foreign policy? The PNAC crowd has taken us totally off the deep end. How is that others in Washington got pulled into this? It boggles the mind.

[saoirse]

4. As an Oregonian...

I have to say that ain't exactly good company, but I'm honored to be loathed by those right-wing wingnuts and their mouth-breathing, moronic followers.

I voted for other, thinking Syria's a good bet.

[gottaB]

8. Look to California

It's the same kind of logic in either case.

And remember, states who harbor Californians are no better than Californians themselves.

;-)

[maveric]

5. Wheres Syria on your list?

I think that they need to tool up and get more troops for Iran, which has 76 million people. Syria is smaller and not so strong of an opponent.
And I bet that the captured Iraqi defense minister, as part of his deal, will say that the WMDs were sent to be hidden in Syria.

[AntiCoup2K4]

6. Syria

And then Lebanon. And then Jordan. and then Saudi Arabia. Since Perle and Wolfoshitz planned this all out with the Likud's it's obvious that the targets will be chosen based on who SHARON thinks is the threat. Iran is only a threat to Israel if they build nukes, and North Korea isn't even remotely close.

[FDRrocks]

9. Better be NK.

I would support a coup in NK. We need to take them out.

Other than that I would support action on Saudi Arabia.

After all this we could take a look at Pakistan.

[thebigidea]

10. agh: "I would support a coup in NK. We need to take them out."

you sound like James Baker, man!

foreign policy shouldn't be a bad Mario Puzo novel.

[jab105]

11. Definitely syria....

Definition of a country that PNAC wants to attack, anything Iraq or weaker....yep, Syria fits the bill....

[eridani]

12. And a bloody stupid thint it would be

They funnelled huge amounts of information to the Al Qaeda investigators, but decided they didn't want to do it anymore when the shitstain PNACers started their saber-rattling.

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?030728fa_fact

American intelligence and State Department officials have told me that by early 2002 Syria had emerged as one of the C.I.A.’s most effective intelligence allies in the fight against Al Qaeda, providing an outpouring of information that came to an end only with the invasion of Iraq.

“There is no security relationship now,” a Syrian foreign-ministry official told me. “It saddens us as much as it saddens you. We could give you information on organizations that we don’t think should exist. If we help you on Al Qaeda, we are helping ourselves.” He added, almost plaintively, that if Washington had agreed to discuss certain key issues in a back channel, “we’d have given you more. But when you publicly try to humiliate a country it’ll become stubborn.”

[beaver tamer]

13. They want the oil from Saudia Arabia....

.. so they will go after the countries surrounding ii first.

[JPace]

14. Iran....

Foot lover Dick Morris was on Fox recently
saying that AWOL could get his popularity
back by bullying Iran. Karl Rove is busy
exploring this option I'm sure.

I don't think it will go over with the
American people who are catching on the
what this administration is doing. It
sure won't pass the smell test in the
world at large. Still I think Rove may
test the waters soon just to see if it
has potential. He's going to want to
do something to get AWOLs numbers back
up there.

[LunaC]

15. U.S. Says Iran Has 'One Last Chance' to Comply

Same saber rattling as before.....been there, done that....

http://wireservice.wired.com/wired/story.asp?section=Breaking&storyId=785163