Posted by Lee Russ on 8/18/2007, 3:09 pm, in reply to "Re: Columnist: To save America, we need another 9/11" Well that's a tricky redefinition. What I said was that they saw 9/11 as a "political opportunity." An oportunity to take actions they had always wanted to take--invade Iraq, remove Saddam, control Iraq's oil, become a real player again in the Middle East, assert American military force to establish what amounts to an American Empire. This is hardly paranoia--there's an awful lot of evidence for it, including the official statements of the PNAC (Project for a New American Century), the half-crazed group that included just about all the admin's neocons, including Scooter Libby: Having It Their Way; How the Bush Gang Exploited 9/11 ..... The power behind the Bush throne, Cheney, heads a tightly organised, highly disciplined cabal of ideologically driven figures who dominate the Bush cabinet. Many are veterans of the Reagan and Bush senior administrations. While Bill Clinton was president, these so-called ``hawks'' organised themselves through a network of right-wing ruling-class think tanks and journals, with overlapping memberships and interlocking leaderships. The most important being the Project for the New American Century and the American Enterprise Institute. The PNAC, established in 1997 to promote ``American global leadership'', included among the 25 signatories of its founding ?statement of principles? Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Libby. In September 2000, the PNAC's imperial vision was set out in a report, ``Rebuilding America's Defences: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century''. It noted that the US ``is the world's only superpower, combining preeminent military power, global technological leadership and the world's largest economy... At present the US faces no global rival. America's grand strategy should aim to preserve and extend this advantageous position as far into the future as possible.'' The report urged Washington to develop the capability to ``fight and win multiple, simultaneous major theatre wars'' and at the same time ``perform the `constabulary' duties associated with shaping the security environment in critical regions''. ``Rebuilding America's Defences'' frankly admitted that a key ``critical region'' was the oil-rich Persian Gulf and that Iraq would be a target when its authors regained power: ``The US has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.'' Clearly, the Cheney cabal had a long-standing mission to expand US global domination when it came to power behind front-man Bush junior in January 2001. But the agenda lacked the existence of a serious enough ``threat'' to convince the US people to abandon their desire for a post-Cold War ``peace dividend'' and their opposition to US soldiers dying in overseas wars. The PNAC's 2000 report recognised this when it stated: ``the process of transformation is likely to be a long one absent some catastrophic and catalysing event -- like a new Pearl Harbor.'' Interesting choice of words, that "like a new Pearl Harbor." As the article's author points out, "as Woodward notes in Bush at War, Bush wrote in his diary on the night of September 11, 2001: ``The Pearl Harbor of the 21st century took place today.'' "it is that sort of insane accusation"
75.69.88.150
"you insinuate that they would start a war to get votes," May 8/9, 2004
By NORM DIXON
`New American Century'
[http://www.counterpunch.org/dixon05082004.html]
It is that sort of accusation by you that is probably not insane, but a definite sign of either gross naivete or the inability to come to terms with the the fact that people you thought were moral and noble are, in fact, grossly self-serving liars to whom a war is, indeed, not all that serious as long as they expect to win and to have popular support.
Message Thread:
« Back to thread