Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

TAKING ON THE PNAC

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
concerned citizen23 Donating Member (131 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 12:39 PM
Original message
TAKING ON THE PNAC
Friday/Saturday, February 3-4, 2005
By Jeff Archer / Malcolm Lagauche
http://www.malcomlagauche.com/id1.html

The Project for the New American Century, commonly called the PNAC, appears to be just another initialed group to many. Few U.S. citizens are aware of the organization and its goals.

To make my point, a few nights ago, I spoke to the Atheist Coalition of San Diego about my upcoming book, The Mother of all Battles. There were about 70 people in the audience, most of whom are above-average in political knowledge compared to the general public. When I asked who had heard of the PNAC, only about 20 people raised their hands. This shows that even many people who are politically aware lack knowledge of the group.

In 1997, the PNAC published its agenda. It is no secret. The group has a website (www.newamericancentury.org) on which it states the 21st century is America’s time to take over the world militarily. It designates areas of the world by numbers and how and why to get them conquered.

Sounds like a bunch of nutcases. Well, the signers of the statement of principles are, but, unfortunately, many are well-entrenched in today’s U.S. administration: Elliott Abrams, Gary Bauer, William Bennett, Dick Cheney, Eliot A. Cohen, Zalmay Khalizad, I. Lewis Libby, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz are just some of the signers. Even Jeb Bush, the person who rigged the Florida election results in the 2000 election, is on board.

The document is scary. Anybody who read it in 1997 would have thought that these were a few crazies (the actual name given to most of these people by the Republican Party itself in the 1990s) who were pipe-dreaming. Unfortunately, their agenda has been met almost to the letter. The only laughable matter of the document is the predictions of how easy it would be to take over Iraq.

What does the PNAC have to do with a retired attorney living in Reno, Nevada? Plenty. At an age when most retirees would be fishing or attending social events or traveling, Douglas A. Wallace is taking on the PNAC with a vengeance.

Wallace applied his law practice for most of his career in the Northwestern area of the U.S. In 1979, he moved to Reno and for the most part, he retired from law practice. He said, "I had a reason to come to the state of Nevada and I spent some time there and discovered that the sun shone most every day. I said, ‘I’m coming here.’"

Wallace is an ex-Mormon with a social conscience. While still involved with the church, he was instrumental in having the racist policy of not allowing blacks in the Mormon priesthood changed. The bigoted attitude of the Mormons, as well as other factors, led him to leave the organization.
Always a keen observer of politics, he first came across the PNAC in 2000.

Wallace explained, "I happened to read an article about the PNAC and what it stood for. I read the names and didn’t recognize any. I thought it sounded like wacky Mormons. Then I forgot about it."

The contested 2000 election and the interference by the Supreme Court piqued Wallace’s interest. He said, "Then we get 9-11. Then the war in Afghanistan. Then, all of a sudden, we have this thing going with Iraq and I couldn’t see the connection the administration was touting at all.

"Then, the weapons of mass destruction didn’t appear. I started getting into this thing more. It was really PNAC as a backdrop behind the Iraq war. Then, I recognized the names because most were a part of the Bush administration.

"They’re not secret about it. That’s the cleverness. They put it out to the public to read, but the public hasn’t bothered to read it. They think that gets them out of the category of conspiracy by putting it out to the public. However, the conspiracy is the implementation."

The next step was not easy. Wallace had to upgrade his membership in attorney groups because he was retired and had not kept active in certain regulations for practicing attorneys. On top of that, he had to begin a fundraising campaign, that, frankly, is not exactly making his bank account as large as those of organizations such as MoveOn, despite his actions being far more honorable.

On January 14, 2005, Wallace filed a class-action suit in U.S. District Court in Reno, Nevada against George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. It was served on January 17, 2006. According to the document: "This class action lawsuit seeks an injunction against the Defendants from further implementation of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) without a constitutional 2/3 vote of Congress and full education of the American public. The lawsuit alleges the plan was the basis for deception behind the Iraq war."

Wallace explained the reasons for the lawsuit: "We have a situation in the country that is so dire, it needs to be corrected. I’m not asking for any legal fees for myself. It’s a private treaty not authorized by Congress, and by doing so, they’ve stepped outside their job descriptions. They’ve lied to the American public and the Congress about the war in Iraq by entering into a private treaty. If the public agrees to it, and they get a two-thirds vote of Congress, then I have nothing further to say.

"However, a finding by the court that they have acted outside their job description in violation of the constitution would make them personally liable to anyone who has been damaged by engaging in the war in Iraq. Everybody. Iraqi citizens, the legitimate Iraqi government, U.S. military personnel; everybody."

According to Wallace, "They can’t ignore the suit. They have 30 days to respond."

Unlike various other political organizations working under the guise of raising funds for the anti-war effort that eventually go to the coffers of either the Democratic Party or Democratic politicians, every cent that Wallace receives will go to the lawsuit against Bush and Cheney that is aimed at stopping the PNAC in its tracks.

Check out Wallace’s website (www.wallacevbushlawsuit.com ) to read much more about the background of the lawsuit. If you want to donate, there is a button on the site you can click on to help the cause.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
fooj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 12:46 PM
Response to Original message
1. This is a good start.
The PNAC must be exposed and stopped!

peace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wtbymark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 12:50 PM
Response to Original message
2. PNAC is a terrorist organization
as well as "The Fellowship"

both of the organizations share many of the same members and mean to undermine the citizens of the United States
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
savemefromdumbya Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. ITA!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueEyedSon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 07:07 PM
Response to Reply #2
12. Treasonous, at least!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
samhsarah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 11:29 PM
Response to Reply #2
19. .
I've never heard of "The Fellowship" before. Do you have a link so I can find out more about it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-07-06 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #2
27. Absolutely!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
savemefromdumbya Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 12:50 PM
Response to Original message
3. The Wall Street Journal seems to think that they are ridding the neocons
The WSJ in its article today seems to think that Cheney and the neocons are on their way out - arethey?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NCarolinawoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 11:36 PM
Response to Reply #3
21. Yes, I read that article.
The strange thing about the WALL STREET JOURNAL is that they are advocates of PNAC in a very draconian way.

On the other hand, the articles and information can be excellent and informative. Kind of a schizoid newspaper.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newyawker99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
5. Hi concerned citizen23!!
Welcome to DU!! :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
concerned citizen23 Donating Member (131 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 04:57 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Thanks Newyawker99!
I appreciate the welcome!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calimary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 06:28 PM
Response to Original message
7. Kicked and recommended!
ANYTHING that gets the PNAC out in public more frequently is a good thing. It's just one of many things for which we must see bush IMPEACHED.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calimary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 06:29 PM
Response to Original message
8. By the way... VERY nice post for one with not-too-many yet.
Welcome to DU! Glad you're here. Glad you put this out there again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 06:46 PM
Response to Original message
9. K&R, Should be on the front page.
Could some of the DU attorneys give us an opinion on this strategy? It sounds logical to me. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calimary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Yes indeedy. ONE MORE RECOMMENDATION, PLEASE!
Then, at least, it'll get into Greatest...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
concerned citizen23 Donating Member (131 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 08:16 PM
Response to Reply #9
16. Some input from DU Attorneys...
Edited on Mon Feb-06-06 08:17 PM by concerned citizen23
Thanks for the feed back everyone!

Getting some input for the DU attorneys would be terrific!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Toots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 06:58 PM
Response to Original message
11. Kick
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 07:19 PM
Response to Original message
13. PNAC cast of characters link, click on the names in blue
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-07-06 09:26 AM
Response to Reply #13
26. some of those names on there were a surprise -
Connie Mack? Jeane Kirkpatrick?

evil - every one of them. to the core. treasonous g'damn bastahds!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-07-06 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #26
31. Well I'm working my way through this info, what a web! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
schmuls Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-07-06 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #13
29. Whew! nice chart that helps connect the dots!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-07-06 08:24 PM
Response to Reply #29
32. Here is another page from that site, I'm sure I first saw this link
posted on DU so a thank you to someone??? Not quite up to date but still useful, note the colors under their names for various affiliations.

http://rightweb.irc-online.org/charts/fpteam.php

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
schmuls Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-08-06 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #32
38. Thank you. Great chart.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wordie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 07:36 PM
Response to Original message
14. Wallace appears to be quite a remarkable man. Thanks for the info,
I'll be trying to look into this more closely.

And welcome to DU, concerned citizen23!

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyskye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 07:47 PM
Response to Original message
15. K&R for a man with a mission!

What a great way to 'retire'. Hope he stays off of small planes!

:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ned_Devine Donating Member (996 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 08:36 PM
Response to Original message
17. I've always thought that dems won't get anywhere until they take on the...
PNAC issue. They know it exists and took no part in its construction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RazzleDazzle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 10:53 PM
Response to Original message
18. Hmm, a private treaty. MOST interesting
Next life *I'm* going to be a lawyer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CoffeeCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 11:34 PM
Response to Original message
20. This is so important...
...and everyone should know about it.

When you tell people about this, they just can't believe it. They don't believe it.

PNAC is hiding in plain sight.

I'm glad this guy is taking them on.

I wish the media would say "PNAC" just once. They never mention it.

Gee, I wonder why?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gauguin57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-07-06 12:07 AM
Response to Original message
22. Until PNAC gets into the MSM, it won't have traction.
I nominate "60 Minutes" -- a whole hour show on PNAC, the "Pearl-Harbor-type event" in their manifesto, the members high up in the Bush Admin, PNAC's relationship to the lies leading up to the Iraq War, etc. etc. etc.

Until a show a lot of people watch really covers this sucker, people still won't have heard of it.

I thought Michael Moore had a great opportunity in "Fahrenheit 9/11," but didn't go for it. A lot of people saw that movie ... a lot of people would have suddenly heard of PNAC and the "Pearl Harbor-type event." And the plans for world domination, country by country.

And they would have known why Cheney is V.P.... PNAC liaison inside the West Wing, pure and simple.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-07-06 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #22
28. I'd love to see a PNAC expose too. I'll refrain from holding my breath...
I don't look good in blue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressoid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-07-06 12:58 AM
Response to Original message
23. interesting, but too bad it will go nowhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
concerned citizen23 Donating Member (131 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-07-06 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #23
34. It is a good thing that
Rosa Parks didn't think that way ....

Or Martin Luther King Jr....

If enough people got behind this it is well within our constitutional rights to take these guys to court...the public just needs to get behind it to give it teeth:

The court has jurisdiction of both the parties and the subject matter under the cited civil code(s). (see PDF documents of lawsuit posted on website)

While connecting the dots, of what may be a vague paper to some , will require evidence in court,
and there is plenty of it available. Once connected, the preponderance of the evidence will be convincing.

And being a civil versus criminal action, a finding of "beyond reasonable doubt" is not required.

Implementation of the "Rebuilding Americas Defenses" as spelled out on the PNAC website sans (without)approval of the congress is an unconstitutional exercise of power of the executive and actionable by the people. Hence a class action. The remedies sought are reasonable and appropriate.

If we the people cannot address such wrongdoing with court action, there is little hope of a bright future for America and the founding fathers screwed up badly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-07-06 01:01 AM
Response to Original message
24. Hmmm, interesting...
Edited on Tue Feb-07-06 01:05 AM by EC
I wonder how far it'll get? Even my old republican boss, got spooked when I showed him PNAC...

On edit: I wish people would listen and pay attention, what the PNAC tells me is that our kids and their kids will be world police and soldiers....that will be their career choices...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hekate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-07-06 05:15 AM
Response to Original message
25. K&R. Welcome to DU!
:toast:
Thanks for bringing this back up -- I first heard about PNAC (and so much else) at DU.

Hekate
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-07-06 06:29 PM
Response to Original message
30. DU's PNAC Links Archive >>>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-07-06 08:26 PM
Response to Reply #30
33. Thank you for posting this link!! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Independent_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-07-06 09:57 PM
Response to Original message
35. Kick!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
concerned citizen23 Donating Member (131 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-07-06 10:59 PM
Response to Original message
36. How you can help:
The lawsuit is SERVED; So let's help him get it answered.

Go to:

http://www.wallacevbushlawsuit.com/letter%20of%20support.doc

Simply print the page or a several of them, follow the instructions... then mail it.

In support of Mr Wallace, I have printed out many pages and have purchased pre-stamped envelopes. We are collecting names and sending them in support of his case. It is very simple and all it cost is a few bucks for postage and a small amount of time in effort.

And visit the website and make a donation:

http://www.wallacevbushlawsuit.com

Over 8283 people have visited the site, if each one had merely donated $5.00...think of the possiblities...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doremus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-07-06 11:28 PM
Response to Original message
37. Just curious -- the website linked to says Kerry's daughter was threatened
There is however, a rumor that his daughter's life had been threatened should he attempt to challenge the outcome of the election.

I never heard that. Does anyone know more about it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
concerned citizen23 Donating Member (131 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-08-06 01:07 PM
Response to Original message
39. What the lawsuit will attempt to resolve:
CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED

In the waning days of the 200 election, George Bush made an agreement with his running mate to adopt the policies of the Project for the New American Century(PNAC), as the agenda for his administration should he win the election. That agreement constituted a private treaty between himself, his running mate and the Cosigners of the policy paper called Rebuilding America’s Defenses. At no time did he consult the Congress or seek approval of implementing that policy which affects the relationship of the US with other nations. Nor has he been open and honest with American citizens and voters to their detriment. Plans for implementing it were underway within days of the inauguration yet it took the 9/11 event to bring in full implementation by way of a cover of a War on Terror.

The lawsuit seeks to establish the following findings of fact and specific legal consequences:

Seek an injunction by the Court to permanently enjoin Bush, et al from further implementation of PNAC without full education of the American public and the open vote of the Congress to acknowledge the implementation of it by a 2/3rds majority.

The President of the US may not constitutionally take it upon himself to implement a private treaty as a part of the policy of government.

The President of the US is not immune from lawsuit when acting outside the scope of his job description.

The President of the US lied to the public and to the Congress to achieve his private goals and is therefore liable for damages inflicted upon victims of his unlawful actions.

Is Bush acting as a figure head only President deferring real authority to the Vice President as de-facto president? If so is this a unconstitutional act? Discovery will produce evidence of this conduct to the court.

The president of the US does not have the authority to enter into clandestine arrangements to promote preemptive war or to violate US law.

The President of the US cannot defy his oath of office to uphold the Constitution without consequences.

Should Bush and Cheney be impeached for withholding information from the public about their implementation of PNAC? While the Court has no jurisdiction to impeach, the lawsuit will seek a court finding to that effect.

Bush, Cheney and numerous John Does are criminally liable for pursuing private ambitions by violating the Constitution, US law and international law. Appropriate Criminal sanctions should be imposed.

A finding by the Court that they can be civilly held personally and financially accountable for their wrongful and unlawful acts by persons adversely affected by such conduct.

For more info visit: http:/www.wallacevbushlawsuit.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
concerned citizen23 Donating Member (131 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-08-06 01:11 PM
Response to Original message
40. All roads lead to PNAC...
Why are our elected officials and the main street media so inept at providing answers to: The mission in Iraq? Is the administration improvising without a strategy? A cabal led by Cheney and Rumsfeld hijacking US foreign policy?

The image being presented of the administration improvising without a strategy is not logical. I suggest we are yet again being misled. I suspect the answers may lie within the foreign policy goals the administration is pursuing and to the best of my knowledge we have not had a national dialog about it.

The strategy is boldly detailed in a 76-page report, the writing of which began in 1998 and published in September 2000 titled; “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”(RAD) by an organization called “The Project for the New American Century.”(PNAC). It is readily accessible on their website. In their “Statement of Principles” the goal of the project is to “make the case and rally support for American global leadership” and “setting forth guiding principles for American foreign policy for a new American century.” A partial list of active members of the PNAC are: Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, John R. Bolton, Paul Wolfowitz, I. Lewis Libby, Zalmay Khalilzad, and Jeb Bush.

I believe the PNAC/RAD report represents the administrations policies based on: 1). The principal architects and their prominent roles within the administration. 2). A concise outline of the administrations objectives. 3). Possible explanations for the administrations motives. 4). Actions currently underway that are in alignment with its stated strategies

Interestingly, a few weeks ago a top aide to former Secretary of State Colin Powell, Lawrence Wilkerson, accused a ''cabal'' led by Cheney and Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld of hijacking U.S. foreign policy. Wilkerson stressed that the ''Oval Office Cabal'' of Cheney and Rumsfeld were ''extremely powerful'' influences. (www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/headlines05/1020-01.htm)

The core concepts of RAD are not new; they were originally developed in 1990. Cheney, Secretary of Defense at the time, formed a core group of many of the same individuals in May 1990. Working in secret they developed the “Defense Strategy for the 1990’s” which they presented to Bush Sr., who in turn delivered the new strategy in a foreign-policy address on August 2, 1990, the day Iraq invaded Kuwait. But further pursuit of the Defense Strategies for the 90’s was thwarted when Bush lost the election to Clinton in 1993. From all indications Bush the son used 911 and the war on terror as the occasion to launch a more comprehensive version of defense strategies recommended by the PNAC in the “Rebuilding Americas Defenses”

However, the PNAC/RAD objectives actually represent more of a broad change in American Foreign Policy rather than a specific war on terrorism. US foreign policy as per the PNAC report:

“At present the United States faces no global rival. America’s grand strategy should aim to preserve and extend this advantageous position as far into the future as possible”. (pg I, RAD, Introduction)

It recommends we should not be swayed by either the cost or world opinion:
“….we cannot safely avoid the responsibilities of global leadership or the costs that are associated with its exercise”.(pg 1 PNAC “Statement of Principles”)

“…U.S. national security interests…as well as…American moral interests…demand American political leadership rather than that of the United Nations…nor can the United States assume a UN-like stance of neutrality”.(pg 11 Section II, “Four Essential Missions”)

The report explains the role of our military:

“ …the military’s task… is to secure and expand the “zones of democratic peace;” to deter the rise of a new great power competitor; defend …Europe, East Asia and the Middle East; and to preserve American preeminence …preserve an international security… conducive to American interests and ideals.”(pg 2, RAD, Section I “Why Another Defense Review”)

It states to ready our military for this grand strategy could take a long time:

“…the process of transformation… is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor”. (pg 51, RAD Section V “Creating Tomorrow’s Dominant Force”)

As catastrophic as 9-11 was, it appears to have been rather fortuitous. On September 20, 2001 the members of PNAC sent a letter to President Bush endorsing his commitment to root out terrorist and find the perpetrators of 911 and proposed initial steps to be taken to win this “first war of the 21st century”. In addition, a committee involving some of the PNAC members, Senator John McCain and numerous others was formed, The Committee for The Liberation of Iraq (CLI) now disband, that “worked closely with the administration”. For details see: www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Committee_for_the_Liberation_of_Iraq

Recent revelations such as the Downing Street memos have exposed that links to terrorism and WMD may have been used as a pretext to invade Iraq. The PNAC report reveals the following regarding Iraq and provides clues for shaping facts around policy:

“…the United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security.” (pg 14, RAD, Section III “Repositioning Today’s Force”).

“…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.”.(pg 14, RAD, Section III “Repositioning Today’s Force”).

Going into Iraq was to pursue an objective to gain a greater foothold in the Middle East in order to build a democratic state conducive to American interest and ideals. There is no exit strategy because that is not part of the plan.

This implies a protracted engagement. It comes as no surprise that the administration seems to be signaling for just such a scenario. One recent article, (“Administration’s Tone Signals a Longer, Broader Iraq Conflict” by David E. Sanger NY Times 10/17/05), Bush’s senior aides are quoted as saying "… the president was concerned that we hadn't described Iraq to the American people for what it is - a struggle of ideologies that isn't going to end with one election, or one constitution, or even a string of elections."

The president has reason for concern. To destabilize rogue states and build democratic ones conducive to American interest and ideals requires time, money, blood, sweat and tears especially when encountering a resistant foe. To achieve these lofty goals will require a lot more people signing off on this then just a select group of political insiders and corporate benefactors. But since the administration has failed to be candid, they may now find themselves in a bit of a quandary.

In order to stay the course, what will their storyline become now if not the truth?

A protracted engagement in Iraq may serve in the administrations best interest by fueling more terrorists with whom to engage in battle that in turn would rile our emotions and thus sustain our support. It could ultimately lead us to the next rogue state. The report reveals an obsession with such states:

“Potential rivals such as China are anxious to exploit…transformational technologies… while adversaries like Iran, Iraq and North Korea are rushing to develop ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons...”(pg 4,RAD, Section I “Why Another Defense Review”)

“…We cannot allow North Korea, Iran, Iraq or similar states to undermine American leadership…”(pg 75, RAD, Section VI, “Defense Spending”)

The Bush administration may be pursuing the foreign policy goals of the PNAC covertly without Congressional approval, which would be a violation of the constitution. The objectives it sets forth are far reaching with long lasting implications and appear to be the motivations behind the President taking preemptive action against Iraq. He did so without a UN resolution, thus violating the Geneva Conventions in the process. Through the requirements of the War Crimes Act the US is violating not only international law but also Article VI of the US Constitution, which states all treaties signed by the US shall be “the supreme law of the land.” If the widespread reporting regarding the manner the US is holding and treating suspected terrorist around the globe is accurate, this would violate several clauses in the fourth Geneva Convention as well.

I think we should be very concerned that in the administrations pursuit to achieve the goals of the PNAC they may believe the end justifies the means.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 05:15 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC