Enjoy an Ads-Free Jets Insider - Become a Jets Insider VIP!
Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: The NeoCons Route To Disaster

  1. #1
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    6,884
    Post Thanks / Like

    The NeoCons Route To Disaster

    The fingerprints of simplifying and exaggerating journalists are all over the Iraq debacle. Take a look at The Neocon Reader, which is edited and introduced by Irwin Stelzer, who writes a column for The Sunday Times. The book brings together essays by political figures, academics and journalists, but the last are the most numerous. Ten of the 22 contributors are columnists or editors.

    The neo-cons that mattered most in shaping the "war on terror" served in the Pentagon and the White House. But the journalists are a vital part of a neo-con network that formulated and sold the ideas that took the US to war in Iraq and that is now pressing for confrontation with Iran. The links between journalists, think-tanks and decision-makers in the neo-con world are tight and there is plenty of movement from one area to the other. For example, David Frum, a former journalist, served as a White House speech-writer and helped coin the most famous over-simplification of the Bush era - the phrase "axis of evil". He is now at the AEI.

    [url]http://www.ft.com/cms/s/f73aaa3c-a505-11db-b0ef-0000779e2340.html[/url]

  2. #2
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,393
    Post Thanks / Like
    If you could put your military "expertise" back into practice, who would you rather fight to defend your country against: jihadist muslims or neo-cons?

  3. #3
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    21,933
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Spirit of Weeb]If you could put your military "expertise" back into practice, who would you rather fight to defend your country against: jihadist muslims or neo-cons?[/QUOTE]


    Muslims are easier to fight than Neo-Cons. Neo-Cons are like Agent Smith from the Matrix...I am very scared of killers who wear suits.

  4. #4
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    7,648
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Spirit of Weeb]If you could put your military "expertise" back into practice, who would you rather fight to defend your country against: jihadist muslims or neo-cons?[/QUOTE]

    We are doing neither in Iraq!

  5. #5
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,709
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=PlumberKhan]Muslims are easier to fight than Neo-Cons. Neo-Cons are like Agent Smith from the Matrix...I am very scared of killers who wear suits.[/QUOTE]

    That's funny:)

  6. #6
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,709
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Jetdawgg]The fingerprints of simplifying and exaggerating journalists are all over the Iraq debacle. Take a look at The Neocon Reader, which is edited and introduced by Irwin Stelzer, who writes a column for The Sunday Times. The book brings together essays by political figures, academics and journalists, but the last are the most numerous. Ten of the 22 contributors are columnists or editors.

    The neo-cons that mattered most in shaping the "war on terror" served in the Pentagon and the White House. But the journalists are a vital part of a neo-con network that formulated and sold the ideas that took the US to war in Iraq and that is now pressing for confrontation with Iran. The links between journalists, think-tanks and decision-makers in the neo-con world are tight and there is plenty of movement from one area to the other. For example, David Frum, a former journalist, served as a White House speech-writer and helped coin the most famous over-simplification of the Bush era - the phrase "axis of evil". He is now at the AEI.

    [url]http://www.ft.com/cms/s/f73aaa3c-a505-11db-b0ef-0000779e2340.html[/url][/QUOTE]

    I think the title is a little misleading. Are you suggesting that here are conservative columnist who attempt to bolster Bush's agenda? Sure. But, compared to those trashing it and compared to the number of (generally speaking) liberal columnists in our country's MSM, there are very few fingers to push any conservative agenda.

  7. #7
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,709
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=kennyo7]We are doing neither in Iraq![/QUOTE]

    Do you have any objectivity? I admit a conservative bias, but I am willing to give credit where credit is due. I don;t think it is fair to knock everything going on in Iraq. From what I have heard on radio and TV (and to be fair, it is in snippets as I am spending most of my free timewith my Dad who is hospitalized):

    1) The enemy has not won a single battle.

    2) They are losing soldiers a lot faster than we are.

    3) Iraq has executed the murderous old leadership and voted for the first time, nut they are having a hard time defining themselves (to say the least)

    The way I see it, the difficulty comes much more from ourselves. We fight with both hands behind our back as the terrorists set no limits on their actions. A couple of examples: We are debating if we should even use torture while they behead civilkians on TV. Our courts grant the prisoners we capture rights, and they have no courts and grant death to those captured. Abu Gharib solicits a cacophony of disgust from journalists while they are cast in a heroic light for fighting for the freedom from American influence - this while they hide behind children, blow up innocents Iraqi's in public places and plot to hijack 10 planes and fly them into anything - including a nuclear power plant. But our own press villifies our actions.

    It seems Osama may have been right when he said that America would not have the stomach for the war. I am not sure if it is because we have a high percentage of very ethical people who object to war on ethical grounds (respectable, but I think deluded) or just a society that wants to be comfortable all of the time, but we seem almost blase about much of the war. Will it take a catastrophe worse than 9-11 to wake us from our slumber? Their attempt at ten simulataneous hijackings was pretty omenous........

    All of that said, Bush is being an idiot. He us either showing way too much loyalty to people who have shown a remarkable lack of anticipation (Rumsfeld, possibly Chiefs of Staff in the Pentagon) or he has no sense of anticipation. We were so worried about securing the country in a week, we forgot to protect the borders from Iran, Syria nad where ever else t he "freedom fighters" are coming from. How hard is that to figure out?

    I am at a loss for what the right thing to do is. Part of me says that we should do what Truman did - not drop a nuke, but untie our hands, hit them so hard with such terrifying bombs in all of the terrorists strongholds that we cripple their operations and also level the playing field to decrease the threat of civil war. Part of me also says lots and lots of inncent people will die. But that's why we are better than them. We care that innocent people donot die nad they delight in their deaths.

  8. #8
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    7,648
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=JCnflies]Do you have any objectivity? I admit a conservative bias, but I am willing to give credit where credit is due. I don;t think it is fair to knock everything going on in Iraq. From what I have heard on radio and TV (and to be fair, it is in snippets as I am spending most of my free timewith my Dad who is hospitalized):

    1) The enemy has not won a single battle.

    2) They are losing soldiers a lot faster than we are.

    3) Iraq has executed the murderous old leadership and voted for the first time, nut they are having a hard time defining themselves (to say the least)

    The way I see it, the difficulty comes much more from ourselves. We fight with both hands behind our back as the terrorists set no limits on their actions. A couple of examples: We are debating if we should even use torture while they behead civilkians on TV. Our courts grant the prisoners we capture rights, and they have no courts and grant death to those captured. Abu Gharib solicits a cacophony of disgust from journalists while they are cast in a heroic light for fighting for the freedom from American influence - this while they hide behind children, blow up innocents Iraqi's in public places and plot to hijack 10 planes and fly them into anything - including a nuclear power plant. But our own press villifies our actions.

    It seems Osama may have been right when he said that America would not have the stomach for the war. I am not sure if it is because we have a high percentage of very ethical people who object to war on ethical grounds (respectable, but I think deluded) or just a society that wants to be comfortable all of the time, but we seem almost blase about much of the war. Will it take a catastrophe worse than 9-11 to wake us from our slumber? Their attempt at ten simulataneous hijackings was pretty omenous........

    All of that said, Bush is being an idiot. He us either showing way too much loyalty to people who have shown a remarkable lack of anticipation (Rumsfeld, possibly Chiefs of Staff in the Pentagon) or he has no sense of anticipation. We were so worried about securing the country in a week, we forgot to protect the borders from Iran, Syria nad where ever else t he "freedom fighters" are coming from. How hard is that to figure out?

    I am at a loss for what the right thing to do is. Part of me says that we should do what Truman did - not drop a nuke, but untie our hands, hit them so hard with such terrifying bombs in all of the terrorists strongholds that we cripple their operations and also level the playing field to decrease the threat of civil war. Part of me also says lots and lots of inncent people will die. But that's why we are better than them. We care that innocent people donot die nad they delight in their deaths.[/QUOTE]

    OK .. try to understand. The # of Jihadists/Islamists behind the violence in Iraq is miniscule. This is a fight between the Sunnis/Baathists and Shia Iraqis. The Baathists are neither Islamistas nor Jihadists. They are fighting for their existance in Iraq. The Shia have demonstrated they are not willing to live side by side with the Sunnis and allow them to have an equal say in political matters. The Baathists are not trying to impose an islamic theocracy. They are not "islamofascists" they are not into "jihad". Dont confuse the two

    You continue to mix up the fight against AQ/Jihadists/Islamic fanatics and the fight in Iraq. They are seperate matters. I know its confusing, but that is what this administration wanted to do, confuse you into thinking they are the same guys we are fighting. They are not

  9. #9
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    6,884
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Spirit of Weeb]If you could put your military "expertise" back into practice, who would you rather fight to defend your country against: jihadist muslims or neo-cons?[/QUOTE]

    Since I am out of the military, my expertise and experience has shown me that the neo-cons have taken America in a direction that we should not be in.

    America has undergone a transformation that has gone too far. We no longer use our intelligence and we no longer use diplomacy. The neo-con sabre rattling has cost us BB of dollars, lots of lives and our standing in the world.

    I used my vote and my brain to get the neo-cons out of office. And will continue to do so. Then I can focus on getting to the bottom line with the external enemies of America.

    This country will be greater than it is today because of that.

  10. #10
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    6,884
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=JCnflies]I think the title is a little misleading. Are you suggesting that here are conservative columnist who attempt to bolster Bush's agenda? Sure. But, compared to those trashing it and compared to the number of (generally speaking) liberal columnists in our country's MSM, there are very few fingers to push any conservative agenda.[/QUOTE]

    The trashing of the Bush agenda started because of the recent election. The MSM was in cahoots until then. Even the republican senators are jumping off the ship.

    The Bush agenda is trash. His presidency is a failure. The "conservative" (big government, big spending) agenda is over.

    A huge tax increase is coming to pay off his war debt one day soon. Bush's regime is indefensible.

  11. #11
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    6,884
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=JCnflies]Do you have any objectivity? I admit a conservative bias, but I am willing to give credit where credit is due. I don;t think it is fair to knock everything going on in Iraq. From what I have heard on radio and TV (and to be fair, it is in snippets as I am spending most of my free timewith my Dad who is hospitalized):

    1) The enemy has not won a single battle.

    2) They are losing soldiers a lot faster than we are.

    3) Iraq has executed the murderous old leadership and voted for the first time, nut they are having a hard time defining themselves (to say the least)

    The way I see it, the difficulty comes much more from ourselves. We fight with both hands behind our back as the terrorists set no limits on their actions. A couple of examples: We are debating if we should even use torture while they behead civilkians on TV. Our courts grant the prisoners we capture rights, and they have no courts and grant death to those captured. Abu Gharib solicits a cacophony of disgust from journalists while they are cast in a heroic light for fighting for the freedom from American influence - this while they hide behind children, blow up innocents Iraqi's in public places and plot to hijack 10 planes and fly them into anything - including a nuclear power plant. But our own press villifies our actions.

    It seems Osama may have been right when he said that America would not have the stomach for the war. I am not sure if it is because we have a high percentage of very ethical people who object to war on ethical grounds (respectable, but I think deluded) or just a society that wants to be comfortable all of the time, but we seem almost blase about much of the war. Will it take a catastrophe worse than 9-11 to wake us from our slumber? Their attempt at ten simulataneous hijackings was pretty omenous........

    All of that said, Bush is being an idiot. He us either showing way too much loyalty to people who have shown a remarkable lack of anticipation (Rumsfeld, possibly Chiefs of Staff in the Pentagon) or he has no sense of anticipation. We were so worried about securing the country in a week, we forgot to protect the borders from Iran, Syria nad where ever else t he "freedom fighters" are coming from. How hard is that to figure out?

    I am at a loss for what the right thing to do is. Part of me says that we should do what Truman did - not drop a nuke, but untie our hands, hit them so hard with such terrifying bombs in all of the terrorists strongholds that we cripple their operations and also level the playing field to decrease the threat of civil war. Part of me also says lots and lots of inncent people will die. But that's why we are better than them. We care that innocent people donot die nad they delight in their deaths.[/QUOTE]

    JC, I feel for your dad.

    This administration has caused a lot of confusion with the lies they told to get us into this mess. Whether the lies were intentional or not, they were lies and now lives are lost.

    BB's are lost. He wants to expand the war. We should have been out of Iraq and not be going into Iran. The USA is in bad shape with new threats popping up all the time and our military tied up in one country for the wrong reason.

  12. #12
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,393
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Jetdawgg]Since I am out of the military, my expertise and experience has shown me that the neo-cons have taken America in a direction that we should not be in.[/QUOTE]

    Yeah, lets go back to the good old days of letting muslim radicals bomb our buildings, hijack, kidnap and kill American citizens and do absolutely nothing about it while were all getting bj's.

    Semper Fi!

  13. #13
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,709
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=kennyo7]OK .. try to understand. The # of Jihadists/Islamists behind the violence in Iraq is miniscule. This is a fight between the Sunnis/Baathists and Shia Iraqis. The Baathists are neither Islamistas nor Jihadists. They are fighting for their existance in Iraq. The Shia have demonstrated they are not willing to live side by side with the Sunnis and allow them to have an equal say in political matters. The Baathists are not trying to impose an islamic theocracy. They are not "islamofascists" they are not into "jihad". Dont confuse the two

    You continue to mix up the fight against AQ/Jihadists/Islamic fanatics and the fight in Iraq. They are seperate matters. I know its confusing, but that is what this administration wanted to do, confuse you into thinking they are the same guys we are fighting. They are not[/QUOTE]

    I understand that completely; however, I interpreted the post to be about OUR lack of success militarily, and lal I am saying is that, in terms of our military succeeding against the enemy in the traditional perception of war, things are not the doom and gloom read about in the news and so often said.

    That said, it is pretty obvious that he country is in tumoil x 10 and the adminstration's anticipation of events and preparation for and management of those events is pathetic. But I hope you noticed that I mentioned one reason for the all out strike would be to "level the playing field." By that I meant that now the civil unrest would be more of a fair fight. I thought I mentioned that?

    And as far as jihad goes, do not focus solely on the local battles in Iraq. While vast terrorist resources are indeed being spent in Iraq, it would be foolish to think t hat they have abandoned their global perspective. As shown by some terror plots that have been broken up as well as their past history, terrorists are constantly conniving to strike when least expected. We might disagree, but I believe a crushing attack, no holds barred, in Iraq would get their attention.

    Never forget the two best lessons we have learned when looking to make our point with terrorists:

    1) When Jimmy Carter responded to the kidnapping of the American hostages with letters to Khomeini asking what we had done to motivate him to capture these people and followed it up with more drivel that was sentimental and self deprecating, Khomeini took it as weakness and emboldened himself. When the hostages were first taken, Khomeini said he expected to be bombed and was prepared to die. He knew from that point forward that he could control Carter.

    2) reagen dealt with Qhadafy (sp?) by attacking his home with our jets. Quadafy was never linked to terrorist plots again.

    Is it any wonder that Khomeini turned the hostages over right as Reagen was about to take over?

    As far as me trying to get something, I think you either do not know or left out or glossed over a phenomenally important point. Tons of these "fighters" are not Iraqi at all. They are from foreign countries like Iran, Syria, Ethiopia, Afhnaistan, etc. They have a well conceived plan to create civil war. It is them that i think we have to go after full bore.

  14. #14
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    6,884
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Spirit of Weeb]Yeah, lets go back to the good old days of letting muslim radicals bomb our buildings, hijack, kidnap and kill American citizens and do absolutely nothing about it while were all getting bj's.

    Semper Fi![/QUOTE]

    When did you serve?

  15. #15
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    7,648
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=JCnflies]

    As far as me trying to get something, I think you either do not know or left out or glossed over a phenomenally important point. [B]Tons of these "fighters" are not Iraqi at all. They are from foreign countries like Iran, Syria, Ethiopia, Afhnaistan, etc. [/B] They have a well conceived plan to create civil war. It is them that i think we have to go after full bore.[/QUOTE]

    This is not true. Its only about 10-15% of the fighters that are foreign. The vast majority are Iraqi

  16. #16
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    7,648
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE][QUOTE=JCnflies]

    [B]2) reagen dealt with Qhadafy (sp?) by attacking his home with our jets. Quadafy was never linked to terrorist plots again.[/B]
    QUOTE][/QUOTE]
    This is also not true.
    One year after Reagan bombed Libya the merchant ship MV Eksund was busted carrying a large consignment of arms and explosives supplied by Libya headed for delivery for the IRA. Qadafy also continued to supply money to Palestinian terror organizations for suicide missions well into the mid 1990s.

  17. #17
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    21,933
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Spirit of Weeb]Yeah, lets go back to the good old days of letting muslim radicals bomb our buildings, hijack, kidnap and kill American citizens and do absolutely nothing about it while were all getting bj's.

    Semper Fi![/QUOTE]

    I remember when, I remember, I remember when I lost my mind,
    There was something so pleasant about that place...
    Even your emotions had an echo in so much space.

    And when you're out there, without care,
    Yeah, I was out of touch.
    But it wasn't because I didn't know enough:
    I just knew too much

    Does that make me crazy?
    Does that make me crazy?
    Does that make me crazy?
    Possibly (or Probably)

    And I hope that you are having the time of your life,
    But think twice, that's my only advice.

    Come on now who do you, who do you, who do you, who do you Think you are, ha ha ha, bless your soul,
    You really think you're in control!

    Well,
    I think you're crazy...
    I think you're crazy...
    I think you're crazy...
    Just like me.

    My heroes had the heart to lose their lives out on a limb,
    And all I remember is thinkin' I wanna be like them.

    Ever since I was little, ever since I was little it looked like fun,
    And it's no coincidence I've come,
    And I can die when I'm done.

    But maybe I'm crazy?
    Maybe you're crazy?
    Maybe we're crazy?
    Probably!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us