Remove the Imperialists

www.newamericancentury.org...



The People versus the Powerful is the oldest story in human history. At no
point in history have the Powerful wielded so much control. At no point in
history has the active and informed involvement of the People, all of them,
been more absolutely required.

William Rivers Pitt: 02/25/03

The Project for the New American Century, or PNAC, is a Washington-based
think tank created in 1997. Above all else, PNAC desires and demands one
thing: The establishment of a global American empire to bend the will of
all nations. They chafe at the idea that the United States, the last
remaining superpower, does not do more by way of economic and military
force to bring the rest of the world under the umbrella of a new
socio-economic Pax Americana.

The fundamental essence of PNAC's ideology can be found in a White Paper
produced in September of 2000 entitled "Rebuilding America's Defenses:
Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century." In it, PNAC outlines
what is required of America to create the global empire they envision.
According to PNAC, America must:
* Reposition permanently based forces to Southern Europe, Southeast Asia
and the Middle East;
* Modernize U.S. forces, including enhancing our fighter aircraft,
submarine and surface fleet capabilities;
* Develop and deploy a global missile defense system, and develop a
strategic dominance of space;
* Control the "International Commons" of cyberspace;
* Increase defense spending to a minimum of 3.8 percent of gross domestic
product, up from the 3 percent currently spent.

Most ominously, this PNAC document described four "Core Missions" for the
American military. The two central requirements are for American forces to
"fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars," and
to "perform the 'constabulary' duties associated with shaping the security
environment in critical regions.

Why is this important? After all, wacky think tanks are a cottage industry
in Washington, DC. They are a dime a dozen. In what way does PNAC stand
above the other groups that would set American foreign policy if they could?
Two events brought PNAC into the mainstream of American government: the
disputed election of George W. Bush, and the attacks of September 11th.
When Bush assumed the Presidency, the men who created and nurtured the
imperial dreams of PNAC became the men who run the Pentagon, the Defense
Department and the White House.

Vice President Dick Cheney is a founding member of PNAC, along with Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Defense Policy Board chairman Richard Perle.

Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz is the ideological father of the
group. Bruce Jackson, a PNAC director, served as a Pentagon official for
Ronald Reagan before leaving government service to take a leading position
with the weapons manufacturer Lockheed Martin.

Recall that PNAC demanded an increase in defense spending to at least 3.8%
of GDP. Bush's proposed budget for next year asks for $379 billion in
defense spending, almost exactly 3.8% of GDP.

There will be adverse side effects. The siege mentality average Americans
are suffering as they smother behind yards of plastic sheeting and duct
tape will increase by orders of magnitude as our aggressions bring forth
new terrorist attacks against the homeland. These attacks will require the
implementation of the newly drafted Patriot Act II, an augmentation of the
previous Act that has profoundly sharper teeth. The sun will set on the
Constitution and Bill of Rights.

The American economy will be ravaged by the need for increased defense
spending, and by the aforementioned "constabulary" duties in Iraq,
Afghanistan and elsewhere. Former allies will turn on us. Germany, France
and the other nations resisting this Iraq war are fully aware of this game
plan. They are not acting out of cowardice or because they love Saddam
Hussein, but because they mean to resist this rising American empire, lest
they face economic and military serfdom at the hands of George W. Bush.
Richard Perle has already stated that France is no longer an American ally.

As the eagle spreads its wings, our rhetoric and their resistance will
become more agitated and dangerous.


Many people, of course, will die. They will die from war and from want,
from famine and disease. At home, the social fabric will be torn in ways
that make the Reagan nightmares of crack addiction, homelessness and AIDS
seem tame by comparison.


This is the price to be paid for empire, and the men of PNAC who now
control the fate and future of America are more than willing to pay it. For
them, the benefits far outweigh the liabilities.

www.informationclearinghouse.info...

Quite frightening.

pnac.info...

home.earthlink.net...

Vote the imperialist out, we cannot allow these hawks to be reselected. They have the potential to cause irrepairable damage to the U.S.

[Edited on 21-12-2003 by Barbarian]

All true. I mean not even up for debate. PNAC exists. And Vice President Dick Cheney is a founding member of PNAC, along with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Defense Policy Board chairman Richard Perle.

And they 'THINK' of ways to make America stronger through war and propaganda.

But what Bush supporter cares? Does this information even register? I've never heard a good justification (or acknowledgement for that matter) from a Bush supporter for PNAC OR KARL ROVE!

Who likes Karl Rove and PNAC? Thinks they're good honest people? Show of hands please??? Anyone?

Back at that end of the cold war the CIA got mind control technology. They developed it enough so they could get it satellite ready. They pointed it at America in 1999 flipped the switch now every person of low intelligence supports Bush. Even when presented with the facts of just how corrupt and dirty the Bush administration is they still support it. That�s the only reason I can think of for an educated populous to throw away facts about Bush and follow him unquestionably like he is Jesus Christ

I love you guys who are deathly afraid of PNAC, which is merely a pro-American think tank. Their ideas are not even original or revolutionary.

Were it an anti-American thinktank, one that espoused notions totally in contrast with these, would you still stand against it or would you be in favor?

Were PNAC merely 'pro-American' that would be fine. Even with their ties to and footholds IN the current administration.

But PNAC has global aspirations and implications with America simply being the tool or weapon. I definitionally consider that ANTI-American.

Devil, that makes no sense. Were there such a beam, you must have soaked up more than your share of the rays.
Nobody that I know follows Bush as if he is Christ. Just the opposite, in fact, most of us realize he was, and appears to be still, the best choice we will be given. Are we satisfied with him? There's not much reason to be satisfied.
What is for sure is remarks such as yours adds no quality to a situation that already lacks it, and to be totally paranoid about something like PNAC indicates to me that for some off the wall reason, there are those who are more trusting of the enemies of the U.S. than they are of the U.S.

Rant, I see what you are saying, but I don't believe it is as you see it. That is a logical concern, I'll agree, but I really think the gun is being jumped!

I love you guys who are deathly afraid of PNAC, which is merely a pro-American think tank. Their ideas are not even original or revolutionary.

As Rant said, PNAC is far from pro-American. It, if you read about it, supports American imperialism and domination, but it supports this at the cost of the well being of the citizens of the U.S. This is "pro-American"?

Were it an anti-American thinktank, one that espoused notions totally in contrast with these, would you still stand against it or would you be in favor?

If it were as radical as this one and it had close ties to members of the governing administration, I would be equally opposed.

[Edited on 21-12-2003 by Barbarian]

I have read of PNAC. I enjoy reading their site. I see no empire-building involved. I do see America-first ideas rather than NWO or U.N. butt-kissing ideas, though, and that is what I like about it.

You made no sense. What you basically said is that you do not like this administration, no matter what they do, and that you could tolerate another admin. looking at PNAC suggestions since they would be, well, not this administration. In other words, you just don't like the Bush Bunch.

Thomas Crowne you have no sense of humor period you conservative prick.

Common lighten up the satelite thing was funny!

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
I have read of PNAC. I enjoy reading their site. I see no empire-building involved. I do see America-first ideas rather than NWO or U.N. butt-kissing ideas, though, and that is what I like about it.

Where I see PNAC expressing itself in the current administration is in the areas that patently go against traditional conservatism. Of course, you can say the Afghanistan and Iraq occupations were going to happen anyway...fine. But they do cover the PNAC requirements for a middle east foothold, and showing the world we can win swift wars. That's the muscle flexing part. (No problems there...) But, it's one piece of the PNAC pie.

Where my conservative friends go ape shat is in the "NEW DEAL" american taxpayers are being asked to cough up for these humanitarian occupations. The last time anyone had it so good was when MaCarther made himself emperor of Japan, fed the starving and started a labor movement. (I mean that's what Republicans RUN AGAINST here! But you can still thank them for your Toyota.)

But you do have to rebuild what you destroy. Fine. So what are we doing in Africa? Free food and healthcare? AIDS money and drugs? I mean great. That's the liberal thing to do. I don't mind the effort, but I question: WHY? Coming from Bush.

Is healthcare and AIDS medicine free for Americans? HEEEEEEEELLLLLLLLLL NO. Listen to Bush's speeches. WTF was that SEX SLAVERY thing about? What's THAT going to cost me?

It's more than just a couple of wars, it's global influence through dependence on MY dime. (Now I sound like a conservative, but I feel like more of one than most Bush fans sound!) And the drug benefit thing. A good 'first step'. Total pandering from the King of all Pander Monkeys. Come on Bush, you bought my vote already, why are you wasting money on something conservatives don't want, and liberals will have to repeal before they can fix?

A "first step" is headed in SOME direction is it not? We're being conditioned, for something. I don't know the whole picture obviously, but my concern is that the most powerful man on the planet doesn't either. He's being manuevered IMO by some crazy azz Rapture junkies that found themselves a real cowboy to make things palatable.

I don't even think THEY know what the goal is... yet. Just moving some pawns around the board now to see what happens.

If nothing else, this administration is GREAT at saying 'we meant to do that' after the fact. The motives just boggle the mind. And about half the country are willing to wait for motives after the fact. Any old justification will do. That's the new "patriotism". It's freaking scary from the outside looking in. Just take one step back from your patriotic Kool Aid sometime and look.

It's BIZARRE when you hear life long Republican neighbors completely unaware that Bush has increased Clinton spending from $16,000 to $21,000 per household, and they STILL scream YAY BUSH...He's a CONSERVATIVE...it's my money damnit!

Um, it was. Now it's Usay Jrs.

Originally posted by DiRtYDeViL
Thomas Crowne you have no sense of humor period you conservative prick.

Common lighten up the satelite thing was funny!

I have no sense of humor?!? You couldn't see me smiling as I typed that?

Rant, you have great points there, and I certainly understand where you are coming from. I'm sure my dime is in there as well. But a couple things to consider:

We always go in and fix things that we tear up. Seems to always be our way. So far it has been a good plan as former enemies have become allies (for a while, anyway). With Iraq, it is essential or else the country would devolve into a worse situation than it was, and that would not only hurt those people but destabilize the entire region. This costs us far less than anything else we could do.

As far as Africa, I am a little set back to hear someone having problems with our attempting to help that continent. True, our healthcare is not free, but can you guess what every able-bodied American can do that every able-bodied African cannot do? Two things, actually. The condition of that continent is appalling, and what's more, due to the refusal of many to accept modern technology and let go of traditional ways of living, the environment is being dragged down, too.
Rant, the aid to Africa isn't a debate of whether to raise taxes to a ludicrous level so that everyone can have the same mediocre healthcare, it is about everyday life and death. An example of this is a friend's sister who died in the hospital waiting room in Kenya. She was very ill and had waited for hours to see the doctor at the emergency room. That isn't an uncommon occurance there, Rant.

I understand, Rant, and normally I'd agree with you about overseas spending and all, but these two points of interest are pretty important. I think, anyway.