It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Think tank: Neocons’ influence remains strong under Obama

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 09:02 AM

For those who thought the end of the Bush Administration spelled doomsday for the neoconservative movement, think again.

According to a May report (pdf) from the Brookings Institution, a Washington, DC think tank, neoconservatives associated with prominent figures like former Assistant Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, Weekly Standard Editor Bill Kristol and pundit Richard Perle are still broadly active, despite policy failures associated with the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Brookings Institution senior fellow Justin Vaisse, author of Neoconservatism: A Biography of a Movement, argues that because neocons never had the degree of influence that opponents credited them with, and also because of a general unawareness of their history, observers don’t fully understand the trajectory of the neoconservative movement that began long before the Iraq invasion and one continues today.

I knew it! What have I been saying all along.

“Neoconservatism remains, to this day, a distinct and very significant voice of the Washington establishment,” Vaisse insists. In May, he published the report, Why Neoconservativism Still Matters.

Stephen Walt, professor of international affairs at the Harvard Kennedy School and co-author of The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, says that the most obvious place the neocons are still influential is in U.S. policy toward Iran, where the Obama administration is “continuing the Bush administration’s basic approach, albeit with a ‘kinder, gentler’ face.”

What will the future bring? More war and attempt at control around the globe; all funded by the American taxpayer. "The Project For A New American Century" is alive and well.

[edit on 9-6-2010 by whaaa]

posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 09:51 AM
The neocons represent the political face of the military-industrial establishment, which is still alive and well, as evidenced by our consistent foregin policy with respect to Iraq, Afghanistan, and our coming conflict with Iran. Ideology aside, its all about profits, plain and simple.

posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 11:35 AM
We all remember PNAC (Project for a New American Century) was a NeoCon think tank which outlined the need for a "new Pearl Harbor" in order to get the political clout to enter into Iraq and Afghan wars - with a focus on securing oil and gas pipelines and less dependence upon Middle East energy resources and the Russian and Chinese elements.

We now have CNES (Center for a New American Security) - is this the democratic version of the PNAC?

You could well be right poster.CNES

Despite its reputation for being a “counter-insurgency heavy organization” [4], CNAS’s scope includes broader areas of study such as energy security. In June 2009, CNAS launched a new program, “Natural Security”, headed by Vice President Sharon Burke to tackle the national security implications of natural resource production and use.

If it walks like a neocon and talks like a neocon....



posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 12:19 PM
I'm not sure what you're saying by making this post. Neo-conservatives aren't gone as are neo-liberals. Congress has a majority of Democrats if I'm not mistaken and they are the ones who keep voting to fund the wars. Are you trying to blame conservatives for our continued presence in Iraq and Afghanistan?

new topics

top topics

log in