Originally posted by mwm1331
Well True lies Amuk, this is the one area that that keeps me a republcan and prevents me from going libertarian. While I feel the domestic planks of
the LP are dead on, It is in the are of foreign policy that I agree 100% with the neo cons. You see in the world we live in today everyone and
everything is so interconnected that IMHO America must be a global leader. If we do not actively seek to lead the world in a way that is in
line with American principles, then some other nation will. As the only other powers which can now, or will be able in the future to, take the
position of leadership are the EU, china, or russia, all of which would reshape the world in a way that is not beneficial to american interests, we
have no choice but to take up the position as world leader. The costs if we do not are simply IMHO too high.
absolutely, mwm1331! I will probably get (and maybe even deserve) a bunch of machetes thrown at me for saying this, but I think that in this age,
foreign policy is clearly the front burner issue...domestically, you'd really have to TRY to screw America up to break it. Anyways...
I checked out the newamericancentury website, and I think that even liberals have to admit that this website is a fresh of breath air after listneing
to the likes of Ann Coulter and hte rest of the gang who think that anyone opposed to the Iraq war is a weird, anti-christian mongrel.
I personally agree with the neocons - I realize that the founding fathers warned against 'foreign entanglements' but like it or not, we are well and
truely entrenched in the world - we are now responsible for it in a way. After world war two, it was necessary to do some questionable things in the
world to hold back communism, such as supporting horrible regimes in asia and the middle east just so that they would be on our side and not the
soviets. Iraq was not such a case...that was to hold back the tide of Iranian fundementalism (which, of course, was a result of the Carter
administration supoprting the coup against the Shah in 1979 - a staggering mistake).
Now of course, the cold war is over, but the fallout from what was then a sensible strategy is posing a threat to the United States in the form of
terrorism. When neocons such as myself say that there is a link between Iraq and 9/11, we don't mean that Saddam Hussein actually was personally
involved in planning the attack...here is what we mean:
Regimes such as the previous Iraqi one depend on many things to stay in power (despite their pathetic systems of government and economic policies).
One of these is obviously fear, and the crushing of dissidence, which one COULD say is an internal affair. But the other measure is to promote a
culture of hatred against the US and its values. This is by no means a crazy strategy on their part. It actually makes a lot of sense, because if the
people are too busy blaming America and Israel for all their troubles, they are more forgiving towarsd the real villians who run their country. And
that culture of hatred is a LARGE reason for why terrorism crops up. That culture of state-promoted-hatred represents a danger to the United
Now, to fight that, the people need to hav the right to question their own governments, and select their own leaders - democracy in other words. Some
say that through trade and diplomatic relations we can influence these regimes, but frankly, that has not worked in much of the middle east, with whom
the US DOES enjoy good diplomatic relations. Hence, democracy had to be forced onto the area ONCE, and made to work by the US ONCE. The reason Iraq
was chosen (in the face of arguably larger threats such as Iran) was that that was seen as the most justifiable one to invade - most Americans and
most of the World saw Saddam as threat.
So the reasoning here is that IF we can make Iraq work, it will serve as an example to the entire region, and freedom will gradually take hold and the
governments that are chosen as a result will be less hate mongering.
Now I'll be the first to admit that the administration has been far from perfect in achieving this. Iraq is a bloody mess right now, and the
administration was unnecssarily smug towarsd our allies and our enemies - NOT the behaviour of a superpower.
However, I do believe that this is a coherent policy in the war on terrorism. Freedom is the key to ending this madness. Why else would Abu Musab
Al-Zarqawi himself say that 'democraacy is a lie....against our religion"? It is because it threatens them. In fact, more than anything, more than
economic sanctions, our military power, even the threat of nuclear war, what these people fear the most is being held to account for their crimes.
THAT is why they hate democracy so much, and that is why WE need to promote it wherever we can.
Anyways, I know that this is not as simple as me saying all that, and unlike many of the conservatives here, I do believe that most liberals care for
America as much as I (or anyone else does)...our viewpoints may collide, but hey, that's what makes america great...the competition of ideas, and a
system that protects this competition.