What's the most accurate label for the 'neo-cons'? - TennisForum.com

 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 9 (permalink) Old Aug 21st, 2006, 04:00 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,655
                     
What's the most accurate label for the 'neo-cons'?

I suppose you have to know a bit about the noe-cons to answer that. Here's the neo-con 'Bible' if you will. Only it isn't a book, it's a think-tank.
The Project for a New American Century

The link deliberately goes to articles from 1997-2000, just so you have easy access to articles espousing the current conflicts in the Middle East. 9/11 had nothing to do with the invasion of Iraq. Neither did Osama bin Laden. Invading Iraq, followed by the overthrow of most of the governments in the Middle East, has been neo-con doctrine for a decade.

Proud to be an American
Not blind. Not uninformed. We are party to atrocities. But the response of the world after 9/11 is worth noting. Even our most dire enemies offered aid. We should all be so lucky.
Volcana is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 9 (permalink) Old Aug 21st, 2006, 04:24 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 6,898
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volcana
I suppose you have to know a bit about the noe-cons to answer that. Here's the neo-con 'Bible' if you will. Only it isn't a book, it's a think-tank.
The Project for a New American Century

The link deliberately goes to articles from 1997-2000, just so you have easy access to articles espousing the current conflicts in the Middle East. 9/11 had nothing to do with the invasion of Iraq. Neither did Osama bin Laden. Invading Iraq, followed by the overthrow of most of the governments in the Middle East, has been neo-con doctrine for a decade.

overthrow of governments? I thought the neo-cons just wanted to nuke the Middle East.
vogus is offline  
post #3 of 9 (permalink) Old Aug 21st, 2006, 04:42 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 40,129
                     
Thank you for posting the infamous website, The New American Century.
It is well documented that Mr Bush lacks intellectual curiosity, but I am just wondering if candidate Bush had ever heard or read the New American Century position papers before he interviewed Rumsfeld, Wolfwitz, Peerle and co for the vaious positions in his adminstration.
Have always been puzzled, that a man of his background and means, never visited Europe, Asia or Africa during his years at Yale.
tennislover22 is offline  
post #4 of 9 (permalink) Old Aug 21st, 2006, 04:52 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 6,898
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by tennisbum79
Thank you for posting the infamous website, The New American Century.
It is well documented that Mr Bush lacks intellectual curiosity, but I am just wondering if candidate Bush had ever heard or read the New American Century position papers before he interviewed Rumsfeld, Wolfwitz, Peerle and co for the vaious positions in his adminstration.
Have always been puzzled, that a man of his background and means, never visited Europe, Asia or Africa during his years at Yale.

well, Bush probably figured that he is never going to make know-it-all critics like you happy no matter what he does, so why should he bother trying?
vogus is offline  
post #5 of 9 (permalink) Old Aug 21st, 2006, 05:02 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 40,129
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by vogus
well, Bush probably figured that he is never going to make know-it-all critics like you happy no matter what he does, so why should he bother trying?
I don't think that is a well thought out answer.



Are you saying because he foresaw he would be criticized regardless of what he does, it drove him to being uncurious about history in general and political history of the middle east
in particular?


But I am sure you are not serious.

Last edited by tennislover22; Aug 21st, 2006 at 05:45 AM.
tennislover22 is offline  
post #6 of 9 (permalink) Old Aug 21st, 2006, 05:25 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 6,898
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by tennisbum79
I don't think that is a well thought out answer.



Are saying because he foresaw he would be criticized regardless of what he does, it drove him to being uncurious about history in general and political history of the middle east in particular?



But I am sure you are not serious






i wasn't really serious. My point is merely that there is nothing Bush could ever do to make certain elements of the orthodox left happy. He could give in to everything they demanded, and he would still be hated. I personally don't find Bush that conservative. For a Republican he is not bad. Reagan was much worse. But Bush has become a punching bag of the orthodox left in a way that Reagan seemed invulnerable to.
vogus is offline  
post #7 of 9 (permalink) Old Aug 21st, 2006, 05:36 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 40,129
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by vogus
i wasn't really serious. My point is merely that there is nothing Bush could ever do to make certain elements of the orthodox left happy. He could give in to everything they demanded, and he would still be hated. I personally don't find Bush that conservative. For a Republican he is not bad. Reagan was much worse. But Bush has become a punching bag of the orthodox left in a way that Reagan seemed invulnerable to.
I think every president, Republican or Democrat, get criticized.
I just happen that Clinton harsh criticism from the right was largely without merits and petty, whereas the Bush criticism (from all quarters, not just the left) is very valid and on matter of war, credibilty of the nation foreign policy (and therefore it credibilty).

Last edited by tennislover22; Aug 21st, 2006 at 05:45 AM.
tennislover22 is offline  
post #8 of 9 (permalink) Old Aug 21st, 2006, 06:17 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,655
                     
I think the 'war-radicals' describes them a bit better than 'neo-cons'.

For a 'pure-blood' conservative (as opposed to those in the USA who used 'conservative as a cover or anti-Black White Supremacy), spending blood and treasure in an aggressive action is ALWAYS anethema. Conservatives were isolationists. Unlike the Rumsfeld-Feith-Bush-Cheney-'war is the solution to all problems' crowd, a conservative, a true blue, dyed-in-the-wool, Barry Goldwater conservative, would hae rejected both the Bush domestic and foreign policies.

Proud to be an American
Not blind. Not uninformed. We are party to atrocities. But the response of the world after 9/11 is worth noting. Even our most dire enemies offered aid. We should all be so lucky.
Volcana is offline  
post #9 of 9 (permalink) Old Aug 21st, 2006, 09:13 AM
country flag RVD
Senior Member
 
RVD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 32,042
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by tennisbum79
Thank you for posting the infamous website, The New American Century.
It is well documented that Mr Bush lacks intellectual curiosity, but I am just wondering if candidate Bush had ever heard or read the New American Century position papers before he interviewed Rumsfeld, Wolfwitz, Peerle and co for the vaious positions in his adminstration.
Have always been puzzled, that a man of his background and means, never visited Europe, Asia or Africa during his years at Yale.
Yes, it's a fact that Bush not only knew of the PNAC Doctrine, but also had intimate knowledge of it from daddy.
See, this 'Bible' was shopped to daddy Bush and Clinton, and both shot this piece of Imperialistic plan down knowing full well the consequences of such an endeavor. But Bush being...well...Bush, saw an opportunity to demonstrate to daddy that he was.... erm... capable of more than driving drunk, shooting up, and crashing cars.

Isn't it interesting that every single author/contributor of PNAC that once worked within the administration, no longer does? I find that quite telling. They left Georgie holding this stick of dynamite.

As to Volcan's question...

I heard a very apt description over the radio of Ne-Cons that fits perfectly:

REGRESSIVES!

Be peaceful, be courteous, obey the law, respect everyone; but if someone puts his hand on you, send him to the cemetery. - Malcolm X
A man who stands for nothing will fall for anything. - Malcolm X
Our greatest glory is not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall. - Confucius
The greatest scholars are not usually the wisest people. - Geoffrey Chaucer
RVD is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the TennisForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Image Verification
Please enter the six letters or digits that appear in the image opposite.

Registration Image

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome