Thank you. On Oct 4, 4:35�am, "mike532 [ Republicans for Obama ]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century > The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) was an American > neoconservative think tank based in Washington, D.C., co-founded in > early 1997 as a non-profit educational organization by William Kristol > and Robert Kagan. The PNAC's stated goal is "to promote American > global leadership."[1] Fundamental to the PNAC are the views that > "American leadership is both good for America and good for the world" > and support for "a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral > clarity."[2] It has exerted strong influence on high-level U.S. > government officials in the administration of U.S President George W. > Bush and strongly affected the George Bush administration's > development of military and foreign policies, especially involving > national security and the Iraq War.[3][4] > > [edit] Background and history > An initiative of the New Citizenship Project, a 501(c)(3) organization > headed by William Kristol (Chairman) and Gary Schmitt (President),[1] > the Project for the New American Century is funded in part by such > organizations as the Sarah Scaife Foundation, the John M. Olin > Foundation and the Bradley Foundation.[5] > > On January 26, 1998, in the PNAC's open letter to President Bill > Clinton, its members explicitly called for a U.S. ground campaign to > oust Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq.[6] > > The goal of regime change remained their consistent position > throughout the Iraq disarmament crisis.[7] They followed that up with > a letter to Republican members of the U.S. Congress Newt Gingrich and > Trent Lott.[8] > > On November 16, 1998, citing Iraq's demand for the expulsion of UN > weapons inspectors and the removal of Richard Butler as head of the > inspections regime, William Kristol, co-founder of the PNAC and editor > of The Weekly Standard, called again for regime change in an editorial > in his online magazine: "...any sustained bombing and missile campaign > against Iraq should be part of any overall political-military strategy > aimed at removing Saddam from power."[9] Kristol states that Paul > Wolfowitz and others believed that the goal was to create "a > 'liberated zone' in southern Iraq that would provide a safe haven > where opponents of Saddam could rally and organize a credible > alternative to the present regime ... The liberated zone would have to > be protected by U.S. military might, both from the air and, if > necessary, on the ground." > > The PNAC also supported the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (H.R.4655), > which President Clinton had signed into law.[10] > > In January 1999, the PNAC circulated a memo that criticized the > December 1998 bombing of Iraq in Operation Desert Fox as ineffective, > questioned the viability of Iraqi democratic opposition which the U.S. > was supporting through the Iraq Liberation Act, and referred to any > "containment" policy as an illusion.[11] > > In September 2000, the PNAC published a controversial 90-page report > entitled Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategies, Forces, and > Resources For a New Century. > > From 2001 through 2002, the co-founders and other members of the PNAC > published articles supporting the United States' invasion of Iraq. > [12]. On its website, the PNAC promoted its point of view that leaving > Saddam Hussein in power would be "surrender to terrorism."[13][14][15] > [16] > > On September 20, 2001 (nine days after the September 11, 2001 > attacks), the PNAC sent a letter to President George W. Bush, > advocating "a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in > Iraq," or regime change: > > ...even if evidence does not link Iraq directly to the attack, any > strategy aiming at the eradication of terrorism and its sponsors must > include a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in > Iraq. Failure to undertake such an effort will constitute an early and > perhaps decisive surrender in the war on international terrorism.[17] > [4] > > In 2003, during the period leading up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, > the PNAC had seven full-time staff members in addition to its board of > directors.[1] According to Tom Barry, "The glory days of the Project > for the New American Century (PNAC) quickly passed but the website is > still functioning and was updated as of Feb 8, 2007.[18][19] > > On Oct 4, 5:25�am, rigsy03 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > What is PNAC? Something non-agression? Hard to keep track of the > > alphabet these days. > > > On Oct 4, 4:19 am, "mike532 [ Republicans for Obama ]" > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > i think it is more about implementing the PNAC groups plans than > > > confronting Russia > > > > On Oct 4, 5:11 am, rigsy03 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > The USA belligerence in the Middle East and Stans/India is really a > > > > thrust against Russia. > > > > > On Oct 4, 3:35 am, Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Most people are against US belligerence against Iraq. Who is going to > > > > > stop the US, not a capitalist apologist like Chomsky? Liberals are > > > > > good for talking about what should be done, and then do nothing > > > > > > mike532 [ Republicans for Obama ] wrote: > > > > > > > Chomsky: "The Majority of the World Supports Iran" > > > > > > > In an exclusive and wide-ranging interview, Chomsky discusses the > > > > > > global politics of Iran's and India's attempts to become nuclear > > > > > > powers. > > > > > > On Wednesday night, in a vote of 86 to 13, the U.S. Senate passed a > > > > > > historic nuclear deal with that will allow the United States to > > > > > > trade > > > > > > with India in nuclear equipment and technology, and to supply India > > > > > > with nuclear fuel for its power reactors. The deal is considered > > > > > > hugely consequential by its supporters and opponents alike -- and a > > > > > > significant victory for the Bush administration. > > > > > > > Last month, Subrata Ghoshroy, a researcher in the Science, > > > > > > Technology > > > > > > and Global Security Working Group at the Massachusetts Institute of > > > > > > Technology, met with Noam Chomsky in his office at MIT, where he is > > > > > > the institute professor of linguistics. "Before we started our > > > > > > discussion," Ghoshroy writes, "Professor Chomsky asked me to give > > > > > > him > > > > > > a little background information. I told him that I was researching > > > > > > missile defense, space weapons and the U.S.-India nuclear deal." > > > > > > Ghoshroy is a longtime critic of the U.S. missile defense program > > > > > > and > > > > > > a former analyst at the Government Accountability Office who in 2006 > > > > > > blew the whistle on the failure -- and attempted cover-up -- of a > > > > > > key > > > > > > component of the program: a $26 billion weapon system that was the > > > > > > "centerpiece" of the Bush administration's antimissile plan. > > > > > > > Ghoshroy and Chomsky discussed the then-pending nuclear deal, which > > > > > > would sanction trade hitherto prohibited by U.S. and international > > > > > > laws because of India's refusal to sign the Nuclear > > > > > > Non-Proliferation > > > > > > Treaty and the nuclear tests it conducted in 1998. Ghoshroy has > > > > > > written several articles criticizing the U.S.-India deal as a > > > > > > triumph > > > > > > of the business lobby -- an assessment Chomsky agreed with. He said > > > > > > that Condoleezza Rice is actually on record admitting what is truly > > > > > > behind this deal, which he characterized as a "non-proliferation > > > > > > disaster." > > > > > > > Ghoshroy's subsequent conversation with Chomsky touched on a number > > > > > > of > > > > > > interweaving topics, including: India and the importance of the non- > > > > > > aligned movement; the myths of free trade and the so-called > > > > > > "success" > > > > > > of neoliberalism; Washington's historic opposition to promote new > > > > > > world economic and information orders; Latin America's growing > > > > > > independence; the West's hypocrisy over Iran's nuclear program -- > > > > > > and > > > > > > MIT's ironic role in it during the shah's regime; and, finally, U.S. > > > > > > elections and the prospects for change. > > > > > > > The result is a two-part interview, the second of which will run on > > > > > > AlterNet tomorrow. Part One begins with India, the Non-Aligned > > > > > > Movement, and why a "majority of the world supports Iran." (The Non- > > > > > > Aligned Movement, which consists of some 115 or more representatives > > > > > > of "developing countries," originated at the Asia-Africa Conference > > > > > > in > > > > > > Bandung, Indonesia, in 1955, which was convened mainly by newly > > > > > > independent former colonies from Africa and Asia to develop joint > > > > > > policies in international relations. Jawaharlal Nehru, then India's > > > > > > prime minister, led the conference. There, "Third World" leaders > > > > > > shared their similar problems of resisting the pressures of the > > > > > > major > > > > > > powers, maintaining their independence and opposing colonialism and > > > > > > neo-colonialism, especially Western domination. India continued its > > > > > > vigorous participation and leadership role in NAM until the end of > > > > > > the > > > > > > Cold War. For further reading, visit the NAM Web site.) > > > > > > > ***- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
