Wolfowitz Doctrine is an unofficial name given to the initial version of the Defense Planning Guidance for the 1994–99 fiscal years (dated February 18, 1992) authored by U.S. Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Paul Wolfowitz and his deputy Scooter Libby. Not intended for public release, it was leaked to The New York Times on March 7, 1992, and sparked a public controversy about U.S. foreign and defense policy. The document was widely criticized as imperialist as the document outlined a policy of unilateralism and pre-emptive military action to suppress potential threats from other nations and prevent any other nation from rising to superpower status.
911 was all they needed to further their agenda On Jun 3, 12:56 pm, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: > Perpetual War Is a Bigger Threat Than TerrorismByConor Friedersdorf > May 31 2011, 11:45 AM ETNeither Barack Obama nor his Republican challengers > have a strategy for victory and peaceIn a scathing Memorial Day jeremiad > against American foreign policy, Andrew Bacevicharguesthat elected officials > are exploiting the troops by sending them to war when doing so isn't > necessary. His whole article is worth a read, but one passage is so striking > that it merits special attention:As the 10th anniversary of what Americans > once called their Global War on Terror approaches, a plausible, realistic > blueprint for bringing that enterprise to a conclusion does not exist.Isn't > that something? He's absolutely right. There isn't even the equivalent of > Richard Nixon's secret plan to get us out of Vietnam. Or popular demand for > one (thebest effortsof my colleague notwithstanding). > As Professor Bacevich puts it:Those who might once have felt some > responsibility for articulating such a plan--the president, his chief > lieutenants, senior military leaders--no longer feel any obligation to do so. > As a practical matter, they devote themselves to war's perpetuation, closing > one front while opening another. More strikingly still, we the people allow > our leaders to evade this basic responsibility to articulate a plan for > peace. By implication, we endorse the unspoken assumption that peace has > become implausible.Our thought process is as follows: terrorism is a threat, > and it justifies waging war anywhere on earth where there are terrorists. As > we all know, however, it's impossible to kill every last terrorist. Thus the > war on terrorism rolls on. Even if we leave Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya, > it'll continue. > Give the hawks their due: terrorism is an ongoing threat to the United > States. In fact, it's likely to pose a bigger threat with every year that > passes, insofar as technological advances are permitting people with meager > resources to obtain ever deadlier weapons. Heaven forbid they get a nuke or a > killer virus. What the hawks fail to recognize, however, is that perpetual > war poses a bigger threat to the citizenry of a superpower than does > terrorism. Already it ishelping to bankrupt usfinancially,undermining our > civil liberties,corroding our values, triggeringabusive > prosecutions,empoweringthe executive branch in ways that are anathema to the > system of checks and balances implemented by the Founders, and causing us > todegrade one another. > Despite a decade without a major terrorist attack, the government continues > to claim ever broader powers and to spend billions more in treasure. So what > do things look like after another decade? Or after another major terrorist > attack? Or when the Oval Office is occupied by someone who wields powers > President Obama already claims in an even more abusive fashion? > All the metrics I mentioned are bound to get worse until Americans demand > more than improved tactics, or an exit strategy in Iraq or Afghanistan, or > the assurance that a leader will do what is necessary to keep us safe. Though > terrorism will always threaten us -- as it always has -- the American people > should demand an exit strategy in the war on terrorism, and an approach to > safeguarding the homeland that isn't likely to bring about our fiscal ruin, > the loss of our liberty, and the corrosion of our morals. Being far more > powerful than our enemies, we pose the biggest threat to > ourselves.http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/05/perpetual-war-is-a-bigger-threat-than-terrorism/239671/ -- 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.
