Some Real Election Issues-4
September 30, 2004
As you've noticed, I keep postponing the fourth installment of this series of "op-eds". The reason is that I've discovered something.
"Project for the New American Century"
I decided to see whether the "Project for the New American Century" (PNAC) that I had found on the Internet last April was still there, or whether it had been removed because of its (from my perspective) damning implications for the Republican platform during an election campaign. Far from being absent, it touts, as I interpret it, plans for global preeminence through, if necessary, military force. To check into this for yourself, type (in quotes) "Project for the New American Century" into an internet search engine... I used Google... and then peruse the references that such a search elicits. See what you think.
We know that Vice-President Cheney, Defense Secretary Rumsfield, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, Florida governor Jeb Bush, and Vice-President Cheney's current Chief of Staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby were on the pre-election committees that drew up the fall-of-2000 PNAC plan, "Why Another Defense Review". We know that since then, the United States has invaded two Mid-Eastern nations, Afghanistan and Iraq. Afghanistan appears to have been an unanticipated detour from the plans that were laid in the fall of 2000, but Iraq lies directly along the critical path. In late April, 2003, when the war in Iraq was winding down, there were warnings to Syria that suggested that Syria would be the next country we would invade. It was said that at that time, Defense Secretary Rumsfield and Deputy Defense Secretary Wolfowitz approached President Bush for approval to invade Syria as the next rung in the PNAC ladder, but that President Bush laughed and told them that it was time for him to start campaigning for re-election.
Given the mess we've encountered in Iraq and the less-publicized mess in Afghanistan, do you think that we'll eschew further invasions if President Bush wins a second term?
President Bush has assured us that, contrary to appearances, things are going well in Iraq, and that once the January elections in Iraq are behind us, things will quiet down. Deputy Defense Secretary Wolfowitz has recently said that these terrorists are tough and resourceful, and that we can expect some bumps in the road. I expect to see a resumption of our trudge toward "The New Order"* once the election is over.
Running a "Reality Check"
The poser here is that there isn't the hue and cry in the media or among Democrats about the "PNAC" that you would expect if my interpretation of its purposes were correct. Consequently, I'm attempting to run a "reality check" on my interpretations of the PNAC. Am I misunderstanding what I'm reading?
Of course, even if I'm misapprehending the PNAC's intent, there would be the question of whether others besides myself might also misinterpret it as a roadmap for global domination. Russia is still estimated to own 18,000 nuclear warheads, and even without Russia's arsenal, there must surely be enough nuclear warheads spread about outside the United States to do grave damage to a country. Russia, combined with China and the European Union, would seem to me to be a conceivable facsimile to a superpower.
Listening to President and Laura Bush' daughters talk today on 'Dr. Phil" about helping with their father's last campaign, I intuit in President Bush a man who's loved by his family, and who loves his family. It's tempting, and, of course, wrong to demonize someone with whom we might tend to disagree. I want to get feedback from others whose knowledge and intentions I can trust before I continue. I'd be ashamed if I were to malign President Bush and the neocons when they don't deserve it (even though what I say will be "little heard nor long-remembered"). I've been trying to get a "reality check" but it takes time. I haven't quite gotten there yet.
To Be Continued