4 posts tagged “neocon”
Victor Davis Hanson is awesome! Hanson explains the reasons as to why the Democrats will be bellicose against Bush, but will do little to actually stop the troop surge.
The bottom line is the hypocritical Dems are going to wait and see which way the fortunes of war turn so they can turn with it. The Dems simply wish to continue to transform America into a socialist morally relative nation. To do so the Dems have to maintain political power. To maintain political power they have to undermine Republican, Neocon and Christian Right successes by twisting the light into darkness.
The Dem alliance with the Mainstream Media (MSM) and fringe Left Wing organizations is all about an American society transformation. The Dems will not talk about this transformation because when Joe Voter hears it the Dems know they will not like it.
Thus the Dem strategy is not to put forth solutions but twist truth or blacken Conservative Republicans. In today’s case it is this mantra: “if Bush said it or thought of it, it must not be good for America.” It is a hate Bush mantra, not solve problems mantra.
(A warm up to Reading Ann Coulter’s Column)
This is one of Ann Coulter’s best columns. Fitzgerald is a tool of the Democratic Party to try and embarrass the Bush Administration in its handling of the war in Iraq. If there can be some court evidence discovered that Saddam Hussein had zero interest in nuke WMD, then the Democrats feel they have the ammunition to nuke Neocon and Christian Right influence and possibly the entire Republican Party.
Patrick Fitzgerald was given a Special Prosecutor’s mandate to hunt down the Neocon that must have released Valerie Plame’s name to the public as an employee for the CIA. As if Plame had any operations that could harm lives of CIA operatives in Africa. Here is the great mystery: Plame is to have sent her husband (an anti-Iraq invasion persona) to to discover if Saddam Hussein was looking to buy Yellow Cake to make nukes. The adventure was so secret that he told everyone who his wife was and she sent him for the CIA.
Of Course it has been proven that anything related to what Wilson says on his adventure has been proven a lie.
And yet since Plame’s name hit the Mainstream Media (MSM), someone had to fry for crossing the CIA. The data I have read is that the CIA has not gotten along with President Bush and very likely has fed the President corrupted or unusable intelligence. I am guessing that the CIA is trying to cover their butts by making a Presidential Administration they widely dislike to look bad.
I surmise this because both Plame and Wilson were hacks of nearly zero importance to the CIA or the Diplomatic Corps. Yes, they both worked their particular professions however they hardly handled life threatening or Security threatening port folios.
Fitzgerald has spent his millions of tax payer’s money on this Leftist hunt of Neocons and has NOT indicted one person for actually leaking to the MSM Plame’s name. This is the case even after every indication is that Richard Armitage initiated the LEAK.
Armitage is not a Neocon, he is just an Arab loving old school Republican that worked in the State Department (or was it Defense – who cares?).
So what is the result of Fitzgerald’s Independent Prosecutor’s investigation? It was to try to catch a Neocon in a lie and prosecute the Neocon for perjury. The Dems really wanted to nail Karl Rove, but they could not dig any dirt that could stick to him. Next was Vice-President Cheney’s Chief of Staff I. Scooter Libby.
The indictment on Libby was for obstruction of Justice by lying or in other words perjury. Fitzgerald’s case is the Special Prosecutor’s accusation versus Libby’s claim of an inexact memory. Memory lapses that are very plausible because of all the duties a Chief of Staff performs, recalling insignificant details are not filed in the human memory banks say like a sitting President having oral sex with a White House intern before remembering her name in an actual perjury case.
When 9/11 occurred, only the Neocons had a plan to address terrorism. The Clinton strategy was immersed in treating Islamofascist terrorists as international criminals rather than enemy combatants determined to alter America’s way of life.
Neocons influenced President Bush to take down Islamofascist regimes to introduce democracy as a way of politically combating the seed bed of terrorism. Ironically there has been more success with this in Afghanistan than in Iraq. I say ironic because Afghanistan's people are steeped in the violent ideology of Wahhabi and Taliban interpretations of Mohammedanism. That populist is the epitome of a fundamentalist Mohammedan.
Iraq though Mohammedan; faced a quarter century of Baathist-Socialist Mohammedanism. Old Saddam Hussein attempted to enforce a degree of secularism into the Mohammedanism of Iraq. The Shi’ites hated him for it. It is in Iraq that America currently faces the greatest challenges concerning the introduction of democracy. Radical Mohammedans have flocked to Iraq to fight American soldiers as if it was a Jihad against an invading Crusader army.
This is unfortunate because America's desire was to build a democratic rule of law under the aegis of a stable government. Iraq is so divided by Radical Mohammedanism from foreign Sunnis and Iran influenced Shi’ites, I am of the opinion that Western Democracy will not take hold as the rule of law in Iraq.
Thus there is the appearance that the Neocon strategy of transformation in the Middle East is a failed strategy. Since it was the Neocon baby, it is the Neocons that are the stigma and scapegoats of a failed nation building strategy.
Something to consider: who had a better or even an alternative plan? Answer: NO ONE!
Neocon strategists have developed another plan. I have not heard a person who identifies himself as a Neocon say the nation building democracy plan is currently a failure. There is a certain amount of political hubris as there is with all political ideologies. Do not think for a minute that Left Wing thinking is devoid of hubris. After all Left Wing utopianism is alive and strong even after the collapse of the Communist Soviet Union as a failed structure for governing people. That also is hubris.
In America the Left Wing plan for the War on Terrorism in Iraq is to cut-n-run enabling the appearance of victory to Islamofascism and radical Mohammedanism. That strategy will only allow the continued growth and eventual domination of the radical reactionary interpretations of Mohammed, the Quran, the Hadiths, the Sunna and Sharia Law and so on. The concept of a moderate Mohammedanism is shrinking daily in the Mohammedan dominated nations and Mohammedan minorities in Western lands. Clearly the cut-n-run strategy is will mess up the global future of Western Civilization.
The Neocons and (smart) Conservatives are calling for a “troop surge” to alter strategy to confront terrorists with a more root out the rodent vermin goal. Then extricate American troops. If democracy latches on in Iraq or Afghanistan, it will be a Mohammedan cultural version. Civil Rights and Liberty as we know will not exist in a Mohammedan democracy; however a better rule of law may develop that goes after radical terrorists in ways that only a Mohammedan can comprehend.
Or despotism may win the day because medieval thought patterns may be too entrenched in Mohammedan culture until a moderate transformation (hopefully) over takes the radical. Then America will back to the old fashioned client States. The Client States will receive American support for existence as long as they quell the radicals in their nation. Both versions may not be amenable to American and Western National Interests.
President Bush has assigned General Patraeus to replace General Abizaid as the Commander land troops in Iraq. He will employ the NEW military strategy and we will see where the chips fall. If the Democratic Congress interferes with Patraeus, the new strategy will certainly fail. Let us think long term and not short term. The short term will result in long term anguish for America and the West. The Short term will embolden current minority Mohammedans to embrace its radical nature, placing the so-called moderate on the shelf of insignificance.
I consider myself more of a neoconservative than a mere conservative, even though neocons have a target pasted to their brains these days. The fact of the matter is I was a Slanted Left kind-of-guy in my youth with a huge belief in the Collective solving the ills of global poverty and human rights.
My slow transference toward the Right was the result of a few things, viz. that the Collective tended to be authoritarian and despotic rather than possessing Liberty, Freedom and Prosperity. I don’t know, I may have a bit of the Collective in my blood, however definitely not the vision of Marx, Lenin and Mao.
If there is ever a valid Collective it will under the auspices of the Liberty, Freedom and Morality that finds a foundation in Christianity.
Saying that, here is a wonderful essay about neocons from James Lewis:
JRH
*********************************
Why Isn't the Whole Left Neoconservative?
By James Lewis
December 21, 2006
American Thinker
Now that neocons are being slow-roasted in effigy all over the world, this may be the right time to ask the question: Why isn't the whole Left neoconservative? Remember that neocons like Norman Podhoretz and Daniel P. Moynihan were former left-wingers who saw the light --- which only seems like common sense, after witnessing Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, the Kims (Dad and Junior), and the whole mass-murdering gang of cutthroats.
After the Soviet Union crashed and no one could possibly ignore the bloody mess the Left kept making over seventy long years. So why didn't all the decent Leftists just read their Milton Friedman and grow up?
That's what the so-called neocons did, and more power to them. I take it as obvious that they were correct and morally decent, in learning to see how wrong they had been. They grew up. My question is: What happened to all the others?
Or to ask it a different way: Why is it that in Britain, of all countries, a BBC4 survey showed that the greatest philosopher of all time is considered to be ... Karl Marx? A hate-filled parasitical scribbler who spent his life in the British Museum, stoking the fires that killed 100 million people in the 20th century? What is wrong with British education that the plain facts do not shout out for themselves?
The fact that the Left never, ever learns gives the lie to all its high-falutin' claims of "idealism," "progressivism," and superior morality. There is one and only one reason the Left isn't blamed for its misdeeds: It still controls the organs of propaganda, following der Übermenschlicher Karl. Thus some 90 percent of our media functionairies are left wingers. A predominant percentage of professors and teachers are, too.
To hold on to their beliefs leftists must shut down any competing ideas, which is precisely what they do. Just take your favorite leftist friends, and tell them some obvious fact they don't want to hear. You can see it working right in front of your eyes: They just won't hear it. Like the stone idols of the Bible, they have eyes, but cannot see; ears, but cannot hear. (Ps. 115) As long as they control the dominant media, our society will keep teetering at the brink of destruction.
All this is relevant today, because the Western world has just realized (again!) that multiculturalism, the latest mass delusion from the elites, comes down to societal suicide. Ooops! In exchange for the Multiculti Cult we get the Twin Towers on 9/11, carnage in London, Madrid, Mumbai, Bali and Baghdad, nightly riots in the banlieus of France, hateful anti-Americanism throughout Europe and America, and yes, the rise of yet another version of Left Fascism, this time marked by loudly voiced race hatred and anti-Semitism. Who could be surprised? Yet nobody blames the snake-oil peddlers for those deadly toxins.
Europe is still suffering from the intellectual monopoly of socialism. "Sophisticated" Europe doesn't see any respectable alternative to the Left, since conservatism is constantly and deliberately confounded with fascism. The American Left tries to ape the Euromyth that any decent and moral person must be a Leftist --- but so far only American professors believe it. Since in the tunnel-vision of the anointed there is no alternative to themselves, if one fairy-tale of Earthly Paradise is seen to crash, another one must instantly take its place. That is why the commissars of Post-Modernism and Multiculturalism suddenly rose to power all over the West in the 1970s and 80s. The faithful had to find a new way to justify their idee fixe.
Such mental fixedness is utterly irrational. A psychiatrist would have to ask whether the people who keep peddling the same toxins over and over again are themselves deeply malevolent and destructive: Whether unconsciously they really want to murder their societies. Why else would they keep pushing toward chaos?
So I ask again: Why isn't everybody on the Left a neocon? Why isn't Hillary? Chomsky? John Kerry? All those Sixties leftovers who never learned --- why are they so intellectually stuck? Have they no decency?
So hurray for the Neocons, say I, and long may they bug the Left.
James Lewis blogs at Dangerous Times.
© American Thinker 2006
Hat tip to Dissecting the Left.
