MrRain422 Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 http://thismodernworld.com/3595 Jonathan Schwarz:The Seven War MemoHey, Congressional Democrats? Now would be a good time to use that subpoena power of yours: AMY GOODMAN: Do you see a replay in what happened in the lead-up to the war with Iraq Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Twisted Acres Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 Definitely scary. Love how we thought we could just sweep through Iraq and move on, like we were playing Risk or something. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
uncle wilco Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 i don't think they planned on being mired in iraq for 4 years. or who knows what else they might have done. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted March 6, 2007 Author Share Posted March 6, 2007 Yeah, who would have guessed that taking over another country would be difficult. Oh yeah. Everybody. But yeah, you're probably right, UW. These plans were made pre-Iraq and they obviously didn't anticipate what would happen there (for some reason). So now they're just jumping right to Iran and skipping all that stuff in the middle I guess. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
uncle wilco Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 Yeah, who would have guessed that taking over another country would be difficult. Oh yeah. Everybody. But yeah, you're probably right, UW. These plans were made pre-Iraq and they obviously didn't anticipate what would happen there (for some reason). So now they're just jumping right to Iran and skipping all that stuff in the middle I guess. seeing bush in action the last 6 years, clark's quote about their original intentions sounds completely within the realm of possibility. they probably already planned the victory parade through the streets of baghdad before the invasion started. i'm sure they had a banner made and everything. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 Just send Jack White. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted March 6, 2007 Author Share Posted March 6, 2007 Jack White is pretty awesome but I don't know if he's really a substitute for invading a country. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted March 6, 2007 Author Share Posted March 6, 2007 Regardless, this here would be a good use of Congressional subpeona power. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 i don't think they planned on being mired in iraq for 4 years. or who knows what else they might have done. This is the thing that blows my mind. The thought that getting bogged down in Iraq and losing 3200+ of our troops (to date), not to mention turning that country into a violent and murderous hellhole, could actually be seen as a net positive because it derailed what the neocons wanted to do, is just fucking terrifying. Edit: I'm not sure I like the way I phrased that. It's not a "net positive" no matter what. But I think you get the idea of what I'm trying to say. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 Jack White is pretty awesome but I don't know if he's really a substitute for invading a country.You won't play along? Kate got it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted March 7, 2007 Author Share Posted March 7, 2007 Sorry, I'm a little slow. Got it now though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mountain bed Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 The fact that there was a plan laid out WAY before Congress had even given thought to authorization speaks volumes about how this Admin. operates. Bush, Cheney, etc. see Congress as a fly buzzing around the ass end of a bull...a minor nuisance that only occasionally has to be dealt with. The "Shadow Government" that has existed the past 6 years is truly terrifying. The worst part being their tracks have been covered so well that there is no way we'll ever uncover all the dirty deeds. I highly recommend the John Dean book "Worse Than Watergate" to all...it begins to pick apart situations such as the one Clark describes. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted March 7, 2007 Author Share Posted March 7, 2007 And this is all as the Afghani invasion is taking place. Awfully quick to be planning all of this, just a few weeks after 9/11. Oh yeah, PNAC. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 Governments make contingency plans for wars all the time. It would be kind of irresponsible for them not to. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
uncle wilco Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 because it derailed what the neocons wanted to do, is just fucking terrifying.what the hell is a neocon anyway? anybody ever define that term? it's not a real conservative, because bush is not and never was one. in fact, he has single-handedly destroyed the republican party and has caused actual conservatives to leave the party in droves muttering profanities and wishing they had a time machine to keep that jackass out of office to begin with. democrats everywhere need to write him a real nice thank you card. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 what the hell is a neocon anyway? anybody ever define that term? it's not a real conservative, because bush is not and never was one. in fact, he has single-handedly destroyed the republican party and has caused actual conservatives to leave the party in droves muttering profanities and wishing they had a time machine to keep that jackass out of office to begin with. democrats everywhere need to write him a real nice thank you card.I would define a neocon as an evil scum-sucking bastard, not to be confused with a Republican. edit: ...or a conservative. Not all (or even very many) Republicans are neocons, despite the fact that most (or all) neocons happen to be Republicans. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted March 7, 2007 Author Share Posted March 7, 2007 what the hell is a neocon anyway? anybody ever define that term? it's not a real conservative, because bush is not and never was one. in fact, he has single-handedly destroyed the republican party and has caused actual conservatives to leave the party in droves muttering profanities and wishing they had a time machine to keep that jackass out of office to begin with. democrats everywhere need to write him a real nice thank you card. I think nowadays most people recognize that conservatism and neoconservatism are not the same thing. There was probably some confusion a few years ago, but most people who pay attention now realize that not all conservatives are neo-conservatives. It may seem obvious in light of recent events, but the main thing that differentiates neoconservatism is the belief that the United States can achieve certain goals militarily. They basically believe that a strong military is the key to continued American hegemony and the spread of democracy worldwide. In other words, exactly what this administration has done. The Statement of Principles and the letters to President Clinton on the PNAC website illustrate this best. It's of note that many neocons were very critical of the way that Bush handled the China spy plane incident in '01. They thought we should have been way less accomodating of China in that instance. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
uncle wilco Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 I would define a neocon as an evil scum-sucking bastard, not to be confused with a Republican. Not all (or even very many) Republicans are neocons, despite the fact that most (or all) neocons happen to be Republicans.well, i'm registered independant who happens to be a conservative so i'm a free agent and right now, obama is looking pretty good. politically, if you aren't fiscally responsible, you aren't a conservative and bush has been writing checks he can't cash since he took office in more ways than one. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
brokendowntele Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 I would add that a neocon also veils itself as a friend to the "average guy", the NASCAR Dad or the Bible Belt citizen, pulling them along to accumulate votes. As a result of this courtship, we have begun to regress as a nation in both social and scientific progress. The neocon also disregards or manipulates the Constitution, knowing that it has the power to avoid any real judicial consequence. It is my hope that if they cannot be eviscerated while living, that the legacy they leave shames their descendants with such an impact that their vast fortunes are spent rebuilding what has been destroyed. As my beloved wife once said as we discussed this same subject, after I said, "I hope they can sleep at night with all the wrong they have brought to our country. Her response, in an icy tone, "I hope they can't." Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Basil II Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 Her response, in an icy tone, "I hope they can't." Your wife exhibits a passionate nature......defiled. we need more like her..... -robert Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mountain bed Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 well, i'm registered independant who happens to be a conservative so i'm a free agent and right now, obama is looking pretty good. politically, if you aren't fiscally responsible, you aren't a conservative and bush has been writing checks he can't cash since he took office in more ways than one.UW, isn't it ironic that the main proponents of fiscal conservatism these days seem to be the ( Blue Dog )Democrats ? After being force-fed the notion for all of my adult life that Dems will spend this country into oblivion...now they're the ones asking for a little fiscal common sense...whoda thunk it ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
uncle wilco Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 UW, isn't it ironic that the main proponents of fiscal conservatism these days seem to be the ( Blue Dog )Democrats ? After being force-fed the notion for all of my adult life that Dems will spend this country into oblivion...now they're the ones asking for a little fiscal common sense...whoda thunk it ?at least someone gets it. i don't care what party at this point, i just want common sense back in the white house. if that's even possible nowdays. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MeDave Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 not to sound like a wiseass, but not only is it true, but they have already done/are doing all of this: seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
viatroy Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 seeing bush in action the last 6 years, clark's quote about their original intentions sounds completely within the realm of possibility. they probably already planned the victory parade through the streets of baghdad before the invasion started. i'm sure they had a banner made and everything. They did, in fact, allocate $20million for the victory celebrations. San Francisco Chronicle: Tucked away in fine print in the military spending bill for this past year was a lump sum of $20 million to pay for a celebration in the nation Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Whitty Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 I think Belize has been lookin' at us kinda funny recently, too... Let's bring down some liberation on British Honduras! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.