Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Ukraine: The Truth [View all]Octafish
(55,745 posts)5. Keeps getting updated and repackaged, ready for October roll-outs.
Take PNAC, please.
Neocons and Liberals Together, Again
The neoconservative Project for the New American Century (PNAC) has signaled its intention to continue shaping the government's national security...
Tom Barry, last updated: February 02, 2005
The neoconservative Project for the New American Century (PNAC) has signaled its intention to continue shaping the government's national security strategy with a new public letter stating that the "U.S. military is too small for the responsibilities we are asking it to assume." Rather than reining in the imperial scope of U.S. national security strategy as set forth by the first Bush administration, PNAC and the letter's signatories call for increasing the size of America's global fighting machine.
SNIP...
Liberal Hawks Fly with the Neocons
The recent PNAC letter to Congress was not the first time that PNAC or its associated front groups, such as the Coalition for the Liberation of Iraq, have included hawkish Democrats.
Two PNAC letters in March 2003 played to those Democrats who believed that the invasion was justified at least as much by humanitarian concerns as it was by the purported presence of weapons of mass destruction. PNAC and the neocon camp had managed to translate their military agenda of preemptive and preventive strikes into national security policy. With the invasion underway, they sought to preempt those hardliners and military officials who opted for a quick exit strategy in Iraq. In their March 19th letter, PNAC stated that Washington should plan to stay in Iraq for the long haul: "Everyone-those who have joined the coalition, those who have stood aside, those who opposed military action, and, most of all, the Iraqi people and their neighbors-must understand that we are committed to the rebuilding of Iraq and will provide the necessary resources and will remain for as long as it takes."
Along with such neocon stalwarts as Robert Kagan, Bruce Jackson, Joshua Muravchik, James Woolsey, and Eliot Cohen, a half-dozen Democrats were among the 23 individuals who signed PNAC's first letter on post-war Iraq. Among the Democrats were Ivo Daalder of the Brookings Institution and a member of Clinton's National Security Council staff; Martin Indyk, Clinton's ambassador to Israel; Will Marshall of the Progressive Policy Institute and Democratic Leadership Council; Dennis Ross, Clinton's top adviser on the Israel-Palestinian negotiations; and James Steinberg, Clinton's deputy national security adviser and head of foreign policy studies at Brookings. A second post-Iraq war letter by PNAC on March 28 called for broader international support for reconstruction, including the involvement of NATO, and brought together the same Democrats with the prominent addition of another Brookings' foreign policy scholar, Michael O'Hanlon.
CONTINUED...
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/articles/display/Neocons_and_Liberals_Together_Again
That's from Rightweb. They're full of facts, for those who take the time to read and learn. One name to pay attention to is Victoria Nuland, our woman in Ukraine, who is married to PNAC co-founder Robert Kagan
Robert Kagan's brother is Frederick Kagan
Frederick Kagan's spouse is Kimberly Kagan
Brilliant people, big ideas, etc. The thing is, that's a lot of PNAC. And the PNAC approach to international relations means more wars without end for profits without cease, among other things detrimental to democracy, peace and justice.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
64 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Hillary Clinton Calls For Greater Military Assistance And Financial Aid For Ukraine
Octafish
Apr 2015
#47
The article reveals nothing except the childish, escapist fantasies of the author.
DetlefK
Apr 2015
#6
No need for ad hominem. Gary Leupp is a professor of history. The guy tells the truth as he sees it.
Octafish
Apr 2015
#8
Oi. That's my point: It seems he intentionally left information out of the discussion.
DetlefK
Apr 2015
#12
Please explain then why Ukrainian fascists killed upwards of 250,000 Ukrainian Jews during
KingCharlemagne
Apr 2015
#16
Even that is giving it too much credit. It's the latest apologia for Putin's war of aggression.
stevenleser
Apr 2015
#21
I'm her even more evil identical triplett. The other two are amateurs when it comes to villainy.
DetlefK
Apr 2015
#27
Does it matter if NATO's expansion is aimed at invading/weakening Russia or is a decision by small
pampango
Apr 2015
#7
STill waiting for the commie hordes to burst into Ukraine like i was told was imminent 6 mos ago.
KG
Apr 2015
#20
NATO is a tool of Empire. If you are in the 'Ownership' class, you got a piece of it.
Octafish
Apr 2015
#41
over 700 military bases all over the world-spends more on its war budget than the rest of the world
EX500rider
Apr 2015
#60
And a lot of that money was spent on humanitarian type aid like vaccinations. It's been in the
okaawhatever
Apr 2015
#31
Except he insinuates that the $5 billion was invested explicitly for regime change in 2014.
Tommy_Carcetti
Apr 2015
#48
Just because that's what you want to argue doesn't make it the point of Leupp's essay.
Octafish
Apr 2015
#50
'I continue to be stunned at how people who oppose war by the US work so hard to justify Russian war
Octafish
Apr 2015
#43
How nice of you to imply I'm pro-Russia when it comes to warmongering. Thank you, no.
Octafish
Apr 2015
#62
"Don't worry if you can't think how it applies to the present situation in Ukraine:"
NuclearDem
Apr 2015
#63