I'm somewhat new to the politics forum, so I apologize if this has been discussed here before. If so, feel free to close it. To fully understand the context of this war against Iraq, I suggest everybody poke around this site: http://www.newamericancentury.org This is the website of a think-tank founded by Cheney, Rumsfeld, Jeb Bush, and various others, in 1997. You don't have to dig very deep to understand what is going on. I'm using a bit of hyperbole when I say "world domination," but only a bit. Among the more frightening ideas proposed: 1) For the US nuclear weapons program to have a proper deterrent effect in the post-Cold War world, it must be greater than the sum of all the nukes in the world combined. (Just think about that for a second. More nukes than the rest of the world put together...) 2) The US must be able to fight multiple (more than two) major-theater wars at the same time. 3) the US must dominate cyberspace and outerspace militarily Read the "Statement of Principles" to get a bird's eye view of where our administration is coming from. For me, this is scary stuff. I'm curious what others have to say about it, pro and/or con.
Wrong! the US military is tailored to fight two regional wars. An example of a major theatre war is the US military in Europre, circa 1944. We have to be able to fight 2 regional wars. This school of thought believe that we would have to be able to fight in the Persian Gulf, and East Asia at the same time. As for the nukes, i'd bet we almost have more nukes than anyone right now. Besides, the key word here is "deterrent." It is to stop others from agression. What you are implying is a nuclear lead campaign of global domination, which is completely false. On another note, how do we dominate "cyberspace" militarily? Has the yahoo.com gov't approved the prescence of military troops yet? More likely, we want to be able to protect our databases from cyber terrorsim. Gasp! This must mean we want to dominate the planet!
Re: Re: Bush Administration: "Foreign Policy" = World Domination You didn't poke around the site, obviously. The US military has always had the ability to fight two major theater wars. PNAC advocates the ability to fight more than two. Regarding nukes as deterrents: again, you didn't read the site. It advocates having more nukes than everybody combined, not having more nukes than any one nation, for deterrence purposes. If we didn't go around waging war against every government we deem unfriendly, we wouldn't need such a big-stick. Regarding cyberspace: good question. I have no idea how you dominate it militarily. That is clearly an agenda right now, though.
Re: Re: Re: Bush Administration: "Foreign Policy" = World Domination Simply having the ability to fight 2 large theatre wars, does not mean that we are trying to conquer the world.
> Simply having the ability to fight 2 large theatre > wars, does not mean that we are trying to > conquer the world. If you arn't trying to take over the world, such an army would be a big waste. Face it, we are now an empire.
It's not president Bush, get it right its emperor Bush, and the new name fo the U.S. is the Empire of America, get used to it..
More proof, according to this article the U.S. has gotten fed-up with the rest of the world and created it's own United Nations. http://www.theonion.com/onion3911/us_forms_own_un.html I read it on the internet ... it must be true.
Hey is china trying to take over the world? they have more men in their army? if they weren't trying to take over the world, they wouldn't need that huge army.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Bush Administration: "Foreign Policy" = World Domination More than two. Read and think before you post.
> Hey is china trying to take over the world? they > have more men in their army? if they weren't > trying to take over the world, they wouldn't need > that huge army. China depends on large numbers of people because they are a not a rich nation and don't have as many high-tech toys to defend itself with. They have absolutly no capability to project their power over the world. They would be hard pressed to take over Taiwan. There is no comparison.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm If that's not a blueprint for world domination, tell me what it is. And from the this link: http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf "At present the United States faces no global rival. America's grand strategy should aim to preserve and extend this advantageous position as far into the future as possible."
• we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad; Yea that part about promoting democracy sent chills down my spine. This is being taken way out of context here.
Agreed. I am quoting out of context, which is entirely necessary given the forum. You don't have to agree with me that this is a manifesto for imperialism -- just tell me what you think it is. If this isn't a blueprint for the proliferation of American values -- backed by use or threat of force -- what is it? I'd like hear other, more benign explanations. Here's the full context of the snippet you quoted(which truly did send chills down my spine...scary stuff): "• we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future; • we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values; • we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad; • we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles." (emphasis added)
I simply view this as a manifesto in regards the war on terror. We will increase defense spending, and we will fight terror in order to create a "friendlier" world in order to extend our security. Also, the principles by which we operate, i believe, are admirable, and shouldn't be feared.
It states that you either agree with America or you die. US values are best for you... you might not know it, but (good for you) we do. I also believe it states that no-one in the world must be allowed to posess military and economic strength to a degree that it might hinder US domination. Sounds like world domination to me.
Pinky: What are we going to do tomorrow night Brain? Brain: Same thing we do every night Pinky. Try to take over the world! Muwhahahahahahahaha....
I don't think the idea of extending Americas security is a novel one.It doesn't mention incorparating foreign territores for the benefit of the Homeland. You really have no idea what a manifesto of world domination is. Anyone ever heard of Lebensraum?
It's no more a secret. Even the biggest italian newspaper Corriere della Sera has published an article about it. http://www.corriere.it/Primo_Piano/Esteri/2003/03_Marzo/27/century.shtml (italian) pointing out some of the targets these crazy men has determined. 1) get free from the UN ties. 2) Stop european economic and military growth. And they say clearly that Rumsfeld, Cheney and Wolfowitz are part of it. Hi "enemies".