PNAC part 1....

[wildbilln864]

an educational video. :hi:

[Bolo Boffin]

1. Hey, Wildbill!

This should be an easy one for you.

The PNAC document "Preserving America's Future" or whatever it was called: it talked about a lot of weapons systems and airplanes and whatnot that it thought needed to be overhauled, junked, or adopted by the Pentagon. Would you mind going through and charting the success rate that the "New Pearl Harbor" had in accomplishing these specifically stated goals in the paper?

The answer will surprise you.

[wildbilln864]

2. Sorry bolo...

If you have a specific point, just spit it out and we'll see. Otherwise your request is irrelevant to my goals and I don't feel it would be useful. Thank you. :hi:

[Bolo Boffin]

5. "your request is irrelevant to my goals and I don't feel it would be useful."

Truer words never came from your keyboard, wildbill.

Your goals are to spread a particular message here, and people who conduct my simple exercise will realize that your particular message here is trash. That certainly wouldn't be useful to you at all.

It's so rare that we agree on something, wildbill, that I think you should get a cookie!

[wildbilln864]

15. my goals are to....

spread the facts about 911 that aren't covered in the msm to any who are unaware that 911 was a very suspicious event and it needs to be thoroughly and independantly investigated, bolo. And to promote said investigation where ever. Why are you always against finding out the truth? :shrug:

ETA: and what particular message do you assume I'm trying to spread here, btw? :popcorn:

[Bolo Boffin]

17. Your main message is rather confused, wildbill.

You promote any and every fantasy about 9/11, no matter how contradictory they are with each other. I've stopped trying to keep track of any cohesive overall message from you, wildbill. I don't think you push the Judy Wood side of the theories, but I honestly don't know. As long as it questions what you perceive to be a received fact about 9/11, it's good enough for a :shrug: from you.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[wildbilln864]

20. I say you're the one confused bolo....

as is clearly exposed in your post. First you say I promote any and every fantasy about 911. I don't even know what every fantasy is. Then you say you don't think I promote Judy Woods' side of the theories. Well which is it?
One statement you made was truthful. That was where you said, you honestly don't know. You don't for sure! :smoke:

[Bolo Boffin]

21. I like how it's my fault I can't make heads or tails of your position.

Tell you what, why don't you make out a clear statement of what you think happened on 9/11?

Then all of this confusion can stop.

[wildbilln864]

23. We're not surprised!

After all, you believe that the towers collapses was like a sledge hammer hitting a lemon pie!

I think the bush/PNAC admin. allowed 911 to happen! I think it's very possible they helped it happen.
I believe we must have a completely independant and thorough investigation no matter the cost or who is implicated.
Is that also confusing you bolo?

[Ghost in the Machine]

3. or another way to look at it...

"The PNAC document "Preserving America's Future" or whatever it was called: it talked about a lot of weapons systems and airplanes and whatnot that it thought needed to be overhauled, junked, or adopted by the Pentagon."

Weapons systems can be used up in their wars. Once they are depleted, the new ones that are "adopted by the Pentagon" start coming in as the Military Industrial Complex rolls on. Same with the airplanes and 'whatnot'(like tanks, humvees, helicopters,...). Do you see where we're going with this? What better way to dispose of it than to use it up? The taxpayers will keep paying for war machine to roll because A.) They can't avoid paying taxes anyways, and B.) The war cheerleaders are spreading Patriotic War Fever all over the country.

"Would you mind going through and charting the success rate that the "New Pearl Harbor" had in accomplishing these specifically stated goals in the paper?"

Would you mind making a list of all equipment lost so far in Iraq & Afghanistan, including helicopters, humvees, tanks, other vehicles, electronics, communications equipment, weapons, ammunition, etc., and then make a list of what they were replaced with?

You *did* read the part where PNAC & the neocons wanted to invade 7 countries in 5 years, didn't you? That would sure as hell deplete or junk a LOT of "weapons systems and airplanes and whatnot", wouldn't it? They just fucked up by assuming Iraq was going to be "a walk in the park"....

[Bolo Boffin]

4. I know about how a war wears out things and they need to be replaced

And there's plenty of Halliburton horror stories we've yet to hear amidst all the ones we have heard.

That's all true. That's not what I'm talking about.

We hear a lot about that specific document -- more precisely, a specific statement in that document, "a new Pearl Harbor." Barring that event, the process of making the military aware of the necessity of transformation was going to be a slow one. Therefore, we are led to believe by our conspiracy-spreading friends that the people behind PNAC brought about this "new Pearl Harbor" in order to fulfill the goals in that paper.

That specific document made very specific recommendations about very specific weapons systems, Ghost. These recommendations can be examined, they can be accessed, and the current progress made toward the very specific recommendations can be determined quite well. Since the people behind PNAC attacked this country in secret to bring these things about, and since most of them were in power when the New Pearl Harbor happened, you would think that very definite progress had been made toward these goals.

If you and I were to assume this, we would be wrong. In fact, I do believe that if anyone actually looked at the progress made toward these goals, they might realize that when PNAC said that only a new Pearl Harbor would accelerate the awareness of necessary transformation, they were even wrong about that.

[wildbilln864]

6. Never ass/u/me bolo. nt

[wildbilln864]

7. They're not through yet. nt

[Ghost in the Machine]

8. Ummm... "making the military aware of the necessity of transformation"??

Where did you get *that* from? It isn't about transforming the military, it's about transforming the Country into a Military State It's about transforming *other countries* through *our* military might. You know, going to war with, and occupying, other Countries (that whole 7 countries in 5 years deal again).

The military isn't 'made aware' of anything, until they're given orders. The military takes orders and carries out missions, without question, from the Commander-in-Chief. They don't pick and choose their missions. Don't you remember Rummy's comment? "You go to war with the military you have, not with the military you *wish* you had". How do they get what they *wish* they had?? Easy... by using up what they *already* have..

The misadministration doesn't ask the top brass if they think we should go to war. They *tell* them "we're going to war with (fill in country here). Tell us what you need."

"making the military aware of the necessity of transformation": :spray: :rofl:

edited: to fix HTML ... D'oh!

[Bolo Boffin]

9. Before you post your little smileys, perhaps you should go read the document.

That's all I'm saying.

[Ghost in the Machine]

10. and perhaps *you* should read it and learn the name of it...

"The PNAC document "Preserving America's Future" or whatever it was called:"

Just sayin'...

Did you mean the 90 page document "Rebuilding Americas Defenses"?

“As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the
world’s most preeminent power. Having led the West to victory in
the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does
the United States have the vision to build upon the achievement of
past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a
new century favorable to American principles and interests?

“ a military that is strong and ready to meet
both present and future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and
purposefully promotes American principles abroad; and national
leadership that accepts the United States’ global responsibilities.

“Of course, the United States must be prudent in how it exercises its
power. But we cannot safely avoid the responsibilities of global
leadership of the costs that are associated with its exercise. America
has a vital role in maintaining peace and security in Europe, Asia,
and the Middle East. If we shirk our responsibilities, we invite
challenges to our fundamental interests. The history of the 20th
century should have taught us that it is important to shape
circumstances before crises emerge, and to meet threats before they
become dire. The history of the past century should have taught us
to embrace the cause of American leadership.”

– From the Project’s founding Statement of Principles
http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What about PNACs letter to Bush on 9-20-2001?

September 20, 2001

The Honorable George W. Bush
President of the United States
Washington, DC

Dear Mr. President,

We write to endorse your admirable commitment to “lead the world to victory” in the war against terrorism. We fully support your call for “a broad and sustained campaign” against the “terrorist organizations and those who harbor and support them.” We agree with Secretary of State Powell that the United States must find and punish the perpetrators of the horrific attack of September 11, and we must, as he said, “go after terrorism wherever we find it in the world” and “get it by its branch and root.” We agree with the Secretary of State that U.S. policy must aim not only at finding the people responsible for this incident, but must also target those “other groups out there that mean us no good” and “that have conducted attacks previously against U.S. personnel, U.S. interests and our allies.”

In order to carry out this “first war of the 21st century” successfully, and in order, as you have said, to do future “generations a favor by coming together and whipping terrorism,” we believe the following steps are necessary parts of a comprehensive strategy.

Osama bin Laden

We agree that a key goal, but by no means the only goal, of the current war on terrorism should be to capture or kill Osama bin Laden, and to destroy his network of associates. To this end, we support the necessary military action in Afghanistan and the provision of substantial financial and military assistance to the anti-Taliban forces in that country.

Iraq

We agree with Secretary of State Powell’s recent statement that Saddam Hussein “is one of the leading terrorists on the face of the Earth….” It may be that the Iraqi government provided assistance in some form to the recent attack on the United States. But even if evidence does not link Iraq directly to the attack, any strategy aiming at the eradication of terrorism and its sponsors must include a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq. Failure to undertake such an effort will constitute an early and perhaps decisive surrender in the war on international terrorism. The United States must therefore provide full military and financial support to the Iraqi opposition. American military force should be used to provide a “safe zone” in Iraq from which the opposition can operate. And American forces must be prepared to back up our commitment to the Iraqi opposition by all necessary means.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/Bushletter.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Which document are you referring to? You know how I am with youtube, so I didn't watch wildbill's video link...

[Bolo Boffin]

12. Which is the one that says "new Pearl Harbor"?

That would be the one I'm talking about.

[wildbilln864]

14. So you're afraid to watch my videos...

poor bolo. :rofl:

[wildbilln864]

11. read about em here....

link

[HamdenRice]

13. Mission Attempted!

The amazing part is that as they failed in each area outlined in the document, they just kept on pushing forward. They have to be the most ideologically driven group of criminals ever to attempt to run our government.

They didn't anticipate the military's pushback against so-called "transformation." They didn't anticipate the way resistance in Iraq would lead to quaqmire and near defeat. And yet they seem still to be intent on at least bombing Iran.

There is a thread today in GD that spells out one of their "successes" however: Total military spending is now estimated to be over $1 trillion from the $350 billion level of the pre-war years.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3210704

Mission Attempted!

[quicknthedead]

16. some observations

Thanks WildBill.

Nice little informative video


some observations

neo cons want world domination

us hegemony

they lied in order to invade iraq

ergo they are war criminals

hundreds of thousands of innocents have died because of their lies/criminality
ergo they have no respect for human life

those who perpetrated 9/11, one of the greatest crimes in history, have no respect for human life

the fbi has no hard evidence on bin laden being involved in 9/11 (that little ol white paper never did happen, now did it)

finally, one of the greatest crimes in history never has had a criminal investigation.......

........cui bono?

again, nice video, wildbill
thanks

[jberryhill]

19. "neo cons want world domination"

A project at which they are failing miserably.

[Ghost in the Machine]

22. "A project at which they are failing miserably."

Yep, but still they push on. It's not "failure" until they're soundly defeated. As it stands now they're still 'in the process', so in their minds they haven't 'failed', they're still 'attempting'. For minds like this, failure isn't an option no matter *what* the toll is, human or otherwise. It really isn't even a matter of "the end justifying the means" with minds like these. It's all about "I WON!" They're in a 'Last Man Standing' match....

[jberryhill]

24. They're not "pushing on"

....they are just playing out the clock until Jan. 20, 2009 at this point.

[Ghost in the Machine]

25. Well, they certainly aren't retreating, are they? They're even sabre rattling with Iran, right?

Time may not be on their side at the moment, but they have no intentions of stopping or pulling out. If they were playing the clock, they'd be backing off some, like going down to one knee on the snap. This misadministration is using the clock in a full court press to run up the score.

I haven't heard any Presidential Candidate promise to end this war, either..

[quicknthedead]

26. Ron Paul said he'd get us out of Iraq...

But the PTB/Establishment and the MSM did not want to hear that, no sirree, Bub.

<Truth-Light>

Recent quote made by Senator I.M. Wellthee:
"My fellow Americans, there's BIG$$$ to be made in War Profits!"

</Truth-Light>

[jberryhill]

28. I'm sure you can find a forum somewhere to promote Republican candidates /nt

[jberryhill]

27. So Obama is now a member of PNAC?

Is that it?

[Ghost in the Machine]

29. Very disappointing. I expect that kind of answer from trolls, not a respected member

such as yourself.

Since you brought it up though, what are Obama's plans for ending this illegal, immoral invasion & occupation of a sovereign nation that did nothing to us?

[jberryhill]

30. Well, you know us trolls, we have a tendency to support Democrats

...which I realize cuts against the grain of this Ron Paul web site we have here.

Anyhow, you never heard a Democratic candidate calling for an end to the war?

How hard is this to figure out, really...

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/

"As a candidate for the United States Senate in 2002, Obama put his political career on the line to oppose going to war in Iraq, and warned of “an occupation of undetermined length, with undetermined costs, and undetermined consequences.” Obama has been a consistent, principled and vocal opponent of the war in Iraq.

* In 2003 and 2004, he spoke out against the war on the campaign trail;
* In 2005, he called for a phased withdrawal of our troops;
* In 2006, he called for a timetable to remove our troops, a political solution within Iraq, and aggressive diplomacy with all of Iraq’s neighbors;
* In January 2007, he introduced legislation in the Senate to remove all of our combat troops from Iraq by March 2008.
* In September 2007, he laid out a detailed plan for how he will end the war as president.


Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months. Obama will make it clear that we will not build any permanent bases in Iraq. He will keep some troops in Iraq to protect our embassy and diplomats; if al Qaeda attempts to build a base within Iraq, he will keep troops in Iraq or elsewhere in the region to carry out targeted strikes on al Qaeda."

But you "never heard" any of that. Does he have to come to your door?

[Ghost in the Machine]

31. Damned trolls! LOL!

Thanks for the info & link... quite honestly, I haven't paid much attention to any of the candidates since mine dropped out. I voted for Edwards in the primary, so I don't have a dog in this fight between Obama & Clinton. Whoever the Democratic nominee is in November gets my vote now. Period.

[jberryhill]

32. I was originally for Biden

Being from Delaware and all.

We'll find out who the "trolls" are, once a Democrat wins, or even once we get a nominee. The DUngeon will take on quite a different character at those points.

[Ghost in the Machine]

33. Heh! I made a troll avatar from one of Fred Thompson's pictures

I got bored and was playing with my paintshop pro software...

I like Joe Biden, too. I could really dig a Biden/Edwards or Edwards/Biden ticket....

[wildbilln864]

34. cool! nt

:hi:

[wildbilln864]

35. Thanks for saying so quickn....

Good to see you still around. :hi: