It sprang from liberal idealists who were concerned during Viet Nam that we were becoming too pacifistic. And that may have been true, but these peoples' ideas morphed into some unrealistic, pie in the sky belief that we could and should " make the world free." But don't confuse the Bush philosophy with neocon theory-Bush is clearly neo-stupid.
2007-04-23 13:53:05
·
answer #1
·
answered by golfer7 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Google PNAC, thats their play book.
The Neocons launched the war in Iraq to begin implementing the Bush Doctrine, their strategy to advance US global domination. Invasion and occupation of Iraq afforded them what they believed would be a "soft target" (obviously someone forgot to account for the challenges of "post war" Iraq) to engage the four principles of their grand blueprint. They exercised preemption by invading a country which they deemed a threat to the United States. Acting in opposition to the United Nations, they attacked Iraq unilaterally. Placing over 100,000 American troops in harm's way, they placed Congress in a moral Catch-22 as they demanded billions of additional dollars to perpetuate the American military's "strength beyond challenge". Despite their constituency's growing opposition to the war, Congress could hardly deny American troops the funding they needed. To complete the "quadrifecta" of principles forming the bedrock of the Bush Doctrine, the Neocons are carrying out their morally despicable invasion and occupation under the guise of "promoting democracy and freedom".
It is critical to note that the chief architects of the Bush Doctrine, which ensures that the poor and working class of America were (and will continue to be) thrust into the inferno of war, found ways to evade conscription into service during previous US imperialistic endeavors. Bush, Cheney, "Scooter" Libby, Karl Rove, and Paul Wolfowitz each sat safely on the sidelines during the Vietnam invasion, which claimed the lives of 58,000 Americans (and an estimated 3 million Vietnamese). Donald Rumsfeld rested comfortably in his dorm room at Princeton while 37,000 Americans died in Korea (with an estimated 2.5 million Koreans). As a vehement opponent of US imperialistic wars, I would laud them for choosing not to participate in those wars were it not for the fact that now that they are ineligible for military service (and enjoy more security than any humans on the planet), they use the poor and working class as disposable components of their military industrial machine to advance US corporate and plutocratic interests. While one could argue that the current military personnel joined voluntarily, it is quite reasonable to conclude that most US soldiers did not sign on to die for the expansion of an imperialistic empire and the further enrichment of America 's elite.
2007-04-23 02:05:44
·
answer #2
·
answered by dstr 6
·
3⤊
2⤋
It's a code word for "anyone not a liberal, and therefore by implication a Nazi".
It means nothing.
2007-04-23 02:06:24
·
answer #3
·
answered by open4one 7
·
1⤊
3⤋