failure and supports israel is evidence that you just might be a
zionist
how's that working for ya?
ever had a zionist minister preside over a dead relative who served in
the middle east?
On Sep 5, 9:30 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 9:09 AM, plainolamerican
> <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > neoconservatives remain a large part of the foreign-policy
> > establishment that will wind up staffing any future Republican
> > administration
> > ---
> > Neoconservatism is better described in general as a complex
> > interlocking professional and family network centered around Jewish
> > publicists and organizers flexibly deployed to recruit the sympathies
> > of both Jews and non-Jews in harnessing the wealth and power of the
> > United States in the service of Israel. As such, neoconservatism
> > should be considered a semicovert branch of the massive and highly
> > effective pro-Israel lobby, which includes organizations like the
> > America Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)—the most powerful
> > lobbying group in Washington—and the Zionist Organization of America
> > (ZOA). Indeed, as discussed below, prominent neoconservatives have
> > been associated with such overtly pro-Israel organizations as the
> > Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), the Washington
> > Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), and ZOA.
>
> > On Sep 4, 6:37 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> > > Grand Old PeaceniksWill austerity turn Republicans away from war?By W.
> > James Antle III | August 31, 2011
> > > Fairly or not, Mitt Romney's approach to national security during the
> > 2008 presidential race can be captured by a single phrase: "Double
> > Guantanamo." When asked about the U.S. prison camp for terror suspects, the
> > eager-to-please former Massachusetts governor's first instinct was to
> > propose super-sizing it like a McDonald's value meal for hungry Republican
> > primary voters.
> > > That was when Romney was trying to compete with John McCain and Rudy
> > Giuliani, both more natural national-security hawks than he. But even as he
> > launched his second campaign in 2010 with the release of his bookNo Apology:
> > The Case for American Greatness, Romney endorsed in its pages what William
> > Kristol and Robert Kagan described in a 1996Foreign Affairsessay as
> > "benevolent global hegemony"the idea that if the United States is not the
> > world's dominant military and ideological power, the void will be filled by
> > countries advancing values that are much worse for peace and human freedom.
> > > So it was surprising when at a June GOP candidates' debate in New
> > Hampshire, Romney said of the war in Afghanistan, "It's time for to us bring
> > our troops home as soon as we possibly can." With this pale imitation of
> > "Come home, America," Romney found himself drawn into a critique by his
> > former rival McCain and other hawks that the Republican Party was becoming
> > too "isolationist."
> > > "There's always been an isolation strain in the Republican Party, that
> > Pat Buchanan wing of our party," McCain lamented, irritated by Republican
> > diffidence over Afghanistan and Libya. "But now it seems to have moved more
> > center stage, so to speak."
> > > McCain's ally, South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, concurred.
> > He worried to theHillthat it "doesn't take long before the [GOP] finds a
> > war-weary nation and exploits it." He fretted about an alliance between Ron
> > Paul on the "far right" and Dennis Kucinich on the "far left," though he was
> > apparently unbothered by a left-right interventionist coalition consisting
> > of himself, McCain, John Kerry, and Hillary Clinton.
> > > Some of this was overblown, even by McCain and Graham's
> > characteristically elastic definition of isolationism. TheWeekly Standard's
> > Stephen Hayes admitted on Fox News that Romney's mild Afghanistan comment
> > "had Republican hawks, policy analysts emailing one another, what does he
> > mean? Is he calling for immediate withdrawal?" But Hayes reassured viewers
> > at home, "I talked to people who are familiar with his thinking. And they
> > said no, look, he misspoke. That's not what he intended to say."
> > > TheWashington Post's Jennifer Rubin, quick to spy "unseriousness" in the
> > form of incipient dovishness upon the part of Republican aspirantslike such
> > notorious McGovernites as Mitch Daniels and Haley Barbourabsolved Romney of
> > any foreign-policy heterodoxy. While Rubin was initially concerned that "the
> > entire GOP field was now hopping on the isolationist bandwagon in some odd
> > attempt to scrounge votes from the Ron Paul contingent," Romney and Tim
> > Pawlenty ultimately passed her "strong foreign policy" test. (As later did
> > Michele Bachmann, who "firmly planted herself at the grown-ups' table" by
> > telling theWeekly Standardwe must "stay the course" in Afghanistan.)
> > > Pawlenty had taken to lecturing the rest of the Republican field about
> > their disturbing "move more towards isolationism," as he toldPolitico.
> > Meanwhile, Romney foreign-policy adviser Mitchell Reiss was quick to tell
> > Rubin that Romney felt the United States was "under-investing" in national
> > defense.
> > > It is nevertheless significant that Romney, his finger ever in search of
> > the primary voter's pulse, has had to defend himself against the charge of
> > isolationism. Much of his double-Gitmo chest-beating last time around was
> > overcompensating for the perception that he wasn't as gung-ho as the other
> > candidates for George W. Bush's foreign policy. At the time, conservative
> > journalist David Freddoso pointed out that Romney "is unique among the
> > serious Republican presidential contenders because he has never said he
> > would do [the Iraq War] all over again, and they all have."
> > > In one debate, Romney twice refused to answer when asked if the Iraq
> > invasion was a mistake. He called the question "an unreasonable
> > hypothetical," a "non-sequitur," and even a "null set," as if it simply did
> > not compute. At another debate he drew McCain's harsh rebuke for saying the
> > surge was "apparently" working. "Governor, the surge is working," McCain
> > snarled. When Romney protested that was what he had just said, McCain shot
> > back, "Not apparently. It's working."
> > > In theNew Republic, Eli Lake has reported that Romney's foreign-policy
> > advisers are divided. Lake described Reisswho ironically was the man
> > dispatched to convince Jennifer Rubin of Romney's hawkishnessas a surge
> > skeptic, while Dan Senor, a former spokesman for the Coalition Provisional
> > Authority in Iraq who later sent a distress signal to Republican hawks about
> > the dovishness of senate candidate Rand Paul, was pro-surge. Reiss and Senor
> > still advise Romney today and are similarly at odds over Afghanistan.
> > > Yet Reiss's doubts about Hamid Karzai's Afghan government are a far cry
> > from mythical isolationism, or even real-world non-interventionism. Other
> > than Ron Paul and fellow libertarian Gary Johnson, Jon Huntsman is the only
> > Republican presidential candidate who has come close to calling for a
> > fundamental reevaluation of American foreign policy. But as Lake notes, "the
> > penny-pinching mood among Republicans" has made GOP leaders "less inclined
> > to sound the kinds of grandiose and expensive notes about foreign policy
> > that were considered par for the course in 2008."
> > > Nowhere was that clearer than in this summer's debt-ceiling battle. In
> > their eagerness to identify spending reductions that would offset an
> > increase in the federal debt limit, congressional Republican leaders were
> > willing to put the Pentagon on the chopping block. House Budget Committee
> > Chairman Paul Ryan had long been a skeptic of trimming the defense budget,
> > preferring to reinvest any savings from eliminating waste or from
> > procurement reform in other military expenditures. But Ryan included former
> > Defense Secretary Robert Gates's requested defense cuts in the official
> > Republican budget for fiscal 2012, reinvesting some of the savings and
> > applying the rest to deficit reduction.
> > > The eventual debt ceiling compromisewhich passed the House with more
> > Republican than Democratic votescaps security spending at $684 billion,
> > about $4.5 billion below the enacted 2011 amount. The law also sets up a
> > joint "super committee" tasked with finding another $1.5 trillion in deficit
> > reduction for the next decade. If the committee flunks its assignment or
> > Congress fails to pass its recommendations, another $600 billion in cuts to
> > defense and other security spending kick in. Romney, Pawlenty, and Bachmann
> > all cited the defense cuts in their opposition to the legislation, with
> > Bachmann saying the armed forces "will be the ones who take the biggest,
> > most severe haircut."
> > > McCain, ever on the watch for isolationism, swallowed hard and supported
> > the deal. So did House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon,
> > despite warning, "Our senior military commanders have been unanimous in
> > their concerns that deeper cuts could break the force." Yet fiscal
> > conservatives like Sen. Tom Coburn were willing to contemplate $1 trillion
> > in defense cuts. Coburn argued that knocking defense spending back to levels
> > seen before the surge in Iraq was hardly isolationism.
> > > Penny-pinching is one thing. Rethinking the projection of American
> > military power is another. Republicans didn't want to pay for the wars
> > launched under President Bush either, but barely a handful voted against
> > waging them. Yet a large number of Republicans opposed President Obama's war
> > in Libya, going so far as to vote for defunding it and invoking the War
> > Powers Resolution to question its legalitythe latter move putting 87 House
> > Republicans on the same page as left-wing Ohio Democrat Dennis Kucinich.
> > > This would have been unthinkable under Bush. TheWall Street
> > Journaleditorialized that it should still be unthinkable now, predictably
> > decrying an "isolationist turn" in the GOP and designating those 87 "the
> > Kucinich Republicans"which included Bachmann and other Tea Party favorites.
>
> ...
>
> read more »
>
> crackpot.jpg
> 9KViewDownload
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
No comments:
Post a Comment