Here DuH2, I've bolded the relevant part of this for you:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuH2";p="
Quote:
|
amazing how every single person that leaves this adminiastration has nothing but bad things to say about it. well, maybe it's not amazing....but it sure is telling.
|
You must be young.
Happens in every single administration... It about as new as wood.
Oh and Neo-Cons.. basically based around the ideals of Ronald Reagan with a dose of Nationalism. You can find their basic philosophy under the mission statement of PNAC.
Quote:
June 3, 1997
American foreign and defense policy is adrift. Conservatives have criticized the incoherent policies of the Clinton Administration. They have also resisted isolationist impulses from within their own ranks. But conservatives have not confidently advanced a strategic vision of America's role in the world. They have not set forth guiding principles for American foreign policy. They have allowed differences over tactics to obscure potential agreement on strategic objectives. And they have not fought for a defense budget that would maintain American security and advance American interests in the new century.
We aim to change this. We aim to make the case and rally support for American global leadership.
As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world's 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 achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?
We are in danger of squandering the opportunity and failing the challenge. We are living off the capital -- both the military investments and the foreign policy achievements -- built up by past administrations. Cuts in foreign affairs and defense spending, inattention to the tools of statecraft, and inconstant leadership are making it increasingly difficult to sustain American influence around the world. And the promise of short-term commercial benefits threatens to override strategic considerations. As a consequence, we are jeopardizing the nation's ability to meet present threats and to deal with potentially greater challenges that lie ahead.
We seem to have forgotten the essential elements of the Reagan Administration's success: 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 or 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 this century should have taught us to embrace the cause of American leadership.
Our aim is to remind Americans of these lessons and to draw their consequences for today. Here are four consequences:
• 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.
Such a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity may not be fashionable today. But it is necessary if the United States is to build on the successes of this past century and to ensure our security and our greatness in the next.
|
http://www.newamericancentury.org/st...principles.htm
Its a philosophy most Americans agree with ..if not declaring themselves part of. Thats why the far left and the "whatevers" liek nonsqtr have such a hard time making it evil...in order to do so they have to lie about what it stands for and basically demean everything related to the USA. |
Transation of the bolded part: does America have the guts to impose its will on the rest of the world?
That's such an anti-conservative position, it's almost laughable.
You've got me all wrong, DuH2. I'm about the farthest thing from a "whatever" guy there ever was.
But, I wouldn't expect you to understand that. My opinion is, you've bought into something you don't understand, and you're unwilling to peek under the covers to see what's really there.
'Cause if you really believe that bolded cr*p, then you're a very dangerous person, not only for the "rest of the world", but for me personally as an upstanding American citizen.
My thought right now is, I'm going to vote you down. I'm going to do everything I can to ensure that BS like this never ever rises to the level of the Presidency again.
Let's face it, Bushie is a failure. Everything he touches turns to doggie poop. The Neo-
Con ideology is a gigantic farce, it's completely bankrupt, both morally and in terms of implementation. It's creating way more problems than it's solving (the count on the latter piece being
zero).
'Nighty 'night, Neo-
Cons. I hope y'all sleep well in your imaginary dream-world, where things like "America is safer today than it was five years ago" keep appearing on your dreamy Faux Noise re-runs.
09-14-2006, 02:04 PM
CIVIL WAR!
Linear Mode
