Daddy - what's a 'neocon'?! Ethnic mafia wars is the USA

[Amy Goodman interviews Andrew Cockburn on DemocracyNow! (http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/03/07/1436239)]

Here is a most revealing exchange which occurred at the end of the interview:

-------
AMY GOODMAN: In 2006, you write that George W. Bush said to his father, "What's a neocon?"

ANDREW COCKBURN: That's right. One of the rare moments of sort of communication between the two. Bush said to -- they were out at Kennebunkport, and Bush Jr. says, “Can I ask you a question? What's a neocon?” And the father says, “Do you want names or a description?” The President says, “I’ll take a description.” He says, “I’ll give it to you in one word: Israel,” which is interesting on all sorts of levels, including the confirmation that our president doesn't really read the newspapers.

AMY GOODMAN: Explain what you mean when you say that. And how do you know that this conversation took place at their vacation home?

ANDREW COCKBURN: Well, I can't really say who told me, but it's someone who was -- I have absolute confidence in both in their -- that they’re telling the truth and also in their position to be aware of this conversation.
-------

I find this exchange most interesting. From my own observations of the power elites in Washington DC (I was very close to them in the 1986-1991 years) I became aware of an highly significant albeit very covert struggle taking place: the old Anglos were being pushed out by Zionist Jews. Here is what I was told, under strict secrecy, by one of the 'old Anglos' in 1990:

"When Ronald Reagan was elected Jews realized that the Democratic Party would not see power for one hell of a long time. So what they did is switch allegiance to the Republican Party. In various think tanks they began by contributing large amounts of money and, pretty soon, they were in the position to impose their own executive directors and research fellows. This is what happened at the Heritage Foundation and this is what is happening here (sorry - I cannot name this institution, VS)"

At that time I did not make too much of this, and I soon left the USA only to return only a decade later. Now I am observing how the Anglos are fighting back using the upcoming attack against Iran as their chance to discredit the 'neocons'. Hence the Mearsheimer, Walt, Scheuer (and pretty much most of the old CIA guard), Carter, Bzrezinski,Buchanan, Kwiatkowski, Scott Ritter, & Co, overtly attacking the 'neocons' and Israel (does anyone believe that all these guys suddenly and miraculously aquiered an anti-imperial conscience?!)

The neocons are not blind to the real nature of the attack. Here is what Jonah Goldberg says about that here:

"The term [neocon] does more damage than good because it allows people to hide their real intent. People who want to denounce the influence of Jews get to use the word 'neocon' when they really mean 'Jewish conservatives' without being held accountable."

My best guess is that is what happened with baby-Bush's election. Papa-Bush was firmly in the 'old Anglo' camp (Baker & Co.) and he tended to despite the pro-Israeli 'neocons' calling them the "crazies in the basement". He had to compose with them because of their power and money, but his real loyalties were always with the Anglo oil lobby. The climax of this takeover came with the presidential election in which Baby-Bush decided to run and the Zionist Jews clerverly pushed the candidacy of Dubya which, on the face of it, appeared to be an Anglo and being Papa's boy the Anglos backed him. But being the semi-litterate failure that he is Baby-Bush became a perfect pawn in the hands of the Zionist lobby and the neocons. After 911 however, the neocons took him under total control and the lame attempt of the Anglo camp (Baker & Hamilton) to get him "back on track" failed. The neocons easily overcame this challange.

So who are these guys? According to the Christian Science monitor, these are the main neocon players:

*Irving Kristol
Widely referred to as the "godfather" of neoconservatism, Mr. Kristol was part of the "New York Intellectuals," a group of critics mainly of Eastern European Jewish descent. In the late 1930s, he studied at City College of New York where he became a Trotskyist. From 1947 to 1952, he was the managing editor of Commentary magazine, later called the "neocon bible.." By the late 1960s, Kristol had shifted from left to right on the political spectrum, due partly to what he considered excesses and anti-Americanism among liberals. Kristol built the intellectual framework of neoconservatism, founding and editing journals such as The Public Interest and The National Interest. Kristol is a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and author of numerous books, including "Neoconservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea." He is the father of Weekly Standard editor and oft-quoted neoconservative William Kristol.

*Norman Podhoretz
Considered one of neoconservatism's founding fathers, Mr. Podhoretz studies, writes, and speaks on social, cultural, and international matters. From 1990 to 1995, he worked as editor-in-chief of Commentary magazine, a neoconservative journal published by the American Jewish Committee. Podhoretz advocated liberal political views earlier in life, but broke ranks in the early 1970s. He became part of the Coalition for a Democratic Majority founded in 1973 by Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson and other intervention-oriented Democrats. Podhoretz has written nine books, including "Breaking Ranks" (1979), in which he argues that Israel's survival is crucial to US military strategy. He is married to like-minded social critic Midge Decter. They helped establish the Committee on the Present Danger in the late 1970s and the Committee for the Free World in the early 1980s. Podhoretz' son, John, is a New York Post columnist.

*Paul Wolfowitz
After serving as deputy secretary of defense for three years, Mr. Wolfowitz, a key architect of the Iraq war, was chosen in March 2005 by President Bush to be president of the World Bank. From 1989 to 1993, Wolfowitz served as under secretary of defense for policy in charge of a 700-person team that had major responsibilies for the reshaping of military strategy and policy at the end of the cold war. In this capacity Wolfowitz co-wrote with Lewis "Scooter" Libby the 1992 draft Defense Planning Guidance, which called for US military dominance over Eurasia and preemptive strikes against countries suspected of developing weapons of mass destruction. After being leaked to the media, the draft proved so shocking that it had to be substantially rewritten. After 9/11, many of the principles in that draft became key points in the 2002 National Security Strategy of the United States, an annual report. During the 1991 Gulf War, Wolfowitz advocated extending the war's aim to include toppling Saddam Hussein's regime.

*Richard Perle
Famously nicknamed the "Prince of Darkness" for his hardline stance on national security issues, Mr. Perle is one of the most high-profile neoconservatives. He resigned in March 2003 as chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board after being criticized for conflicts of interest. From 1981 to 1987 he was assistant secretary of defense for international security policy. Perle is a chief architect of the "creative destruction" agenda to reshape the Middle East, starting with the invasion of Iraq. He outlined parts of this agenda in a key 1996 report for Israel's right-wing Likud Party called "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm." Perle helped establish two think tanks: The Center for Security Policy and The Jewish Institute for National Security. He is also a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, an adviser for the counter-terrorist think tank Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, and a director of the Jerusalem Post.

*Douglas Feith
The defense department announced in January 2005 that Mr. Feith will resign this summer as undersecretary of defense for policy, the Pentagon's No. 3 civilian position, which he has held since being appointed by President Bush in July 2001. Feith also served in the Reagan administration as deputy assistant secretary of defense for negotiations policy. Prior to that, he served as special counsel to Richard Perle. Before his service at the Pentagon, Feith worked as a Middle East specialist for the National Security Council in 1981-82. Feith is well-known for his support of Israel's right-wing Likud Party. In 1997, Feith was honored along with his father Dalck Feith, who was active in a Zionist youth movement in his native Poland, for their "service to Israel and the Jewish people" by pro-Likud Zionist Organization of America at its 100th anniversary banquet. In 1992, he was vice president of the advisory board of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs. Mr. Feith is a former chairman and currently a director of the Center for Security Policy.

*Lewis "Scooter" Libby
Mr. Libby is currently chief of staff and national security advisor for Vice President Dick Cheney. He's served in a wide variety of posts. In the first Bush administration, Mr. Libby served in the Department of Principal Deputy Under Secretary (Strategy and Resources), and, later, as Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Policy. Libby was a founding member of the Project for the New American Century. He joined Paul Wolfowitz, William Kristol, Robert Kagan, and others in writing its 2000 report entitled, "Rebuilding America's Defenses - Strategy, Forces, and Resources for a New Century." Libby co-authored the once-shocking draft of the 'Defense Planning Guidance' with Mr. Wolfowitz for then-Defense Secretary Dick Cheney in 1992. Libby serves on the advisory board of the Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies of the RAND Corporation.

*John Bolton
In February 2005, Mr. Bolton was nominated US ambassador to the UN by President Bush. If confirmed, he would move to this position from the Department of State where he was Under Secretary for Arms Control, the top US non-proliferation official. Prior to this appointment, Bolton was senior vice president of the neoconservative think tank American Enterprise Institute. He also held a variety of positions in both the George H. W. Bush and Ronald Reagan administrations. Bolton has often made claims not fully supported by the intelligence community. In a controversial May 2002 speech entitled, "Beyond the Axis of Evil," Bolton fingered Libya, Syria, and Cuba as "other rogue states intent on acquiring weapons of mass destruction." In July 2003, the CIA and other agencies reportedly objected strongly to claims Bolton made in a draft assessment about the progress Syria has made in its weapons programs.

*Elliott Abrams
In February of 2005 Elliott Abrams was appointed deputy assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser for global democracy strategy. From December 2002 to February 2005, Mr. Abrams served as special assistant to the president and senior director for Near East and North African affairs. Abrams began his political career by taking a job with the Democratic Senator Henry M. "Scoop" Jackson. He held a variety of State Department posts in the Reagan administration. He was a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute from 1990 to the 1996 before becoming president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, which "affirms the political relevance of the great Western ethical imperatives." Abrams also served as chairman of the US Commission on International Religious Freedom. In 1991, Abrams pleaded guilty to withholding information from Congress about the Iran-Contra affair. President George H. W. Bush pardoned him in 1992. In 1980, he married Rachel Decter, daughter of neocon veterans Norman Podhoretz and Midge Decter.

*Robert Kagan
Mr. Kagan writes extensively on US strategy and diplomacy. Kagan and fellow neoconservative William Kristol co-founded the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) in 1997. Kagan signed the famous 1998 PNAC letter sent to President Clinton urging regime change in Iraq. After working as principal speechwriter to Secretary of State George P. Shultz from 1984-1985, he was hired by Elliott Abrams to work as deputy for policy in the State Department's Bureau of Inter-American Affairs. He is a senior associate at the Carnegie endowment for International Peace (CEIP). He is also an international affairs columnist for The Washington Post, and contributing editor at The New Republic and The Weekly Standard. He wrote the bestseller "Of Paradise and Power: America and Europe in the New World Order." Kagan's wife, Victoria Nuland, was chosen by Vice President Dick Cheney as his deputy national security adviser.

*Michael Ledeen
Seen by many as one of the most radical neoconservatives, Mr. Ledeen is said to frequently advise George W. Bush's top adviser Karl Rove on foreign policy matters. He is one of the strongest voices calling for regime change in Iran. In 2001, Ledeen co-founded the Coalition for Democracy in Iran. He served as Secretary of State Alexander Haig's adviser during the Reagan administration. Ledeen is resident scholar in the Freedom Chair at the American Enterprise Institute, where he works closely with Richard Perle. he is also a member of the Jewish Institute of National Security Affairs' advisory board and one of its founding organizers. He was Rome correspondent for the New Republic magazine from 1975-1977, and founding editor of the Washington Quarterly. Ledeen also wrote "The War Against the Terror Masters," which advocates regime change in Iraq, Syria, and Saudi Arabia.

*William Kristol
Son of "godfather" of neoconservatism Irving Kristol, Bill Kristol is currently chairman of the Project for a New American Century, which he co-founded with leading neoconservative writer Robert Kagan. He is also editor of the influential Weekly Standard. Like other neoconservatives Frank Gaffney Jr. and Elliott Abrams, Kristol worked for hawkish Democratic Sen. Henry "Scoop" Jackson. But by 1976, he became a Republican. he served as chief of staff to Education Secretary William Bennett during the Reagan administration and chief of staff to former Vice President Dan Quayle during the George H. W. Bush presidency. Kristol continuously called for Saddam Hussein's ouster since the 1991 Gulf War. With the like-minded Lawrence Kaplan, Kristol co-wrote "The War Over Iraq: Saddam's Tyranny and America's Mission." He is on the board of advisers of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, established as a counterterrorist think tank after 9/11.

*Frank Gaffney Jr.
Mr. Gaffney is the founder, president, and CEO of the influential Washington think tank Center for Security Policy, whose mission is "to promote world peace through American strength." In 1987, President Reagan nominated Gaffney to be assistant secretary of defense for international security policy. he earlier served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear Forces and Arms Control Policy under then-Assistant Secretary Richard Perle. In the late 1970s, Gaffney served as a defense and foreign policy adviser to Sen. Henry "Scoop" Jackson. He is columnist for the Washington Times and a contributor to Defense News and Investor's Business Daily. He is a contributing editor to National Review Online, WolrdNetDaily.com and JewishWorldReview.com. Gaffney is also one of 25 mostly neoconservative co-signers of the Project for a New American Century's Statement of Principles.[/i]

[BTW - one important name is missing from this list: Eliott Cohen]

The mere fact that the CSM would make and publish such list with a all-not-too-subtle references at Israel & Jewish institution is telling of how desperate and determined the old Anglo guard is.

This list of neocons includes several non-Jews such as Bolton or, for that matter, Cheney himself who, while missing on this list, is certainly a major neocon player. This goes to show that equating Jews=neocons is as wrong as equating any Anglo person with what I call here the 'old Anglo' camp. While ethnicity does play an important role here (principally by making any attack on neocons subject to accusations of anti-Semitism and by making any criticism of Israel and the unconditional support of it by the USA as total 'crimethink') it is not the key element. They key thing is two mafia cliques fighting for power and these cliques are composed of people from the same ethnicity just as the Italian or Irish mafias were. Necons do not speak for Jews any more than Joseph Stalin spoke for Georgians or Putin for ethnic Russians. However, there can be little doubt that Stalin did try hard to promote supporters from non-Russian (and non-Jewish I would add) stock while today Putin is promoting Russians over the Eltsin era people (who were often Jews),

It is in fact a very sad but real danger that people disgusted with the neocons will blame 'Jews' for what is happening in the USA today. This is why it is essential to separate these two concepts and keep reminding people of the many Americans Jews who are at the forefront of the struggle against the neocons today (Chomsky, Fingelstein, Neumann, Goodman, etc.) and who have to put up with constant accusations of being 'self-hating Jews'.

Dubya was clearly chosen by the neocons not in spite of, but *because* he is so utterly clueless about pretty much any issue, including the behind-the-scenes power politics in the USA. Speaking of which,

The CIA and the FBI seem to have been bastions of the old Anglo guard, which is why there was this truly huge purge at the CIA over the past years. This is also one of the main sources of leaks to the press about the planned war against Iran. As for the FBI the upcoming trial of the AIPAC officials for espionage goes to show that the FBI still is trying to hurt the Zionist power. Ditto for the Scooter Libby trial which is a non-so-subtle attempt to get at Cheney and his office.

As for the Pentagon, my best guess is that the top brass there is totally neocon coopted, but that the middle-top layer is fighting back, again with leaks about Iran and all the stuff about the (now defunct) Office of Special Plans.

How to deal with Iran is the issue which brought these two camps in an overt confrontation. Simply put, the Anglos have *nothing* to gain form a war with Iran (and everything to loose) while the neocons clearly realize that Dubya's presidency is the last chance to get the USA to fight one more war on Israel's behalf (and deliver a final blow to the old Anglo guard in the process).

So who will prevail?

My guess is that the Anglos are 'out' and have lost power for one heck on a long while. Even if the Republicans loose the Presidency in 2008, the conference in Herzilia and the recent speeches of all the main Democratic Presidential candidates at the AIPAC meeting clearly show that the Democractic Party is even more pro-necon that the Republican one.

Only a 'third party' (really a *true* second one) which would eject *both* the Anglo-Oil and the Neocon-Israeli lobbies from power would be an alternative and this, I sadly have to say, is not something I see happening anytime soon.

The USA is really,really in very bad shape and its foreseeable future look very bleak

0

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Daddy - what's a 'neocon'?!

"neocon" is just as it sounds - the new generation of cons. There are a few Jews in there but they're certainly not leading the pack. In a bizarre perversion of logic, the neocons are driven by the fundamentalist self-professed christian sects and they are a very real and very big threat to democracy. It was no coincidence that the founding fathers worked so hard to minimize the influence of religions on politics. There is truth in Superintendent Chalmers' (The Simpsons) exclamation "There is no room for God within these walls!".

don't confuse the dog and the (non-dog-waggin) tail

Quote:
There are a few Jews in there but they're certainly not leading the pack.

you gotta be kiddin'!

Of the 12 listed by the CSM only John Bolton is not a Jew. Add Eliott Cohen to the list and that makes 12/13 who are Jews. There is one big non-Jewish neocon missing here and that is Cheney so we should adjust that list to 12/14 which is still a whopping 85% (from a Jewish population of about 5-6 millions in a country of 300 millions). You can make your own math here.

Now, were you are very corrent is that there is a huge evangelical & baptist 'Christian Zionist' current in the US politics, but these are not neocons, only Zionists who think that by supporting Israel they will bring about Armageddon (-: not a bad guess I would add :-) and the second coming of Christ. [For more info on these nutcases look here]

However, since these folks also believe that all Jews must convert to their brand of Christianity or be destroyed they can hardly be called sincere friends of Israel.

The fact is that these nutcases (like, for example, Pastor John Hagee) are used by not only neocons, but pretty much most Israeli politicians (plenty of good articles in Ha'aretz about these strange bed-fellows) does not change the reality of fact that these 'dominionist' Christians are just idiotic pawns in the hand of more cynical politicians.

Cheers!

Motto: chown -R linux:GNU world
Distros: Debian, gNewSense

Waging intellectual war.

vees,
If you want to wage a war against jews, you might consider advice from a person who has been there and done that.

“All propaganda has to be popular and has to accommodate itself to the comprehension of the least intelligent of those whom it seeks to reach.”
Adolf Hitler

Jaclo(w)n's doubleplusgoodthinkingbellyfeelanticrimethinkoutrage

Jaclon,

I am sorry to say that you are an incurable idiot who seems unable to discuss anything related to Jews without totally stupid accusations of Judeophobia. As all idiots, you are just parrotting what the dominant propaganda wants to to parrot. Which says plenty of how saturated with thought-inhibiting propaganda the US landscape as become. Although considering the fact that from its very beginnings the history of the USA has been dominated by various forms of militant and ruthless racism I would see why any mention of ethniticiy in politics would trigger knee-jerk reactions from many Americans.

Try to imagine this: none of what is being discussed here would be a cause for outrage or illiterate accusations anywhere else in the world, including Israel. Unbelievable, right?

Jaclo(w)n - you desperatly need a trip abroad! Surely the American dream includes the means to at least ONCE in your life see another continent? (Imagining the entire world from inside Texas is something like trying to image a house from inside a toilet bowl or a good French restaurant while being stuck in a McDonald's).

As for Hitler's advice on propaganda - its seems to have been dutifully followed by the propagandists who have rammed obligatory knee-jerk philosemitism down your mental throat.

Funny that you would prove Hitler right eh?!

Motto: chown -R linux:GNU world
Distros: Debian, gNewSense

You are truly hilarious.

vees,
You are truly hilarious.
I'm trying to help you in your war on jews and you attack me. I guess you only want help from the folks at CounterPunch.
Your written words and postings declare your war with jews.

"As all idiots, you are just parrotting what the dominant propaganda wants to to parrot."
Can you sit at the table? I can.

“The genius of you Americans is that you never make clear-cut stupid moves, only complicated stupid moves which make the rest of us wonder at the possibility that we might be missing something.”
Gamal Abdel Nasser

You are truly hilarious.

"Your written words and postings declare your war with jews"

right. and if I were Jewish, you would tell me that I am self-hating Jew. Which is what all Jews who oppose the Zionist thugs which claim to speak for Jews in the USA and the rest of the world hear on a daily basis from AIPAC & Co.

Jaclo(w)n - you are the real thing, to total idiot. The funniest of all things is that you claim to be a red-blooded American while you cheerlead for those who spy on your country and use it as a tool without any regards for US national interests. You claim to admire Jews, but you defend an evil buntch of hypocrits who do not care in the least about their fellow-Jews, they just scare them and use them to leverage power.

With friends like you...

Pawn or parrot - you are the kind of thought-killing individual which is simply instinctively averse to facts or reason.

You tell us you were offered to join the Klan. Let me tell you something: you should have joined as you would have felt right at home with these folks. Oh but yes, I forget - they really hate Jews. So the Beitar maybe? But no, you are not even Jewish. So a being a Texan is the best you can hope for in life. How sad, but how fittin.

[voice in the background - "daddy, daddy - what's 'a Beitar'?!"]

LOL

Motto: chown -R linux:GNU world
Distros: Debian, gNewSense

You are truly hilarious.

So the KKK are too liberal for jaclo(w)n. Maybe he should get in touch with these guys.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stormfront_(website)

anticapitalista

"Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it."

ok, one last try with you

Jaclon,

For one last time I will assume that you are sincere and that you simply do not understand where I come from. So let me try to explain.

If the Afrikaaner community in the USA had a super powerful lobby, in fact THE most powerful lobby here, AND if they had used that lobby in support of the Apartheid regime AND if they would have pushed as hard as they can to get the USA involved in wars on behalf of their Apartheid regime, AND if they had systematically accused anyone who would denounce anyone opposition their lies as "anti-Afrikaaner" and any Afrikaaner who would oppose that as "self-hating Afrikaaner" AND if they would spy on the USA and if their spies would high-five each other on 911, AND if their colonial regime would have over 400 nukes and a history of constant violence, AND if their colonial regime would be in violation of literally many dozens of UN resolutions AND if they would totally disregard international and even customary law I would also engage in what you would then call an 'war against Afrikaaners'.

You may chose to think of me as a racist and a bigot if that makes your mental universe more secure or if that is the cultural frame of reference you are used to. As for me, I will leave you with words of wisdom from one of those Jews whom you claim to love so much and by whose words I attempt to live my life:

Though shalt not be a victim
Though shalt not be a perpetrator
And above all,
Though shalt not be a bystander

Yehuda Bauer

Motto: chown -R linux:GNU world
Distros: Debian, gNewSense

definition of neocon, who makes makes the list

The definition of "neocon" is important. If it is narrowed to only include those who are putting the interests of Israel ahead of the US, the list would likely come out majority Jewish. But a broader definition would pull in VERY influential people such as Rumsfeld. Without Rumsfeld, would the US have invaded Iraq, for example? He was one of the key players in advocating the invasion and claiming that it would be a cake walk.

I remember many conversations around the dinner table in which the family would get to vote on something (probably fairly trivial). Then after all of the siblings got a chance to vote, my dad's tie breaker would always carry just enough weight to sway the decision one way or the other. So my question is, how many votes do Cheney and Rumsfeld get? Surely more than Libby, for example.

But my main question is, what is the definition of neocon?
Is "Israel" really sufficient, or is that too narrow?

some background on the horigins of the 'neocons'

Quote:
But my main question is, what is the definition of neocon?
Is "Israel" really sufficient, or is that too narrow?

Well, in Papa-Bush's mind its all about 'Israel'. The Christian Science monitor is more thorough.

-------
Neocon 101
Some basic questions answered.
What do neoconservatives believe?

"Neocons" believe that the United States should not be ashamed to use its unrivaled power – forcefully if necessary – to promote its values around the world. Some even speak of the need to cultivate a US empire. Neoconservatives believe modern threats facing the US can no longer be reliably contained and therefore must be prevented, sometimes through preemptive military action.

Most neocons believe that the US has allowed dangers to gather by not spending enough on defense and not confronting threats aggressively enough. One such threat, they contend, was Saddam Hussein and his pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. Since the 1991 Gulf War, neocons relentlessly advocated Mr. Hussein's ouster.

Most neocons share unwavering support for Israel, which they see as crucial to US military sufficiency in a volatile region. They also see Israel as a key outpost of democracy in a region ruled by despots. Believing that authoritarianism and theocracy have allowed anti-Americanism to flourish in the Middle East, neocons advocate the democratic transformation of the region, starting with Iraq. They also believe the US is unnecessarily hampered by multilateral institutions, which they do not trust to effectively neutralize threats to global security.
What are the roots of neoconservative beliefs?

The original neocons were a small group of mostly Jewish liberal intellectuals who, in the 1960s and 70s, grew disenchanted with what they saw as the American left's social excesses and reluctance to spend adequately on defense. Many of these neocons worked in the 1970s for Democratic Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson, a staunch anti-communist. By the 1980s, most neocons had become Republicans, finding in President Ronald Reagan an avenue for their aggressive approach of confronting the Soviet Union with bold rhetoric and steep hikes in military spending. After the Soviet Union's fall, the neocons decried what they saw as American complacency. In the 1990s, they warned of the dangers of reducing both America's defense spending and its role in the world.

Unlike their predecessors, most younger neocons never experienced being left of center. They've always been "Reagan" Republicans.

What is the difference between a neoconservative and a conservative?

Liberals first applied the "neo" prefix to their comrades who broke ranks to become more conservative in the 1960s and 70s. The defectors remained more liberal on some domestic policy issues. But foreign policy stands have always defined neoconservatism. Where other conservatives favored détente and containment of the Soviet Union, neocons pushed direct confrontation, which became their raison d'etre during the 1970s and 80s.

Today, both conservatives and neocons favor a robust US military. But most conservatives express greater reservations about military intervention and so-called nation building. Neocons share no such reluctance. The post 9/11-campaigns against regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq demonstrate that the neocons are not afraid to force regime change and reshape hostile states in the American image. Neocons believe the US must do to whatever it takes to end state-supported terrorism. For most, this means an aggressive push for democracy in the Middle East. Even after 9/11, many other conservatives, particularly in the isolationist wing, view this as an overzealous dream with nightmarish consequences.

How have neoconservatives influenced US foreign policy?

Finding a kindred spirit in President Reagan, neocons greatly influenced US foreign policy in the 1980s.

But in the 1990s, neocon cries failed to spur much action. Outside of Reaganite think tanks and Israel's right-wing Likud Party, their calls for regime change in Iraq were deemed provocative and extremist by the political mainstream. With a few notable exceptions, such as President Bill Clinton's decision to launch isolated strikes at suspected terrorist targets in Afghanistan and Sudan in 1998, their talk of preemptive military action was largely dismissed as overkill.

Despite being muted by a president who called for restraint and humility in foreign affairs, neocons used the 1990s to hone their message and craft their blueprint for American power. Their forward thinking and long-time ties to Republican circles helped many neocons win key posts in the Bush administration.

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 moved much of the Bush administration closer than ever to neoconservative foreign policy. Only days after 9/11, one of the top neoconservative think tanks in Washington, the Project for a New American Century, wrote an open letter to President Bush calling for regime change in Iraq. Before long, Bush, who campaigned in 2000 against nation building and excessive military intervention overseas, also began calling for regime change in Iraq. In a highly significant nod to neocon influence, Bush chose the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) as the venue for a key February 2003 speech in which he declared that a US victory in Iraq "could begin a new stage for Middle Eastern peace." AEI – the de facto headquarters for neconservative policy – had been calling for democratization of the Arab world for more than a decade.

What does a neoconservative dream world look like?

Neocons envision a world in which the United States is the unchallenged superpower, immune to threats. They believe that the US has a responsibility to act as a "benevolent global hegemon." In this capacity, the US would maintain an empire of sorts by helping to create democratic, economically liberal governments in place of "failed states" or oppressive regimes they deem threatening to the US or its interests. In the neocon dream world the entire Middle East would be democratized in the belief that this would eliminate a prime breeding ground for terrorists. This approach, they claim, is not only best for the US; it is best for the world. In their view, the world can only achieve peace through strong US leadership backed with credible force, not weak treaties to be disrespected by tyrants.

Any regime that is outwardly hostile to the US and could pose a threat would be confronted aggressively, not "appeased" or merely contained. The US military would be reconfigured around the world to allow for greater flexibility and quicker deployment to hot spots in the Middle East, as well as Central and Southeast Asia. The US would spend more on defense, particularly for high-tech, precision weaponry that could be used in preemptive strikes. It would work through multilateral institutions such as the United Nations when possible, but must never be constrained from acting in its best interests whenever necessary.
-------
[http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/neocon/neocon101.html]

For a more detailed history of the necons, read these:

http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j061303.html
http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/Chronicles/January2004/0104Raimondo.html
http://www.amconmag.com/2005/2005_10_10/article3.html
http://www.intellectualconservative.com/article2389.html
http://www.peaceaware.com/NeoCon.shtml

These articles are of various levels of quality, but between them you should get the picture.

But keep in mind that in the parlance of many of the 'old guard Anglos' the term 'necon' is, indeed, a euphemism for 'Jews' which they cannot use as the likes of Jaclon will jump all over them with accusations of anti-Semitism. Neocon is ethnically neutral, even if it really refers to folks who are essentially Likudniks or, more accurately, who use the Likudnik ideology to serve their only real purpose: power.

HTH.

VS

Motto: chown -R linux:GNU world
Distros: Debian, gNewSense

And here is a reply from Scott Horton to a similar question

I just saw this on the web. Might interest you:

http://thestressblog.com/2007/03/11/letter-to-the-editor-2/

Motto: chown -R linux:GNU world
Distros: Debian, gNewSense

Syndicate content