It's been discussed before and in depth.
There was a time when the Trilateral Commission was going to lead the US into socialism too. Or was it the Council on Foreign Relations? Maybe it was the Bilderberg Group.... I dunno, I often lose track of who's taking over the world at any given moment.
I myself am an acolyte of.... Dr. Evil.
I think that’s being a bit intellectually dishonest to try and dismiss PNAC as some fringe, uninfluential body when a great many of its members not only hold/held significant foreign policy positions in this administration and have advocated (well documented) before, during and after 9/11 the actual actions that the current administration has undertaken in the Middle East. And I’m not just talking about the big names, but a lot of those folk holding/held deputy positions, etc.
Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Perle, Fief, Condi, etc. have pushed for regime change in Iraq for a long time (well predating 9/11) for reasons that had noting to do with international terrorism/threats. A variety of “I was there” sources (Richard Clarke, for example) show that 9/11 represented a great opportunity to finally get their policy goals achieved, even though Iraq itself wasn’t linked to 9/11. It started on 9/12 with Wolfowitz not wanting to hear anything about this “al Queda” group, just “What’s Iraq’s role?”
So, either Bush agreed with their plan to remake the Middle East to serve our and Israel’s interests though a democratic foothold in Iraq (and resulting domino effect), or he let himself get misled by these advisors -- or it was all just a huge coincidence. A coincidence that PNAC’s long-standing, publicly stated (whitepapers, Congressional testimony, press releases, policy magazine, etc.) policy goals came to pass with no influence from the many PNAC members serving in the current administration. To me, it’s pretty clear that WMD were used as the public, focus-group proven selling point (legally justified, no doubt expected to be found, etc., certainly an issue in a long laundry list of issues for regime change) to achieve the “grand vision” held by these Ivy League, insulated “think tankers” who apparently were not quite as smart or well versed in cultures and human behaviors as they thought they were. Oops.
Nope, PNAC is no Trilateral Commission. How can you even make that comparison give the realities of the actual PNAC members holding/held senior positions in the current administration? At least 17, I belive. Senior, "Lets close the door and figure out what to do next..." positions. My comparison would be a modern example of Robert McNamara. Not only a philosophy on policy, but the actual power, influence and administrative position to promote that policy on the ground.
Just about everything that could be said from the different perspectives, and certainly from my perspective, is covered in this thread:
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=152713&referrerid=5405Probably not much reason to reinvent the wheel here.
Charon
