Help me understand, what's the real strategy behind PNAC?

[Pobeka]

This has really been bothering me for the past couple of days.

Why did the PNAC leave their documents laying around on their website for anyone to grab and read? If your goal is to take parts of the world, by force or other means, you don't warn the enemy first, which is essentially what the documents on the website say.

I'm thinking, the neocons are not stupid. Misguided, selfish, even evil -- yes. But not stupid.

I'm not thinking that what they announced publicly through their documents isn't part of the plan, it's just there must be something more.

Are we about to be blindsided?

[Serenity-NOW]

1. My understanding is that PNAC is about

controlling resources, hence production, hence economies, hence people.

But the thing you don't see is Peak Oil and that is likely the underlying thing that will 'blindside' us even though it's well documented and has been studied since the sixties.

Here - http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/061203_simmons.html is something interesting from Matthew Simmons of the administration who was privy to the Cheney Energy Task Farce and is connected with the CFR.

As you read this consider that oil production is declining.

Matthew Simmons-
"What peaking does mean, in energy terms, is that once you've peaked, further growth in supply, is over. Peaking is generally, also, a relatively quick transition to a relatively serious decline at least on a basin by basin basis. And the issue then, is the world's biggest serious question.

Peaking of oil is also probably then assuming peaking of gas too. So is this issue important, I think the answer is an emphatic yes. Why does this issue evoke such controversy? Well, I think for several reasons, first of all the term "peaking", unfortunately, does suggest a bleak future. It also suggests high future energy prices and neither are pleasant thoughts."

[Pobeka]

3. Yes, this is true. I knew about the controlling resources aspect

But, what's the *short term* strategy to accomplish those goals. My gut says we're about to be manipulated, or are being manipulated and the publishing of the documents on the PNAC website is part of that manipulation.

[Serenity-NOW]

13. The short term strategy?

You're seeing it on the news. Perpetual war for a start, imbue fear to cow the populace of the US in a nationilistic frenzy as they undermine the workings of our beloved country, stifle free speech and so on. That way they can amass wealth quickly and protect themselves from the pain of diminishing resources- and the rest of us.

Ever see Mad Max movies?

These thugs are really trotskyites (troglodytes if you prefer).

[Solomon]

34. It's because Americans are so arrogant that they are ignorant.

No 1. They know that americans DON'T READ.

No 2. They assume everybody else is too stupid to read.

[lastknowngood]

2. to bankrupt the us government

Check out this link
http://www.crisispapers.org/Editorials/PNAC-Primer.htm

[Cleita]

4. They are open about it because idealogues always think

they are divinely appointed to be right. Also, it isn't the PNAC that is ruling the country, but the people associated with them who have very high positions in the White House as well as the fact that Jeb Bush, the Governor of Florida is among the founders. Shrub's name doesn't pop up in their documents yet he is surrounded by their members, whom he has given jobs to in his administration. I would bet that these people, like Perle and Wolfowitz are taking order directly from Dick Cheney, whom I think is the Evil Emperor here. (Think Star Wars.)

[Kazak]

8. Yeah, It's got Cheney written all over it... eom

;)

[DuctapeFatwa]

5. to make rich men richer

[Pobeka]

7. I was thinking about that just one post away from you...

[Pobeka]

6. Perhaps they intended to raise the terrorist anger against the USA?

Given:

1) They make money from wars.
2) The terrorist scenario was well known.

One of them says, "Hey, let's piss off the terrorists and make them strike the U.S.A. !" The rest chime in (with dollars in their eyes) "Hell yeah, great idea".

:shrug:

[pacifictiger]

9. fundamentally the PNAC group comes from

a position that the ruling elite knows whats best for the world more than anybody else. They cannot see much less understand that there is another side of the argument. They think they control everything, and that they're right so what have they got to lose by posting their mission statement. What they do not post is their true motives of retaining world commodity resources and thus political power, military power, and unlimited wealth in perpetuity. Their job right now is to con/deceive the majority of the masses into buying into their way of thinking without too much fuss.

[Stephanie]

10. Because they are quite sure that they are SMARTER than the rest of us

They believe that we won't UNDERSTAND what they've written, so they hide it in plain sight. So far, it's working out pretty well for them.

SELECTIVE INTELLIGENCE
by SEYMOUR M. HERSH
Donald Rumsfeld has his own special sources. Are they reliable?
Issue of 2003-05-12
Posted 2003-05-05
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?030512fa_fact

<snip>

Shulsky’s work has deep theoretical underpinnings. In his academic and think-tank writings, Shulsky, the son of a newspaperman—his father, Sam, wrote a nationally syndicated business column—has long been a critic of the American intelligence community. During the Cold War, his area of expertise was Soviet disinformation techniques. Like Wolfowitz, he was a student of Leo Strauss’s, at the University of Chicago. Both men received their doctorates under Strauss in 1972. Strauss, a refugee from Nazi Germany who arrived in the United States in 1937, was trained in the history of political philosophy, and became one of the foremost conservative émigré scholars. He was widely known for his argument that the works of ancient philosophers contain deliberately concealed esoteric meanings whose truths can be comprehended only by a very few, and would be misunderstood by the masses. The Straussian movement has many adherents in and around the Bush Administration. In addition to Wolfowitz, they include William Kristol, the editor of the Weekly Standard, and Stephen Cambone, the Under-Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, who is particularly close to Rumsfeld. Strauss’s influence on foreign-policy decision-making (he never wrote explicitly about the subject himself) is usually discussed in terms of his tendency to view the world as a place where isolated liberal democracies live in constant danger from hostile elements abroad, and face threats that must be confronted vigorously and with strong leadership.

<snip>

Strauss’s idea of hidden meaning, Shulsky and Schmitt added, “alerts one to the possibility that political life may be closely linked to deception. Indeed, it suggests that deception is the norm in political life, and the hope, to say nothing of the expectation, of establishing a politics that can dispense with it is the exception.”

[Stephanie]

11. Did anyone read this today? Perle wants to know if Dem candidates will go

along with his really super plan to topple all the regimes in the ME.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/21/opinion/21FRUM.html

"If the Democrats are serious about their stated analyses of the terrorist threat, then they need to tell America their plan to destroy the terrorists and change the policies — or, if necessary, the regimes — of the states that support them. In addition, they need to propose a policy toward Saudi Arabia equal to the magnitude of the Saudi problem. Such a policy would be based on this direct challenge: either the Saudis put an end to the direct flow of money from the kingdom to extremist organizations or else the United States will no longer have an interest in the continued tenure of the present regime."

[Cleita]

16. That's scary.

It's even scarier that they are so up front about it.

[Pobeka]

20. Just an aside about chickenhawk Perle.

If he's feeling so cock-sure and sincere about this, he needs to get his butt over to Iraq and serve with the military on the frontlines.

Hell of a lot of nerve telling others to die for his cause. Put up or shut up I say.

On edit: fixed typo

[mike1963]

12. It's sort of a self-assured Divine Manifesto, as it were.

I have no doubt they have any reservations about their perception of the plan as being "for the ultimate good" (for whom and at the expense of what are a bit nebulous), but it does seem to be a true labor of misguided love (again, for whom isn't so clear.)

But surely the army of Crusaders thought similarly. Evil always has an advantage over good because it doesn't care about (or have) virtue.

[Lone_Wolf]

14. Their postion papers don't spell out everything

I've noticed that their position papers are vague. Everything you see is about national defense and securing America's lead in the world. Rightly or wrongly, these are things that many Americans probably support. What you don't see are their underlying motives. For example, according to them, invading Iraq was necessary for American security. What they don't tell you is the U.S. is primarily interested in Iraq's oil and that they wish to install a friendly (or puppet) government that will take orders from Washington.

[Stephanie]

15. Read this article

PNAC Links Archive


http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1036571,00.html

This war on terrorism is bogus
The 9/11 attacks gave the US an ideal pretext to use force to secure its global domination
Michael Meacher
Saturday September 6, 2003
The Guardian

The overriding motivation for this political smokescreen is that the US and the UK are beginning to run out of secure hydrocarbon energy supplies. By 2010 the Muslim world will control as much as 60% of the world's oil production and, even more importantly, 95% of remaining global oil export capacity. As demand is increasing, so supply is decreasing, continually since the 1960s.

This is leading to increasing dependence on foreign oil supplies for both the US and the UK. The US, which in 1990 produced domestically 57% of its total energy demand, is predicted to produce only 39% of its needs by 2010. A DTI minister has admitted that the UK could be facing "severe" gas shortages by 2005. The UK government has confirmed that 70% of our electricity will come from gas by 2020, and 90% of that will be imported. In that context it should be noted that Iraq has 110 trillion cubic feet of gas reserves in addition to its oil.

A report from the commission on America's national interests in July 2000 noted that the most promising new source of world supplies was the Caspian region, and this would relieve US dependence on Saudi Arabia. To diversify supply routes from the Caspian, one pipeline would run westward via Azerbaijan and Georgia to the Turkish port of Ceyhan. Another would extend eastwards through Afghanistan and Pakistan and terminate near the Indian border. This would rescue Enron's beleaguered power plant at Dabhol on India's west coast, in which Enron had sunk $3bn investment and whose economic survival was dependent on access to cheap gas.

<snip>

The conclusion of all this analysis must surely be that the "global war on terrorism" has the hallmarks of a political myth propagated to pave the way for a wholly different agenda - the US goal of world hegemony, built around securing by force command over the oil supplies required to drive the whole project. Is collusion in this myth and junior participation in this project really a proper aspiration for British foreign policy? If there was ever need to justify a more objective British stance, driven by our own independent goals, this whole depressing saga surely provides all the evidence needed for a radical change of course.

[ComerPerro]

17. I think its an attempt to say "see, its all in the open"

You know, to dismiss "conspiracy theories".

They and the dittoheads can say, "how can you say they are hiding things? Its all avalible online"

But, of course, that is bullshit.

[Pobeka]

18. But, why warn your targets ahead of time?

This is what really, really bugs me. If they want to take over the world, they don't have to announce it and let the "enemy" prepare. They can be smug and self righteous in other ways (don't we know that!).

I think there's a motive for leaving those documents in the public eye, and that we don't understand the full extent of the true strategy behind leaving those documents there.

Perhaps I'm getting a little on the :tinfoilhat: side of things, it just doesn't add up.

[Stephanie]

22. What are those targets going to do about it? This policy is MIGHT IS RIGHT

It's the policy of the BULLY, which is why Bush loves it. The goal is US domination of resources. The justification is democratization of the ME and the overthrow of threatening regimes. But after the overthrow, we get to keep the oil. And our companies get to profit from it. Look at the Cheney energy docs with the maps of Iraqi oil fields and lists of "suitors" for Iraqi oil. It all goes together. They certainly don't publicize the OIL aspect of the policy. What they publicize is the philosophical, strategic justifications for what they want to do.

[Pobeka]

23. You and JohnOneillsMemory make the same comment - it's a brochure

of sorts. Like the little flyers that cult groups hand out to help indoctrinate would-be followers?

God knows these wackos need all the support they can get from the general masses to make global domination "legitimate", in our own country at least.

Hmmm...

[JohnOneillsMemory]

19. Machiavelli for corporate control of people,resources, the whole planet.

Yes, they believe that it is as natural as the food chain so they don't hide it.

They believe that is an inevitibility and want other like-minded power brokers to get the big picture and help them bring about US military and economic hegemony over the entire planet forever.

The website is really a sales brochure for investment in Fascism.

They want people like Wesley Clark to work with them. And, until very recently, he has been doing quite a job.

[Stephanie]

25. "hegemony over the entire planet forever"

And if they get military control of space, they will have it.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

21. Global domination, starting with the Middle East...

...and they don't care who knows it because the U. S. can't be stopped when attacking one country at a time.

[Djinn]

24. they couldn't give a shit

if the rest of the world knows what they'er up to. As posted earlier they truly beleive that might is right, you can almost hear them saying "don't like it? well whaddaya gonna do about it"

The vast majority of the world population also knew only too well that the stated reasons for war in Iraq were a crock and that oil/corporate pay-offs and the establishment of "pre-emptive" war were the real reasons - they didn't care that the resulting protests were the largest in history - they don't need to convince everyone just the handful of gullible swinging voters - come to think of it now they know how to steal an election and completely and utterly get away with it they don't even need to do that.

[Pobeka]

26. Afghanistan, Iraq were not well defended countries

We won't achieve the same success with say a Syria. Not that it's impossible, but harder. And there comes a point, when the volunteer army just loses it's steam. It's hard to get poor volunteers to die for some rich guy's oil profits.

[oasis]

27. Kick

[TNOE]

28. Can Somebody PLEASE post the Pearl Harbor bit

Which page, section of the PNAC report - I am told that it doesn't say that. I am unable to get ADOBE to work, so if its ADOBE I can't get it. Thank you!

[Stephanie]

29. New Pearl Harbor

http://www.newamericancentury.org/publicationsreports.htm

"Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century," September 2000. A Report of the Project for the New American Century.

<snip>The United States cannot simply declare a strategic pause while experimenting with new technologies and operational concepts. Nor can it choose to pursue a transformation strategy that would decouple American and allied interests. A transformation strategy that solely pursued capabilities for projecting force from the United States, for example, and sacrificed forward basing and presence, would be at odds with larger American policy goals and would trouble American allies.

Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor. Domestic politics and industrial policy will shape the pace and content of transformation as much as the requirements of current missions. A decision to suspend or terminate aircraft carrier production, as recommended by this report and as justified by the clear direction of military technology, will cause great upheaval. Likewise, systems entering production today - the F-22 fighter, for example - will be in service inventories for decades to come. Wise management of this process will consist in large measure of figuring out the right moments to halt production of current-paradigm weapons and shift to radically new designs. The expense associated with some programs can make them roadblocks to the larger process of transformation - the Joint Strike Fighter program, at a total of approximately $200 billion, seems an unwise investment. Thus, this report advocates a two-stage process of change - transition and transformation - over the coming decades.</snip>

PNAC Links Archive

[Stephanie]

30. Direct link to the PDF

http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

The quote is on page 63 of the PDF, page 51 of the report.

[TNOE]

31. Stephanie you are a doll

thank you!

[ElsewheresDaughter]

39. Stephanie teaches PNAC 101 here at DU....New to DU===Pnac Intro link

thank Prof Stephanie for all her work :yourock:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=301411

[Stephanie]

41. LOL!

PNAC 101

[Stephanie]

42. that's a good one!

Saved from the archives - thanks ElsewheresDaughter!

[Pobeka]

43. Thanks prof Stephanie. Your posts have been very informative!

Thank goodness I have a tabbed browser environment. Let's see, I now have about 12 tabs running on PNAC.

[LeahMira]

32. Did you read "Bush is not ..."

I'm not thinking that what they announced publicly through their documents isn't part of the plan, it's just there must be something more.

There's a wonderful article on the lobby page today that you should read.

The "more" of the PNAC plan is that they think Americans won't believe it means exactly what it says.

[Stephanie]

33. Which article is that? n/t

.

[Pobeka]

35. Bush is not a fuck up. n/t

[Pobeka]

36. You mean, everbody expects a lie, so tell the truth: reverse psychology?

That would be devious, and really hard for people who love to have secret information.

I'm still not convinced. (But I don't need to be convinced, I'm really hoping we can fully vet out this thing, maybe there's nothing here but a :tinfoilhat: , maybe there's something more...)

[justsam]

37. to have all

the money and controll the world

[ElsewheresDaughter]

38. have you ever heard the term "disinformation"?

[Pobeka]

40. Yep, and that adds to my suspicion of these documents! n/t