March 29, 2005
The Bush Doctrine vs. the 'Arc of Tyranny'
Comments are disabled.
Post is locked.
Willisms has a fascinating post on the danger of what he terms 'the arc of tyranny' poses for the West and how the Bush doctrine is taking on that danger.
Posted by: Rusty at
08:29 AM
| Comments (33)
| Add Comment
Post contains 46 words, total size 1 kb.
1
There's a great book, "The Pentagon's New Map" written by national security strategic planner Thomas P.M. Barnett which basically talks about the same thing. When people say the government plans policy decades in advance, it's these "strategic planners" who are doing the planning and theorizing. According to this book, our policies vis a vis Iraq specifically and the ME generally is about stabilizing these regions of chaos, or "archs of tyranny."
Posted by: Carlos at March 29, 2005 09:30 AM (8e/V4)
2
There was another think tank that wrote on the subject. It was the "Project for the New American Century" with Neocon members like Wolfowitz and Bill Crystal. They said that in order for the American people to get on board with what needed to be done to secure our global strategic interests we would need a "New Pearl Harbor" like event to galvanize the American people. Then came 9-11 a few years later. Coincidence? I don't think so.
Posted by: greg at March 29, 2005 10:12 AM (/+dAV)
3
Is Cuba green on this map?!
Posted by: electronicIDF at March 29, 2005 10:32 AM (MBd2J)
4
where there is freedom theee is prosperity.
tyranny stagnates human creativity and human creativity is the engine of economic growth.
If anarchists and Leftie-do-gooders really wanted to improve the lot of lives of the poor people in the Third World then they would be advocating MORE gloabalism and MORE BUSH DOCTRINE instead of less trade and a huge, international welfare regime.
Posted by: reliapundit at March 29, 2005 10:59 AM (4G2i1)
5
where there is freedom, there is prosperity.
tyranny stagnates human creativity and human creativity is the engine of economic growth.
If anarchists and Leftie-do-gooders really wanted to improve the lot of lives of the poor people in the Third World, then they should advocate MORE gloabalism and MORE BUSH DOCTRINE instead of less trade and a huge, international welfare regime.
Posted by: reliapundit at March 29, 2005 11:00 AM (4G2i1)
6
>>>"If anarchists and Leftie-do-gooders really wanted to improve the lot of lives of the poor people in the Third World..."
stop sentence. That's not what they want. They've proved it in Iraq.
Posted by: Carlos at March 29, 2005 12:18 PM (8e/V4)
7
>>>"Coincidence? I don't think so."
Greg,
probably not coincidence. Think tanks try to avoid that kind of thing. They sit and think, and they put 2 and 2 together, and make educated guesses, just like many analysts predicted the Japanese would attack Pearl Harbor before they actually did. Here's an example:
"The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was a surprise, but many keen observers foresaw an inevitable attack."
http://p-38online.com/alaska.html
PNAC and many others have predicted a catastrophic attack on our soil for years.
Posted by: Carlos at March 29, 2005 12:22 PM (8e/V4)
8
Very good reply Carlos.
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at March 29, 2005 01:00 PM (JQjhA)
9
Carlito,
You're the only one who read my post apparently.
In the months just before and after 9-11, over 200 Israeli spies were caught in the United States and whisked quietly back to Israel. This was reported by Brit Hume and Carl Cameron of Fox News in a 4 part series on Dec. 11-14, 2001 and was then removed from Fox’s website on Dec. 15, 2001. In the report, a senior U.S. intelligence agent was asked if the spy ring was in anyway related to 9-11 and he said, “This information is classified, I cannot speak about it”.
This 4 part series is still available at:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7545.htm
I highly recommend that you listen to these reports, at least listen to part 1 (broadband connection required). TheyÂ’re about 5 minutes long each. Brit Hume and Fox are not anti-semitic and neither am I. Brit Hume called the piece "Explosive!".
Posted by: greg at March 29, 2005 03:00 PM (/+dAV)
10
The PNAC didn't predict a new Pearl Harbor, they wished for it. What was needed for America to dominate much of humanity and the world's resources, it said, was "some catastrophic and catalysing event - like a new Pearl Harbor".
Cui bono?
Posted by: greg at March 29, 2005 03:10 PM (/+dAV)
11
>>>"In the months just before and after 9-11, over 200 Israeli spies were caught in the United States and whisked quietly back to Israel."
Honestly, and?
Posted by: Carlos at March 29, 2005 03:29 PM (8e/V4)
12
>>>"The PNAC didn't predict a new Pearl Harbor, they wished for it."
So some think tank pencil necks mobilized the U.S. government at all levels, from highest to lowest, to pull off the conspiracy, and then the pencil necks killed them all to keep it secret?
The problem with most conspiracies is that they aren't plausible. They never explain just HOW it can be pulled off. I know because I good buddy of mine is huge into conspiracies, including this one, and he never even pauses to consider just how such conspiracies could be pulled off. It never occurs to him. Same here. It would have been impossible to coopt all the necessary intelligence agencies, including the Secret Service, and the airlines and the Air Force, etc., to play along.
It's an irrational belief on your part cobbled together by isolated and unrelated factoids.
Posted by: Carlos at March 29, 2005 03:35 PM (8e/V4)
13
Carlos,
I actually read the site you pointed me to http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7545.htm
Before you comment on Brit Hume's report you should listen to it otherwise you come off as IGNORant. Is the report that threatening to you?
Posted by: Greg at March 29, 2005 03:42 PM (/+dAV)
14
Is Brit Hume irrational? Regarding Israel's possible foreknowledge of 9-11, he is the one that came to the conclusion on the basis of the report, "How could they not have known".
It looks like the "terrorists" were shepherded.
If "explosive" stories like this one were not spiked your buddy and I wouldn't be so suspicious.
Posted by: greg at March 29, 2005 03:56 PM (/+dAV)
15
"By deception, we shall make war".
The motto of the Mossad.
"Let's you and him fight".
Posted by: greg at March 29, 2005 04:16 PM (/+dAV)
16
The Arc of Tyranny is a reified construct.
Posted by: Collin Baber at March 29, 2005 04:34 PM (Hkppj)
17
Carlos,
It was nice chatting with you. I've got to run and will be out of pocket. I can tell you're not too interested in the Brit Hume report.
Do me a favor and pass it on to your good buddy. He'll appreciate it.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7545.htm
Posted by: greg at March 29, 2005 04:49 PM (/+dAV)
18
>>>"Before you comment on Brit Hume's report you should listen to it otherwise you come off as IGNORant."
greg,
I didn't comment on Brit Hume's report. I commented on your Israeli spies statement, and I said and?
Posted by: Carlos at March 29, 2005 04:52 PM (8e/V4)
19
>>>"By deception, we shall make war".
a factoid.
Posted by: Carlos at March 29, 2005 04:54 PM (8e/V4)
20
That arc may need a bump in the middle if Putin gets too uppity.
Posted by: Brian H at March 29, 2005 06:33 PM (8AabM)
21
The real arc of instability leads right through 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
Posted by: Collin Baber at March 29, 2005 07:08 PM (Hkppj)
22
>Is Cuba green on this map?!
But most importantly, why is communist dictatorship China yellow on this map?
Posted by: Francesco Poli at March 30, 2005 05:32 AM (r3ZP6)
23
The Peoples' Republic was branded purple by that mapmaker.
Posted by: Collin Baber at March 30, 2005 05:54 AM (fufbw)
24
"The real arc of instability leads right through 1600 Pennsylvania Ave."
Right, that's why bin Laden and his ilk are so pleased Bush won the '04 election.
Colon Babbler ad infinitum!
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at March 30, 2005 07:11 AM (x+5JB)
25
Francesco bello,
China is clearly purple on the map not yellow (unless of course you're joking as in "yellow china"). Check your geography book.
Posted by: greg at March 30, 2005 08:12 AM (/+dAV)
26
Cuba and Haiti are the only purple in the Western hemisphere.
Posted by: Carlos at March 30, 2005 08:26 AM (8e/V4)
27
In my opinion the Muslims are not the major threat to America.
The major threat is China. A recent CIA report stated that the Chinese economy will surpase that of the USA by the year 2025. They will, along with India, be our largest competitors for oil and other commodities. Should China and Russia team up against the USA, and they have been holding talks, it will be a formidable enemy with a strong likelyhood of a nuclear exchange occuring given a confrontation.
I hate to be a warmonger, but confronting China before they undergo further economic development may be prudent.
Instead, "multinational" corporations with no real allegiance to America are feeding the slumbering Chinese giant.
Posted by: greg at March 30, 2005 10:52 AM (/+dAV)
28
Another benefit in confronting the Chinese is that we could tell them to go screw themselves as far as the American debt that they hold. This would help alleviate the American people's burden of economic slavery that thhey are currently in.
Posted by: greg at March 30, 2005 10:58 AM (/+dAV)
29
Economic slavery? Sounds like words from another loser.
Posted by: greyrooster at March 30, 2005 10:12 PM (JRpVI)
30
Roooster,
Being over taxed and in deep deep debt is economic slavery.
But you just keep slurping on that sweet government pocycle like a good little slave. Hell, go ahead and bend over so they can insert the mark of the devil up your ass while you're at it.
Posted by: greg at March 31, 2005 09:58 AM (/+dAV)
31
First the Jews, now the Chinese.
I don't feel over taxed. You imbecile we have one of the lowest tax rates in the Western world. I do feel that some of my tax dollars are wasted on stupid liberal programs that always achieve the opposite results.
I don't slurp at the Government popsicle. I buy them so losers like you can slurp.
Posted by: greyrooster at March 31, 2005 07:31 PM (CBNGy)
32
Question: If Zimbabwe was still Rhodesia would it be colored green?
Posted by: greyrooster at April 02, 2005 10:28 AM (CBNGy)
33
Greyrooster,
Probably not.
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 02, 2005 10:32 PM (fufbw)
30kb generated in CPU 0.0779, elapsed 0.1882 seconds.
119 queries taking 0.178 seconds, 282 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
119 queries taking 0.178 seconds, 282 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
