LESSONS UNLEARNED AND UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
“Without reflection, we go blindly on our way, creating more unintended consequences, and failing to achieve anything useful.” ~ Margaret J. Wheatley
Janus, the Roman god who has faces on both sides of his head in order to look forward as well as backward is the symbol for January, and as we are on the threshold of a new year, would it not be proper for us to look to the past for lessons for the future?
Over the course of several decades, I have learned firsthand the hazards of being knowledgeable of history and trying to relay that knowledge to others to avoid the admonishment so eloquently stated by George Santayana that those who fail to learn from history are destined to repeat its mistakes. Such a venture would certainly qualify as an effort in futility. People, especially those on the right of the political spectrum, become most agitated and angry when one draws back the curtain revealing their historical ignorance and unwillingness to learn those historical lessons.
In early 2000, a so-called “conservative think-tank” formulated a plan that has led to continual war, rampant mass immigration and acts of terror all over the globe. The big problem is, the Neocons (read Republicans) who operated and funded this think-tank not only influenced their own political party but made their totally failed plan the hallmark of the current Democrat administration. Not only that but following through with the principles of the Hegelian Dialectic, they have made the majority of Americans believe the way to cure the problem created with their policies is to apply more of what caused the problem in the first place.
A quick perusal of any social media site will show a great many Americans believe the way to stop terrorism and mass immigration is to continue doing what caused it in the first place.
Back in 2003, because of the massive false hype for the invasion of Iraq, I wrote an article on the above-referenced think-tank which is known as the Project For The New American Century. (PNAC) In the title for that article, I claimed PNAC’s plan was the death certificate for our Republic. I stand by my prognostication. I ask you, the reader, to review this article and compare it with where we are today.
(Please note: I have emphasized in bold some things that are most relevant)
Project For The New American Century:
The Death Certificate For Our Republic
By Michael Gaddy (Originally published on 03/03/03)
I, like many other supporters of the Constitution, have been asking since the 2000 election; exactly what drives the foreign policy of the Bush Administration. The answer is revealed in the doctrines of the Policy for the New American Century, (PNAC)
Neil Mackay, in the Scotland Sunday Herald, reveals the master plan now driving this administration.
“A SECRET blueprint for US global domination reveals that President Bush and his cabinet were planning a premeditated attack on Iraq to secure ‘regime change’ even before he took power in January 2001.
The blueprint, uncovered by the Sunday Herald, for the creation of a ‘global Pax Americana’ was drawn up for Dick Cheney (now vice- president), Donald Rumsfeld (defense secretary), Paul Wolfowitz (Rumsfeld’s deputy), George W Bush’s younger brother Jeb and Lewis Libby (Cheney’s chief of staff). The document, entitled Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategies, Forces And Resources For A New Century, was written in September 2000 by the neo-conservative think-tank Project for the New American Century (PNAC).”
This plan can be found here in PDF format.
The plan put forth by PNAC reveals, regardless of whether Saddam Hussein was in power in Iraq, an attack there was preordained. Maybe this can explain why the powers that be and their lap-dog media continue the war beat no matter how many times this administration is caught prevaricating about Iraq.
Inside the document prepared by PNAC is the following: “The United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.”
To facilitate their plans, our military cannot be constrained by our Constitution. The plan calls our military, “the cavalry on the new American frontier.” In other words, the new American frontier is wherever our government says it is. If this is not a game plan of empire, I have never seen one.
The thoughts brought forth in this document should scare the bejeezus out of anyone who calls him or herself an American.
The PNAC plan:
Supports a “blueprint for maintaining global US preeminence, precluding the rise of a great power rival, and shaping the international security order in line with American principles and interests.”
This “American grand strategy” must be advanced for “as far into the future as possible,” the report says. It also calls for the US to “fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theatre wars” as a “core mission.”
1. Refers to key allies such as the UK as “the most effective and efficient means of exercising American global leadership.”
2. Describes peacekeeping missions as “demanding American political leadership rather than that of the United Nations.”
3. Reveals worries in the administration that Europe could rival the USA.
4. Says “even should Saddam pass from the scene” bases in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait will remain permanently — despite domestic opposition in the Gulf regimes to the stationing of US troops — as “Iran may well prove as large a threat to US interests as Iraq has.”
5. Spotlights China for “regime change” saying “it is time to increase the presence of American forces in Southeast Asia”. This, it says, may lead to “American and allied power providing the spur to the process of democratization in China”
6. Calls for the creation of “US Space Forces”, to dominate space, and the total control of cyberspace to prevent “enemies” using the Internet against the US. (How long will it be before those of us who oppose this quest for empire, become the “enemy”?)
7. Hints that, despite threatening war against Iraq for developing weapons of mass destruction, the US may consider developing biological weapons — which the nation has banned — in decades to come. It says: “New methods of attack — electronic, ‘non-lethal’, biological — will be more widely available … combat likely will take place in new dimensions, in space, cyberspace, and perhaps the world of microbes … advanced forms of biological warfare that can ‘target’ specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool.”
8. Pinpoints North Korea, Libya, Syria and Iran as dangerous regimes and says their existence justifies the creation of a “worldwide command-and-control system.”
Our European allies know of this plan. Perhaps that is why the administration’s plan for “regime change” is meeting such opposition there.
Tam Dalyell, father of the House of Commons in the UK, and one of the leading British voices against war with Iraq said: “This is garbage from right-wing think-tanks stuffed with chicken-hawks — men who have never seen the horror of war but are in love with the idea of war.
Men like Cheney, who were draft-dodgers in the Vietnam War. This is a blueprint for US world domination — a new world order of their making. These are the thought processes of fantasist Americans who want to control the world. I am appalled that a British Labour Prime Minister should have got into bed with a crew which has this moral standing.”
Ironically, the policies of PNAC were first brought forth in Papa George’s administration, but it was not well received and the would-be world controllers backed off for the time being. Scott McConnell of the American Conservative magazine says; “In the final year of the first Bush administration, Paul Wolfowitz penned a memo under the aegis of then Secretary of Defense Cheney, calling for the United States to ramp up its defense spending in order to deter any other country from “even aspiring to a larger regional or global role.” China, Russia, Germany, and Japan were to be intimidated from seeking more power in their own regions. After the Wolfowitz draft was leaked to the press, it received widespread ridicule, and the Bush I diplomats rushed to reassure allies that Wolfowitz’s views did not truly reflect American foreign policy.
But, during the 1990s, these did become the views of the neoconservatives, packaged under the slogan “benevolent global hegemony” touted by William Kristol and Robert Kagan. The positions of the neoconservative foreign policy team in exile were fleshed out in a PNAC book, Present Dangers, which called for the U.S. to “shape the international environment to its own advantage” by being “at once a European power, an Asian power, a Middle Eastern power, and of course a Western Hemisphere power” and to “act as if instability in important regions of the world … affect[s] us with almost the same immediacy as if [it] was occurring on our own doorstep.” In practice, this meant assertive risk-taking virtually everywhere. Jonathan Clarke, reviewing the volume in the National Interest, wrote, “If the book’s recommendations were implemented all at once, the U.S. would risk unilaterally fighting a five-front war, while simultaneously urging Israel to abandon the peace process in favor of a new no-holds-barred confrontation with the Palestinians.” This book has become the blueprint for the foreign policy of George W. Bush.”
The most alarming part of this document is the proposals for our military. Those of us who believe that we maintain a military for defense are in for a real shock. When this plan is implemented there will have to be a name change in our government. We will no longer have a department of defense; it will have to be changed to the department of offense.
Does anyone really believe we can accomplish the outlined military goals with an “all volunteer” force? Or will we once again be required to subject our young people to a draft so they can be made indentured servants to a government so as to “fight for freedom?” Don’t forget Secretary of Offense, Donald Rumsfeld, recently praised our “all volunteer’ military as being one where everyone is there by choice, yet days later froze all lengths of service for the U.S. Marines and all forces in Korea until further notice. (stop-loss)
This plan for world domination, written in 2000, called for raising our outlay on military spending to 3.8 percent of our GNP from the then level of 3.5. With the last increase in military spending by this administration, we reached the exact figure of 3.8!
The steps of this plan, which are being followed to the letter by George W. Bush, (and then by Obama for the past 8 years) will lead to the end of what little is left of our Republic and a disaster for us as a nation on the world stage. History is resplendent with the tragedies of nations that sought empire and failed. We will be no different.
All allies will be repulsed in our desire to dominate the world. It is happening already. Our European allies have gone from those with headlines on 9/11 that proclaimed “We are all Americans now,” to disgust with our leaders, our foreign policy and its intended goal of world domination. Sure, we will be able to buy some allies, just as we have Turkey, but we must be aware we have only purchased the support of the government. The people of the world will never support a foreign power that seeks to make everyone victims of its democratization and moral superiority.
When we subdue Iraq, will the oil resources be given to the citizens? I think not. A puppet government will be installed and the oil resources will be channeled to US interests, just as poppy production is being done in Afghanistan. Why else would a supposed “leader” of a country require 24/7 protection by US Special Forces soldiers from his own citizens?
We call what we seek to impose on the world, “democracy.” What majority of citizens in Afghanistan elected Hamid Karzai to be head of the country? Could it be coincidence Karzai was a former Unocal employee? Is it also coincidence the plan for the oil line across Afghanistan is now being implemented? Could the Taliban have become military opponents of the United States simply because they refused this same pipeline deal with Unocal after being wined and dined in Texas back when Dubya was governor in 1997?
What will it take for the majority of citizens in this country to realize we are becoming that which we fought so hard to oppose 50+ years ago? By continuing to implement this policy set forth by Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Perle and Bush, do we not become the same as the Soviet Union whom we fought so hard to defeat, costing us tens of thousands of lives and trillions of dollars? One need only to compare the proposed ideologies of our new neoconservative leaders with those of Leon Trotsky!
Another thing this plan for world domination will bring us here at home is terrorism too intense to be imagined. When we have separated ourselves from the other people of this planet by our quest for domination, by what other means will they be able to retaliate? Does the thought of Rome being invaded by the Barbarians bring forth any visions? If they invade across our Southern Border, they will be assisted by our government’s policies rather than opposed?
What will become of those here in this country who seek to remain loyal to the Constitution? Will we not become just as much an opposing force to those who seek world domination as those in other countries who do not wish to become American subjects?
How much more of our personal resources will be required to accomplish world domination? How many more of our freedoms?
IN RIGHTFUL REBEL LIBERTY
