Reality 1, Neo-cons 0

Free Congress Foundation ^ | March 2, 2004 | William S. Lind

[discostu]

Haiti isn't a test of neo-con methods at all. In Haiti we took an ousted dictator and put him back in place, very different than what we're doing in Afghanistan and Iraq.

[FReepaholic]

Neocons? I thought it was Clinton that sent in troops ten years ago.

[anniegetyourgun]

Thank you for your clarity in response. I thought perhaps I had lost my mind....but you brought me back to the truth.

[stands2reason]

Clinton's a neocon?

[Poohbah]

Ah, yes...the wannabe Field Marshal is heard from again.

[Dr. Frank fan]

The author paints Clinton's installation of Aristide as a "neo-con" thing, and sets up the straw man of "the neo-cons' thesis ... that history and culture simply don't matter" to knock down.

What the heck is he talking about? He just wants to bad-mouth "neo-cons", correct?

[RightWhale]

fools, lightweights who can dismiss history and culture because they know nothing of history or culture.

Bet the author has no idea what he wrote here. He probably can't define history properly, nor culture.

[Qwinn]

That has got to be one of the stupidest articles I have ever read in my -life-. I mean, seriously, hands down!

Clinton was a neocon?!

Chalabi bears even a -slight- resemblance to Aristide?!

Haiti bears even a -slight- resemblance to Iraq?!

What a freakin' moron.

Qwinn

[KantianBurke]

How many years will our forces be in that pit? Bush trying for a Western Hemisphere Kosovo?

[RussianConservative]

When US go to Haiti Aristit not dictator but newly elected president...later he make himself dictator...that is where whole issue of history come in. Haiti never have elected transition of power...he who gain power stay in power not give it up unless at bayonet...like Papa Doc....you only make point of articles stronger.

[Ohioan]

Neocons? I thought it was Clinton that sent in troops ten years ago.

Are you suggesting that there is much ideological difference between Clinton and some of the phoney-balooney types whom the writer is referring to under the heading "neo-cons?" If you read the context, you will quickly see that he is not referring to new conservatives. Those to whom he refers represent neither a new movement nor a conservative one.

Clinton's approach to Haiti, using American might to reimpose "Democracy" on the Haitian people, was remakably like that proposed by the Canadian expatriate, out of Yale, David Frum's proposed approach to the Near and Middle East. Frum has advocated sacrificing young Americans to the purpose of imposing "Democracy," on other peoples on the other side of the globe. Before anyone takes Frum's idea seriously--before we put one American at risk for another idiotic pipe dream--we propose sending Frum to Haiti, right off our Southern shore, to demonstrate his theories: David Frum To Haiti Project.

Can we get you on board? Wouldn't you like to see Frum try to reestablish the Clinton legacy?

William Flax

[mrsmith]

Our first great foreign policy success was when America's founding 'neocons' got Louisiana by kicking a dictatorship out of Haiti.

President Adams used our first navy to help the revolutionaries to kick the French out.

President Jefferson allowed the French to have it back.

Poor place, kicked around since the day it was born.

Oh well, thanks to Adams ( and some in Jefferson's administration too to be fair), Napoleon realized they had to give us Louisiana if they wanted to keep Haiti.

[Moby Grape]

You thought Clinton sent troops to Haiti...Hey, don't confuse the Ostrich Foreign Policy Club of deep thinkers at the Free Congress Foundation.

[discostu]

He might have been elected at some point, but he was clearly a dictator by the time he got run out of town, then we put him back.

The article has no point, the comparison between re-installing Aristide 10 years ago and overthrowing Hussein last year is completely disingenuous. Aristide's ouster never had the chance to prove whether or not he'd be a dictator, only thing he got a chance to prove was that he didn't like Tyson chicken; it's been well established that Hussein was a dictator.

[RussianConservative]

Watch how long "democracy" in Iraq live...exactly one election after US leaves and Shietes take power and then extermination of Sunni begin and religious councils gain powers and Kurds say f&*k all this and go seperate.

Ask self this: 22 Arab country, not single one has elected government, not single one has free press, not single one has anything but dictator (president to life, general to life, monarch, iotola, whatever) none has freedom of religion trully open...not even US darling Arafat, who US still give monies to even as slap Israel in face for defending self.

Why? Lack of revolutions? Hardly, many revolutions, in some constant revolution...but why? Hint: CULTURE DOES MATTER...only ONE Arab country ever have all that...Lebanon...and at time it 52% CHRISTIAN...now it is shiete hole with majority Islamo...

Welcome to reality...its nasty wake up.

[kevao]

William S. Lind. Any relation to that rat-boy, Taliban Johnny?

[discostu]

So we shouldn't try? That's not the American way. And in the end it doesn't really matter if we succeed in making democracy work in the Mid-East, what matters is that we succeed in making terorism fail, functioning democracies are purely icing.

[Dr. Frank fan]

Are you suggesting that there is much ideological difference between Clinton and some of the phoney-balooney types whom the writer is referring to under the heading "neo-cons?"

What you're saying is that the author has lumped together (1) Clinton, and (2) some unnamed "phoney-balooney types", who supported the intervention in Haiti ten years ago, and is calling them all "neo-cons". That's probably true, that *is* what the author is doing. The problem is, you can't just grab a terminology like "neo-con", lump anyone you like under it, criticize them, and expect to be making a valid point about "neo-cons".

If you read the context, you will quickly see that he is not referring to new conservatives.

In other words, he's not referring to "neo-con", since that's a key part what the term means. (I'm constantly amazed by the number of people who seem to treat the term "neo-con" as an empty vessel into which they can freely pour all their perceived ideological enemies... there's a definite "I disagree with you, therefore you're a 'neo-con'" movement proliferating, and I just don't understand it.. )

Clinton's approach to Haiti, using American might to reimpose "Democracy" on the Haitian people, was remakably like that proposed by the Canadian expatriate, out of Yale, David Frum's proposed approach to the Near and Middle East.

I'm not sure I agree with that, unless you count the window-dressing of the term "democracy" as a "remarkable" similarity. Also not sure what the biographical information about (let alone your apparent fixation on) Mr. Frum is supposed to have to do with anything.

[steplock]

The clinton/carter cartel installed a communist pig as dictator of haiti and now this same POS is on his way to join his fellow communist dictators in south africa. Now only if clinton/carter/jackson would just follow him to south afreica and we can always hope they learn what a necklace was to the south africans.