Posted on 12/23/2006 10:00:03 AM PST by my_pointy_head_is_sharp
It is revealing and amusing, and would be infuriating if I cared remotely for the opinions of fools, that these analysts appear to believe their own cant; that not only terms such as "neocon" can be redefined to suit the exigencies of the moment but that ther very term "defeat" is similarly amenable to adjustment at whim and validation by sheer dint of repetition. The real world doesn't work like that, thank God, but progressive fantasyland does. I do wish these people would tire of attempting to drag the rest of us into their communal delusions.
"The end of the neocon dream is America'a nightmare. It is also Israel's. Neither of us is more secure. They have created a universal desire of aspiring countries to have the atom weapon - as don't go into the future with America without it. The neocons have created perpetual war, their dreams have come true."
I can't believe you've been allowed to spread your Bircher agit-prop for so long on this forum.
It's disgusting.
.....leads me to borrow the following graphic from this thread regarding the Associated press:
AP Stonewalls, "Jamil Hussein" Still Missing
****************************************************
Yes, which demonstrates how breathtakingly naive they are. Thank goodness these clowns have been descredited. We should have never let the fomer troskyites into the conservative tent.
Yes, that's true. That's one of the reasons I supported him over McCain. Unfortunately, he broke that promise.
Neocons are the followers of a political philosophy (I'm being generous with this label; some would say religion is more descriptive) invented by intelectuals Francis Futayama, Irving Kristol, and Norman Podhoretz in the mid 1970's. Prominent intellectuals today include the sons of Kristol and Podhoretz, William and John. Other prominent neocon public intellectuals would include Charles Krauthammer, Michael Novak, Michael Barone, Paul Gigot, David Brooks, and most on the staff of the American Enterprise Institute. The Weekly Standard would be the political magazine most strongly identified with the neocons, edited by William Kristol.
Prominent neocons in the Bush Administration would invlude Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz. I would say that Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney became neocons, adopting their ideology, soon after 9-11. Prior to that it would be difficult to classify them as such, but today the clearly adhere to the neocon faith.
To read more about the neocon philosophy, as described by a self-described neocon and "godfather" of the movement, see the following link:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/000tzmlw.asp
review
'Opinions coming from a nation so weak it surrendered to Brussels are of no use to a great nation such as the United States of America.
Its high time england shuffled off into much deserved irrelavance, as we fix its meddling ways of the last few hundred years. Iraq anyone ? Remind us who forced that artificial nation on its people, with its borders drawn up by some limp wristed british diplomat ?'
Thanks for confusing the warped views of one journalist with the opinion of the entire British Isles. From now on I shall return the compliment by assuming the NY Times represents the view of every American. Makes life simple letting the MSM lead you round by the nose doesn't it?
Bump for a later read!
I don't really feel the need to respond to your trolling with any actual rebuttals tbh, I'm happy to let your own words speak for themselves.
The fact that you not only consistently not only denigrate the sacrifice of British troops fighting alongside US troops around the world, but also apparently (as per post 29) advocate some kind of military action by the US against the UK speaks more than eloquently of the lucidity of your views.
Fortunately the vast majority of your countrymen in no way agree with you.
hoisted by his own canard... jolly good... and nicely done...
teeman
Actually, he's exactly right. The self-described godfather of the neocons, Irving Kristol, explicitly admits he wants to transform the conservative movement:
Viewed in this way, one can say that the historical task and political purpose of neoconservatism would seem to be this: to convert the Republican party, and American conservatism in general, against their respective wills, into a new kind of conservative politics suitable to governing a modern democracy.
The quote is taken from here:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/000tzmlw.asp
Don't you find it breathtakingly arrogant that these clowns think conservatism is incapable of governing in a modern democracy without them?
Hopefully Kristol and his ilk will go crawl back into their hole now that they have been disgraced in Iraq.
The term "Neo-Con" is just a cover for those who mean Jewish Republican. Very transparent and tired. But not unexpected from the BBC. And further, it's not the "Kristols" who are irrelevant, it's Buchanan, Baker, etc. Baker has now been laughed off the stage.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.