Neo-cons have hijacked US foreign policy

Boston Globe | 9/10/2003 | Robert Kuttner,

[ex-snook]

Seems Bush got neo-conned into world military domination. After our success in Afghan, our 'power' performance in Iraq has not been rewarded. Peace is now more remote than ever, either in the Arab world, Israel-Palestine, or the Orient.

Time to declare victory, come home to fortress America, forget world military domination, turn rehab over to the UN, and let Israel loose to do whatever, and let the world solve their own ageless problems.

[zacyak]

Once the American people find out how much it's going to cost over there in Iraq, I seriously doubt that they'll be eager to enter into another military adventure anytime soon.

[quidnunc]

Robert Kuttner is top honcho at the mad-dog-leftist The American Prospect.

It is most instructive to see a self-styled conservative like you making common cause with the loony left.

Perhaps the paleo-cons really aren't quite so conservative after all.

[tallhappy]

CFR are definitely not neo-cons.

Nor are the foreign policy elite and Foggy head Foggy bottom dwellers.

[zacyak]

You think spending several hundred billion on re-building Iraq is good conservative policy? The isolationism of the paleo-cons is looking better all the time.

[rdb3]

It is most instructive to see a self-styled conservative like you making common cause with the loony left.

Are you shocked by their common cause? I'm not.

Perhaps the paleo-cons really aren't quite so conservative after all.

They're not. When did they start? 1986 or so, right?

[Theyknow]

Yep, it was a big neo-con job. When the war started I didn’t believe it, I had read about it but thought it was an exaggeration by the antiwar whackos. Even as recently as two weeks ago I didn’t buy it, but now it is starting to be the only answer that makes sense.

Not everything in the article is true, but the fact that the neo-cons control(ed) policy looks like it may be the case. IMO they thought Iran would be just like Kuwait, and if it had been everything would be fine still and questions about the reasons for war wouldn’t be asked today. But it wasn’t, and now it is time to reflect.

[A. Pole]

The neo-cons also contended that "the road to Jerusalem goes through Baghdad." In other words, get rid of Saddam and the Mideast balance of power would shift; Israel's enemies would be softened up for a peace settlement on Israel's terms.

Neo-cons see Damascus and Teheran as the next stops on their "road map". But they underestimate the human and financial resources needed for such trip.

[quidnunc]

zacyak wrote: You think spending several hundred billion on re-building Iraq is good conservative policy?

And how much do you reckon 9/11 cost us?

How many more 9/11s are you willing to have the US absorb?

Stop talking nonsense.

[July 4th]

I think for the next 10 years, it makes sense to merge the State department into the DoD, and rename it the Department of War. At least it will keep State from actively undermining our missions abroad. As one writer aptly put it, "Over the past 30 years, State ceased to be a representative for Americans abroad, but rather the representative for foreign governments in the US."

[OkiMusashi]

Let's look at this whole situation in about 6 more months. The Neo-Cons may have this one pegged. I'll withhold judgement until I get a look at the Iraqi Constitution after the Iraqi people ratify it.

Then we can decide on whether to hang Rummy or build him a monument.

[zacyak]

Whats Iraq got to do with 911?

[Theyknow]

When Bush ran for office did you support him because you believed he would lead the military into action all over the world? Or did you support him because you thought he would avoid meddling in world affairs? Did you think he would ask the nation to create an enormous deficit so we could “rebuild” foreign nations?

Please don’t say we are there because of 9/11 or because Saddam gassed his own people. Saddam used the gas on his own people in the 1980s and we rewarded him for that with an extra billion in agricultural assistance. Whatever evidence there is linking Saddam to 9/11 is weak at very best and unsupported at very least.

It is time to start talking about what neoconservativism is and whether this new foreign policy initiative is one which we can support. Pretending that it isn’t an issue is foolishness plain and simple.

[Verginius Rufus]

Which administration was James Rubin a part of, again?

France was never going to approve of using force to remove Saddam Hussein from power. Rubin evidently thinks Chirac was acting in good faith, rather than to protect France's $50 billion worth of contracts with the Saddam regime, and to do whatever he could to undercut the American role in world affairs.

The same people who attack Bush for acting too quickly in March would be attacking him if he had waited till the fall, because now the Presidential election campaign is starting...they would be claiming he was launching the war to ensure his re-election.

[LenS]

It's better to close the State Dept. down completely and to fire everyone of it's staff. We won't need to worry about them, the Saudis will hire them as consultants.

The rest of the posts on this board come from people who clearly learned nothing from 9-11. The Islamofascists are coming for us. As soon as they can, they will kill us all. Better to attack and destroy them first. But then, it's clear that paleocon's would rather see America destroyed if they don't get their way.

[.cnI redruM]

OMG, the Americans are actually shooting back! The horror of it all! Jimmy Carter, Tom Daschele and all the 'real conservatives' spamming FR are deeply saddened!

[Theyknow]

“The same people who attack Bush for acting too quickly in March would be attacking him if he had waited till the fall, because now the Presidential election campaign is starting...they would be claiming he was launching the war to ensure his re-election."

Why do you think we are in Iraq? IMO you are absolutely correct about France, but that isn’t the issue, the issue is why we went to war in the first place and being honest about the neoconservative movement. There is a real division here, a difference in philosophy. Let’s talk about it.

Are there any neocons out there?

[OkiMusashi]

James P. Rubin was nominated by President Clinton to be Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs on May 23, 1997 and confirmed by the full Senate on July 31, 1997. On August 4, 1997, Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright swore Mr. Rubin in as Assistant Secretary and appointed him to be the Department's Chief Spokesman.

In this capacity, Mr. Rubin directed the development and execution of Department-wide public information policies and oversees public outreach efforts to the American people on foreign policy issues. He served as principal adviser to the Secretary, other officials of the Department, and other Government agencies on all aspects of the Department's responsibilities in the conduct of public affairs. He exercised primary authority in the Department for the coordination and release of proposed public statements; and he maintained liaison with the Executive Office of the President and other government agencies.

Prior to his Presidential appointment as Assistant Secretary, Mr. Rubin served as a Senior Adviser to the Secretary of State. From August to November 1996, Mr. Rubin was Director of Foreign Policy and Spokesman for the Clinton/Gore '96 Campaign. From May 1993 until his arrival at the Clinton/Gore Campaign, Mr. Rubin served as Senior Adviser and Spokesman for U.S. Representative to the United Nations, Madeleine K. Albright. He assisted Ambassador Albright in formulating and articulating U.S. policy pursued at the United Nations. He also advised the Ambassador on national security related to her role as a member of President Clinton's Cabinet and the National Security Council.

Before joining Ambassador Albright's staff, Mr. Rubin served as a Professional Staff Member on the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations and Senior Foreign Policy Adviser to Senator Joseph R. Biden, Jr. (D-DE). While working in the Senate, he advised Senator Biden and other Committee members on U.S. policy toward Europe and the former Soviet Union, the Middle East, China, and on global arms proliferation issues.

From 1985 to 1989, Mr. Rubin was the Research Director for the non-profit Arms Control Association in Washington, D.C. In that capacity, he often served as a consultant to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on nuclear arms control issues.

Mr. Rubin was born in New York City, New York in 1960. He received a Bachelor of Arts degree in Political Science from Columbia University in 1982 and a Master in International Affairs degree in 1984. In 1998, Mr. Rubin was the recipient of Columbia College's John Jay Award for Distinguished Professional Achievement.

---

OK, this dude doesn't like what's going on. Fine. That is predictable .... but that doesn't make him honest or right and I don't intend to buy anything he says based upon his credentials. Somebody better than Rubin needs to make the arguement.

... and don't EVEN start quoting Albright LOL

[MEG33]

What is a neocon?

[zacyak]

The rest of the posts on this board come from people who clearly learned nothing from 9-11. The Islamofascists are coming for us

I'll ask you the same thing I asked quidnunc, what does Iraq have to do with the Islamofascists? Saddams's Baathist Party was secular and he suppressed Islamic extremists. He certainly was no friend of bin Ladens.