Jim Randleman Posted by Jim Randleman on Mon, 08/25/2008 - 20:15 in

Repost of an e-mail I received........

For what its worth, the hypothesis for my research project on the Global Strategic Shift From Empire To Community, stated: "The next US administration, regardless of party, will promote the Communitarian Philosophy in both foreign and domestic policy in a marked turn away from War On Terrorism."

I also noted Israel's defeat in Lebanon as signaling the turning point: "Israel's recent defeat in Lebanon established this new direction. It was emphasized with an exclamation point by the US midterm elections in November of 2006...".

Then on June 14th I commented in an email to this list:

Trilateral Commission [co-]founder Zbigniew Brzezinski and his Trilateralist co-conspirators are apparently back in control in Washington D.C. as recent events seem to confirm. Webster G. Tarpley names the Air Force Purge of June 5th (story) as the most significant indicator, which happened within two days of Obama's (unprecedented?) acceptance speech as the Democratic presidential nominee months ahead of the Democratic Convention. According to Tarpley, Defense Secretary Robert Gates is a leading member of the Principals' Committee which now runs the US government.

Now we have the Pilgrims controlled CFR reviving "1948: A History of the First Arab-Israeli War. Benny Morris", as the most accurate account of the reality in the ME, and discounting all the propaganda of the intervening 60 years.

Refusing to admit that the noble Jewish dream of statehood was stained by the sins of Israel's birth and eager to deny the centrality of the Palestinian problem to the wider conflict in the Middle East, the Israelis have preferred to dwell on their struggle for independence against the supposedly superior invading Arab armies.
...
When the war was over, the Palestinian problem practically disappeared from Israeli public debate, or it was conveniently defined as one of "refugees" or "infiltrators." It was as if there were no Israeli-Palestinian conflict or Palestinian people. As Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir famously put it in 1969, "They did not exist."

The conflict in Georgia should be analyzed in view of this strategic shift.

Following are some choice blurbs from The Next President's Daunting Agenda

The Bush era's focus on the "global war on terror" was simultaneously too limited and too broad. ...

Guantánamo must not become the next president's albatross, too; closing it, no matter how difficult, is not just desirable but imperative. ...

With the price of oil quadruple what it was four years ago, Americans are witnessing -- or, more to the point, contributing to -- the greatest transfer of wealth from one set of nations to another in history. ...

The other major consumers, including China, the European Union, India, and Japan, are sending even greater portions of their wealth to the producing countries, for a total annual transfer of well over $2.2 trillion. ...

The wealth now accumulating in the producing nations will lead over time not only to even greater economic muscle but also to greater political power. ...

Does anyone doubt that the current assertiveness on the international stage of, for example, Iran, Russia, and Venezuela comes from the economic muscle that accompanies their growing petrodollar reserves? ...

climate change has reached a level that, in the view of many scientists, threatens the planet; many believe that there is only a decade to act to avoid a catastrophic tipping point ...

Obama has a far more comprehensive plan, with an ambitious goal for emissions reduction, a market-based mechanism that has broad support among economists on the left and the right, and substantially greater investments than McCain's plan in technologies that will help achieve these goals. ...

As a cautionary tale, it is worth recalling President Jimmy Carter's fervent but unsuccessful attempt to rally the nation in a prime-time televised speech in April 1977. Wearing a much-mocked cardigan sweater, he said that his energy-independence project would be the "moral equivalent of war." When someone pointed out that the initials of that phrase spelled "meow," the press had a field day, ignoring the substance of Carter's proposals. A true national debate was deferred for 30 years. One of Ronald Reagan's first acts as president was to remove from the White House roof the solar panels Carter had had installed. ...

-- although in very different language -- over the recent behavior of Russia, especially in Georgia. (McCain has gone overboard, however, speaking in a highly confrontational manner and calling for the expulsion of Russia from the G-8, ...

Obama's policy proposals -- whether on climate change, energy, Africa, Cuba, or Iran -- are forward-leaning; he proposes adjusting old and static policies to new and evolving realities. He emphasizes the need for diplomacy as the best way of enhancing U.S. power and influence. On trade, although McCain accuses Obama of neoprotectionism, in fact Obama argues for improving trade agreements to take into account elements such as labor and environmental standards. ...

Afghanistan -- an early Bush administration success that has deteriorated dramatically as a result of neglect, miscalculation, and mismanagement. ...

McCain's boldest proposals are neither new nor original: his vague "League of Democracies," for example, sounds like an expansion of an organization, the Community of Democracies, created by former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright that still exists but is virtually ignored by the current administration. Although McCain says his league "would not supplant the United Nations," he explicitly proposes that it take collective action when the UN does not. ...

Obama, on the other hand, believes that military victory, as defined by Bush and McCain, is not possible -- a judgment shared by the U.S. commanders in Iraq. ...

Using as his model South Korea, where 28,500 American forces remain 55 years after the armistice agreement, McCain said that he was ready to station U.S. troops in Iraq for at least that long, if not longer, even a hundred years. Such a multidecade commitment, even under peaceful conditions, is inconceivable in the xenophobic and violent atmosphere of the Middle East. ...

Bush had often said that the United States would leave when it was not wanted; now he objects to a reasonable request from a sovereign state, seeming to prove the charge that the United States seeks a permanent presence in Iraq. Obama, on the other hand, calls it "an enormous opportunity . . . to begin the phased redeployment of combat troops." ...

At the heart of the United States' geostrategic challenge lie five countries with linked borders: the United States' NATO ally Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. In this arc of crisis, incoherence has marked U.S. policy since 2003. ...

Any serious policy will require dealing with all the countries in this region, as well as Israel and the Palestinian Authority, Lebanon, Syria, and Saudi Arabia. This unfortunately includes the very unpleasant reality at the center of this region, Iran. ...

Even loyal pro-McCain Republicans, such as James Baker, Robert Gates (before he became secretary of defense), Henry Kissinger, and Brent Scowcroft have disagreed with the McCain position on Iran and Russia. ...

A new, creative approach to public diplomacy must be developed. Then there is the odd problem posed by the "democracy agenda" of the last six years. The Bush administration's inept advocacy of a fundamental human right has contaminated one of the nation's most sacred concepts. Bush did the dream of democracy a huge disservice by linking it to the assertion of U.S. military power. ...
Yet the goal is correct and should not be abandoned -- only presented in a style and a tone far more sensitive to how it is perceived in other lands. ...
encouraging the development of democratic forms of government, accompanied by the evolution of a pluralist political culture, the rule of law, and improvements in material conditions...

The world needs a strategy to address Africa's endless conflicts, and that strategy must include a political approach to conflict resolution. ...

.The United States is still great. It deserves leadership worthy of its people, leadership that will restore the nation's pride and sense of purpose. That task must begin at home, but the world will be watching and waiting. ...

It is a well-established historical fact that what candidates say about foreign policy is not always an exact guide to what they will do if elected. Historians point to a myriad of examples: Franklin Roosevelt's 1940 promise to not send "your boys . . . into any foreign wars," Lyndon Johnson's statements in 1964 that he would not send ground troops to Vietnam, Richard Nixon's 1968 references to a nonexistent "secret plan" to get out of Vietnam, Ronald Reagan's 1980 pledge to upgrade U.S. relations with Taiwan to "official" status, Bill Clinton's 1992 promises to take a strong stand on Bosnia and stand up to the "butchers of Beijing," George W. Bush's 2000 call for a "more humble" foreign policy that would never again have the United States involved in "nation building." ...
__
How could they have missed George H.W. Bush's pledge, "Read my lips, No New Taxes!"?

Bobby Garner
http://www.congregator.net/
http://apps.congregator.net/Blog/
Free to forward or post.


Comment viewing options
Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
More often than not, they do tell you what they are going to do

But more often then not, they do tell you what they are going to do.

July 15, 2008 , obama news conference on foreign policy:

"We cannot lose Afghanistan to a future of narco-terrorism. The Afghan people must know that our commitment to their future is enduring..."

"We need more troops, more helicopters, more satellites, more Predator drones in the Afghan border region.

"This is a war we have to win. I will send at least two additional combat brigades to Afghanistan..."

"...I'll develop new defenses to protect against the 21st century threat of ... cyber-terrorists,..."

"[Our strategy] would foster new international institutions like the United Nations, NATO, and the World Bank,..."

etc, etc...

By the way, did you catch Joe Biden's New World Order speech?

troy Posted by troy on Tue, 08/26/2008 - 02:09
Comment viewing options
Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.