================================================================
http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_12501.shtml
================================================================
Sidelined by their failed predictions for Iraq and US President George
W Bush's efforts to reassure voters he is not a warmonger, prominent
neo-conservatives and their Christian Right allies are nonetheless
trying hard to prepare the ground for future US adventures in the
Middle East.
Echoing increasingly threatening noises from the government of Israeli
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon about preventing Iran from developing a
nuclear weapon, neo-cons are calling for Washington to undertake
covert action, at the very least, to oust what some of them call the
"terror masters" in Tehran as part of a more general "World War IV"
against alleged Arab and Islamic extremism. (The Cold War is widely
considered as World War III.)
Some neo-cons are even complaining that if Bush had been serious about
the "war on terrorism", he should have taken on Iran after
Afghanistan, rather than Iraq.
"Had we seen the war for what it was, we would not have started with
Iraq, but with Iran, the mother of modern Islamic terrorism, the
creator of Hezbollah, the ally of al-Qaeda, the sponsor of [Abu Musab
al-]Zarqawi, the longtime sponsor of Fatah and the backbone of Hamas,"
wrote part-time Pentagon consultant Michael Ledeen of the American
Enterprise Institute (AEI) this week.
His article also reprised an argument he first made three years ago -
that the Iranian people were already rising up against the mullahs and
needed only a little nudge from Washington to succeed.
Neo-conservatives are also busy stoking tensions with Syria, even amid
indications that Washington and Damascus are feeling their way toward
some kind of "modus vivendi" that may even include joint military
patrols along the latter's porous border with Iraq.
Last week they heard from a Syrian exile, Farid Ghadry, who apparently
aspires to become the Ahmed Chalabi - the neo-con boosted leader of
the exiled Iraqi National Congress whose standing in Washington
plummeted after it was alleged he passed secrets to Iran - of his
homeland.
In addition to lobbying for the pending Syria Liberation Act, which
would commit the US government to "regime change" in Damascus, Ghadry
charged that the government of President Bashir Assad was building "a
new colony of terrorism" for youths in Lebanon's Bekaa Valley.
The neo-conservatives, who led the charge to war in Iraq, have
steadily lost influence over US policy in Baghdad since a year ago,
when US troops found themselves welcomed by a serious and growing
insurgency rather than the flowers and sweets the neo-cons had
predicted.
At the same time, Bush's top political adviser, Karl Rove, was
reported to have told unhappy war hawks in the Pentagon and Vice
President ***** Cheney's office, the two neo-con strongholds, that
Bush's re-election prospects would be greatly enhanced if there was
"no war in '04".
Led by arch-realists Secretary of State Colin Powell and his deputy
Richard Armitage, the State Department gradually wrested control over
policy towards Syria and Iran. With US troops bogged down next door, a
policy of confrontation, as advocated by neo-cons, not only risked
another war, the realists argued, but could also invite more damaging
efforts by both Damascus and Tehran to destabilize Iraq.
Wary engagement with both countries has thus become official policy.
The recent visit by a high-level US delegation to Damascus and the
invitation of European and Arab allies and Iraq's neighbors to attend
a US-sponsored meeting on Iraq in Tehran later this fall mark
hard-fought advances in the State Department's agenda.
But while the neo-cons may be down, they are by no means out. As more
than one foreign-policy analyst has noted, no neo-con within the
administration has resigned or been fired, despite their
responsibility for the Iraqi quagmire and public calls by even some
senior Republican lawmakers and retired military officers that they be
ousted.
Some analysts have argued the neo-cons remain in place only because
their departure now would amount to an admission by the administration
- and thus Bush himself - that serious mistakes had been made. In this
view, Bush would purge them in a second term, as he continued along
the State Department's "realist" line.
But a growing number of observers, particularly in the State
Department and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), are coming to
the conclusion that the neo-cons may actually enjoy greater influence
if Bush wins re-election.
In just the past few days, for example, an article, The State
Department's Extreme Makeover, published by online magazine Slate and
attributed to an "anonymous" veteran foreign service officer, made
precisely this argument.
It is in this context that neo-cons' recent efforts to focus their
fire on Syria and Iran, in particular, should be seen.
Ghadry spoke at an all-day symposium co-sponsored by the Committee on
the Present Danger (CPD), a predominantly neo-conservative lobby group
set up in August, and by the Foundation for Defense of Democracies
(FDD), a group created two days after the September 11, 2001 terrorist
attacks on the US, whose views largely mirror those of Israel's ruling
Likud Party.
On FDD's board of advisers are prominent neo-cons and Iraq war
boosters, including former Defense Policy Board chairman and Ledeen's
sidekick at AEI, Richard Perle; AEI fellow Jeane Kirkpatrick; and
former CIA director James Woolsey, who also co-chairs the CPD.
Joining them are Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol, whose own
Project for the New American Century first named Iran and Syria - as
well as Iraq and the Palestinian Authority - as targets of the "war on
terrorism", in an open letter published just 10 days after September
11.
The conference was addressed briefly by telephone by former secretary
of state George Shultz, the group's new co-chair, while Woolsey
announced that former Czech Republic president Vaclav Havel and former
Spanish prime minister Jose Maria Aznar had agreed to head an
international chapter.
Keynoters for the symposium, titled "World War IV: Why We're Fighting,
Whom We're Fighting, How We're Fighting", included Woolsey, who has
long spoken of the fight against "Islamo-fascism" - defined as
including "the mullahs of Iran", the Ba'athist parties of Iraq and
Syria, and "the Wahhabis", of which the al-Qaeda terrorist group is a
part - as the equivalent of a world war.
On hand was Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, whose
participation appeared not only to provide an official sanction of the
radical agenda, but also to confirm that the neo-con faction within
the Bush administration is alive, kicking and unashamed despite the
quagmire in Iraq.
Neo-conservative godfather Norman Podhoretz, who has also used "World
War IV" as his favored description for the challenges Washington faces
in the Near East, in particular, made a rare public appearance.
He called Israeli tactics in the occupied territories a "model for how
to fight this kind of war", and asserted that "Iran is unquestionably
on the agenda" of a second Bush administration.
"I have no doubt that we're going to have to do it and do it fast," he
declared, noting there were "many different instrumentalities" at
Washington's disposal for dealing with the mullahs and their nuclear
program.
Podhoretz, whose son-in-law Elliott Abrams is the Middle East director
on the National Security Council staff, also offered a sweeping vision
of what the region might look like when the US triumphed.
Stressing the long-held Likud view that the nations of the region were
artificial creations forged out of the defeated Ottoman Empire, he
suggested, 'What was done in the aftermath of World War I can be
undone in World War IV."
Two days later, the FDD helped convene the Middle Eastern American
Convention for Freedom and Democracy to elaborate a foreign policy
towards the region by several dozen mostly sectarian groups, including
the American Coptic Association, the American Maronite Union, the
Southern Sudanese Voice for Freedom, the Assyrian American National
Federation, the Chaldean National Congress, the American Middle East
Christian Association, Jews Indigenous to the Middle East and North
Africa and the Washington Kurdish Institute.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FJ09Ak01.html
============================================================================
.
|
|
| User: "Leigh_Bee" |
|
| Title: Re: World War III **NEWS** Update 11/10/4.......+ |
11 Oct 2004 05:17:13 PM |
|
|
(From: Wally Lorne?) wrote in message news:<29ab5835.0410110252.3ebf97fe@posting.google.com>...
================================================================
http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_12501.shtml
================================================================
Sidelined by their failed predictions for Iraq and US President George
W Bush's efforts to reassure voters he is not a warmonger, prominent
neo-conservatives and their Christian Right allies are nonetheless
trying hard to prepare the ground for future US adventures in the
Middle East.
Echoing increasingly threatening noises from the government of Israeli
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon about preventing Iran from developing a
nuclear weapon, neo-cons are calling for Washington to undertake
covert action, at the very least, to oust what some of them call the
"terror masters" in Tehran as part of a more general "World War IV"
against alleged Arab and Islamic extremism. (The Cold War is widely
considered as World War III.)
Some neo-cons are even complaining that if Bush had been serious about
the "war on terrorism", he should have taken on Iran after
Afghanistan, rather than Iraq.
Well when you are in a hole keep digging eh?
"SNIP
Two days later, the FDD helped convene the Middle Eastern American
Convention for Freedom and Democracy to elaborate a foreign policy
towards the region by several dozen mostly sectarian groups, including
the American Coptic Association, the American Maronite Union, the
Southern Sudanese Voice for Freedom, the Assyrian American National
Federation, the Chaldean National Congress, the American Middle East
Christian Association, Jews Indigenous to the Middle East and North
Africa and the Washington Kurdish Institute.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FJ09Ak01.html
Looks this bunch has just become target priority for the Black hats.
LB
============================================================================
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Leigh_Bee" |
|
| Title: Re: World War III **NEWS** Update 11/10/4.......+ |
14 Oct 2004 06:27:55 PM |
|
|
(Uncle Wally's World) wrote in message news:<a7ef5981.0410122050.6cd430cc@posting.google.com>...
"ME" <ME@MINE.COM> wrote in message news:<bqmdne0z99ASnvHcRVn-sQ@eatel.net>...
All of these WW3 postings.
The christian bible, in Mark 13:22-33, states that the generation which
sees Israel become a nation, which happened in 1948, shall see the return of
the true Christ.
This said, the average lifespan today is 65 to 85 years. Do the math,
year 2013 to year 2033. Rare maximum lifespan is around 114 years, which
brings year 2062. So, that said, give I'd give it between 9 to 60 more
years. If you remove the 7 year tribulation period, going to the beginning
period of greatest sickness and sorrows, 2 to 53 more years for such signs.
Between years 2006 and 2057.
me
http://www.demonpossessed.com
==========================================================================
*Much* Closer to 2006/2007.....
Watch the Middle East in particular, but also be mindful of the Indian
Subcontinent & the Korean Peninsula.....
If either Iran or Syria are attacked by US or Israel, then we're in for
a wild ride !!!!
Hooroo ;-)
Uncle Wally ;-)
========================================================================
I think you are getting, Just add S America Russia and SE Asia or
parts thereof and we'll all go together when we go!
LB
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FJ09Ak01.html
============================================================================
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jean Guernon" |
|
| Title: Re: World War III **NEWS** Update 11/10/4.......+ |
11 Oct 2004 11:51:17 AM |
|
|
From: Wally Lorne? a écrit:
================================================================
http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_12501.shtml
================================================================
Sidelined by their failed predictions for Iraq and US President George
W Bush's efforts to reassure voters he is not a warmonger, prominent
neo-conservatives and their Christian Right allies are nonetheless
trying hard to prepare the ground for future US adventures in the
Middle East.
Echoing increasingly threatening noises from the government of Israeli
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon about preventing Iran from developing a
nuclear weapon, neo-cons are calling for Washington to undertake
covert action, at the very least, to oust what some of them call the
"terror masters" in Tehran as part of a more general "World War IV"
against alleged Arab and Islamic extremism. (The Cold War is widely
considered as World War III.)
Some neo-cons are even complaining that if Bush had been serious about
the "war on terrorism", he should have taken on Iran after
Afghanistan, rather than Iraq.
Nah, that is the neo-liberals.
J.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bikerbomber" |
|
| Title: Re: World War III **NEWS** Update 11/10/4.......+ |
13 Oct 2004 04:56:33 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 19:54:41 GMT, Never anonymous Bud
<newskat@katxyzkave.net> wrote:
Trying to steal the thunder from Arnold, "ME" <ME@MINE.COM> on Tue, 12 Oct 2004 11:18:19 -0500 spoke:
All of these WW3 postings.
The christian bible, in Mark 13:22-33, states that the generation which
sees Israel become a nation, which happened in 1948, shall see the return of
the true Christ.
That is NOT what it says.
It DOES say "THIS generation", meaning the people listening at THAT time.
But it obviously DIDN'T happen.
And a generation is widely accepted as 30 years, or at most 40 years.
So it didn't and WON'T happen as YOU think either.
I have to point out the differences in translations, mine gives a
footnote telling the reader that the original Greek(Hebrew?) word here
can be translated to "Generation" OR "Race". And the sad fact here is
that one word can change the context of the whole passage. The problem
with translation is the translated word rarely has the same exact
meaning or feeling as the original. Hope that helps some, thanks!!
-Bikerbomber
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
