Pat Buchnan on the neocons

> --- Begin Message ---
> NC Coalition for Peace and Justice Listserv
>
> Hmmmm, interesting. So the new direction seems to be
> to make the neocons the scapegoat and allow Bush and
> the Republican party to come out smelling like a
> rose--a stupid rose--but a rose, nevertheless.
>
> I don't trust Pat Buchanan, but he is certainly a very
> smart man! 
>
> Bonnie
>
>
> --- Maureen Sutton <suttonmaureen@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >Subject: Pat Buchnan on the neocons
> > >Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 14:22:02 -0700
> > >
> > >
> > >June 16, 2003 issue
> > >Copyright © 2003 The American Conservative
> > >
> > >
> > >Is the Neoconservative Moment Over?
> > >
> > >by Pat Buchanan
> > >
> > >
> > >The salad days of the neoconservatives, which began
> > with the president's
> > >Axis-of-Evil address in January 2002 and lasted
> > until the fall of Baghdad
> > >may be coming to an end. Indeed, it is likely the
> > neoconservatives will
> > >never again enjoy the celebrity and cachet in which
> > they reveled in their
> > >romp to war on Iraq.
> > >
> > >While this is, admittedly, a prediction, it rests
> > on reasonable 
> > >assumptions.
> > >But why should neoconservatism, at the apparent
> > apex of its influence, be 
> > >on
> > >the edge of eclipse?
> > >
> > >Answer: the high tide of neoconservatism may have
> > passed because the high
> > >tide of American empire may have passed. "World War
> > IV," the empire 
> > >project,
> > >the great cause of the neocons, seems to have been
> > suspended by the
> > >President of the United States.
> > >
> > >While we still hear talk of "regime change" in Iran
> > and North Korea, U.S.
> > >forces not tied down in occupation duties by the
> > anarchy and chaos in Iraq,
> > >are returning home.
> > >
> > >The first signal that the apogee of American
> > hegemony in the Middle East 
> > >has
> > >been reached came as U.S. soldiers and marines were
> > completing their
> > >triumphant march into Baghdad. Suddenly, all the
> > bellicosity toward Syria
> > >from neoconservatives and the Pentagon, stopped,
> > apparently on the orders 
> > >of
> > >the Commander in Chief.
> > >
> > >Secretary of State Powell announced he would go to
> > Damascus to talk with
> > >President Assad. U.S. ground forces halted at the
> > Syrian border. Our
> > >carriers began to sail home from the Gulf. All the
> > talk of Iraqi war
> > >criminals hiding out in Syria and Saddam's weapons
> > of mass destruction 
> > >being
> > >transferred there suddenly ceased. "Mission
> > Accomplished" read the huge
> > >banner on the Abraham Lincoln, as the president
> > landed on the carrier deck
> > >to address the nation.
> > >
> > >When Newt Gingrich, before an audience at the
> > American Enterprise Institute
> > >(AEI), launched his tirade against Powell and the
> > Department of State,
> > >accusing them of appeasing Syria, no echo came out
> > of the Pentagon.
> > >Reportedly, Karl Rove gave Newt an earful, and the
> > president himself was
> > >prepared to blast Newt, for he saw the attack on
> > Powell as an attack on his
> > >own policy. A few editorials and columns praised
> > Newt, but the neocons 
> > >could
> > >sense that they were no longer in step with the
> > White House. So, too, did
> > >every other Kremlinologist in this city.
> > >
> > >Why did Bush order an end to the threats to Syria?
> > The answer is obvious. 
> > >He
> > >is not prepared to carry them out. With the heavy
> > fighting over in
> > >Afghanistan and Iraq, the American people have had
> > enough of invasions and
> > >occupations for one presidential term. The United
> > States is now deep into
> > >nation building in both countries.
> > >
> > >Moreover, Syria is not under any UN sanctions. Its
> > leader did not try to
> > >assassinate the president's father. There is no
> > evidence Damascus is 
> > >working
> > >on nuclear weapons. Assad has not threatened us. A
> > war on Syria would have
> > >no Security Council endorsement, no NATO allies, no
> > authorization from
> > >Congress. Such a pre-emptive war would be
> > unconstitutional and be seen
> > >abroad as the imperial war of a rogue superpower.
> > For all the talk of
> > >unilateralism and of our "unipolar moment"
> > President Bush clearly feels a
> > >need for allies, foreign and domestic, before
> > launching such a war.
> > >
> > >Finally, having assumed paternity of 23 million
> > Iraqis, few Americans are
> > >anxious to adopt 17 million Syrians. Damascus is a
> > bridge too far for Bush
> > >and Rove, and with two wars and two victories in
> > two years, why press their
> > >luck? The re-election that the president's father
> > did not win-and not an
> > >empire-appears to be what they are about.
> > >
> > >Therefore, for the foreseeable future, the glory
> > days-of Special Forces
> > >galloping on horseback in the Afghan hills, of
> > Abrams tanks dashing like
> > >Custer's cavalry across the Iraqi desert, of
> > statues of Saddam toppling 
> > >into
> > >the streets of Baghdad, and presidents landing on
> > carrier flight decks in
> > >fighter-pilot garb -are over, behind us, gone.
> > >
> > >And ahead? Like all empires, once they cease to
> > expand, they go over onto
> > >the defensive. Like the Brits before us, we must
> > now secure, consolidate,
> > >protect, manage, and rule what we have in the
> > tedious aftermath of our
> > >imperial wars. And as we have seen in the terror
> > attacks in Casablanca and
> > >Riyadh, al-Qaeda and its allies, not Tommy Franks,
> > now decide the time and
> > >place of attack in the War on Terror.
> > >
> > >With 25 U.S. soldiers dead and counting since
> > Baghdad fell, what the empire
> > >now entails is a steady stream of caskets coming
> > home from Afghanistan and
> > >Iraq and tens of billions of American tax dollars
> > going the other way to 
> > >pay
> > >the cost of reconstruction of countries we have
> > defeated and occupied.
> > >
> > >Victory has brought unanticipated headaches. Having
> > smashed the forces that
> > >held Iraq together-Saddam's regime, the Ba'ath
> > Party, the Republican Guard,
> > >the army-we must now build new forces to police the
> > country, hold it
> > >together, and protect it from its predatory
> > neighbors. And there are 
> > >Islamic
> > >and Arab elements in and outside of Iraq determined
> > that we should fail.
> > >
> > >Where Tehran and the mullahs colluded in our
> > smashing of a Taliban they
> > >hated, and of their old enemy Saddam, they no
> > longer welcome America's
> > >massive military presence in their region.
> > >
> > >Most important, it appears the president has
> > shifted roles from war leader
> > >to peacemaker. While the neocons are adamant in
> > rejecting the road map to
> > >peace, drafted by the "quartet"-the U.S., the EU,
> > the UN, and Russia-as a
> > >threat to Israel's survival, Bush has endorsed it
> > and evidently means to
> > >pursue it. The neocons are already carping at him
> > for pressuring Sharon to
> > >"negotiate with terrorists" and "creating a new
> > terrorist state in the
> > >Middle East." Where White House and neoconservative
> > agendas coincided
> > >precisely in the invasion of Iraq, they are now
> > clearly in conflict.
> > >
> > >While it has not happened yet, there is the
> > possibility that our effort at
> > >nation building in Iraq will falter and fail, that
> > Americans will tire of
> > >pouring men and money into the project, and will
> > demand that the president
> > >bring the troops home and turn Iraq over to the
> > allies, the Arabs, or the
> > >UN. As one looks at Afghanistan, Iraq, and a Middle
> > East where al-Qaeda is
> > >avidly seeking soft targets, it may be that all the
> > good news is behind us
> > >and that only bad news lies ahead.
> > >
> > >If we have hit the tar baby in Baghdad, the
> > president may be seeking to
> > >extricate us before we go to the polls 17 months
> > from now. And should the
> > >fruits of victory start to rot, Americans will
> > begin to ask questions of 
> > >the
> > >principal propagandists for war.
> > >
> > >It was, after all, the neocons who sold the country
> > on the notion that Iraq
> > >had a huge arsenal of weapons of mass destruction,
> > that Iraq was behind
> > >9/11, that Saddam had ties to al-Qaeda, that the
> > war would be a "cakewalk,"
> > >that we would be welcomed as liberators, that
> > victory would bring 
> > >democratic
> > >revolution in the Middle East. Should the cream go
> > sour, the neocons will
> > >face the charge that they "lied us into war."
> > >
> > >Moreover, for a movement that is small in number
> > and utterly dependent on
> > >its proximity to power, the neocons have made major
> > mistakes. They have
> > >insulted too many U.S. allies, boasted too much of
> > their connections and
> > >influence, attracted too much attention to
> > themselves, and antagonized too
> > >many adversaries. In this snake pit of a city,
> > their over-developed 
> > >penchant
> > >for self-promotion is not necessarily an asset.
> > >
> > >By now, all their columnists and house
> > organs-Commentary, National Review,
> > >the New Republic, the Weekly Standard-are known.
> > Their front groups-AEI,
> > >JINSA-have all been identified and bracketed. Their
> > agents of
> > >influence-Perle, Wolfowitz, Feith, Libby, Bolton,
> > Wurmser, Abrams, et
> > >alia-have all been outed. Neoconservatives are now
> > seen as separate and
> > >apart from the Bush loyalists, with loyalties and
> > an agenda all their own.
> > >
> > >If Americans decide they were lied to, that the
> > Iraqi war was not fought 
> > >for
> > >America's interests, that its propagandists
> > harbored a hidden agenda-as 
> > >they
> > >decided after World War I and exposure of the
> > "merchants of death"-they 
> > >will
> > >  know exactly whom to blame and whom to hold
> > accountable.
> > >
> > >The weakness of the neocons is that, politically
> > speaking, they are
> > >parasites. They achieve influence only by attaching
> > themselves to powerful
> > >hosts, be it "Scoop" Jackson, Ronald Reagan, or
> > Rupert Murdoch. When the
> > >host dies or retires, they must scramble to find a
> > new one. Thus, they have
> > >blundered in isolating themselves from and
> > alienating almost every other
> > >once-friendly group on the Right.
> > >
> > >Consider the lurid charges laid against all three
> > founding editors of this
> > >magazine and four of our writers-Sam Francis, Bob
> > Novak, Justin Raimondo,
> > >and Eric Margolis-by National Review in its cover
> > story, "Unpatriotic
> > >Conservatives." Of us, NR writes,
> > >
> > >They . excuse terror. They espouse . defeatism. .
> > And some of them
> > >explicitly yearn for the victory of their nation's
> > enemies. .
> > >
> > >Only the boldest of them . acknowledge their wish
> > to see the United States
> > >defeated in the War on Terror. But they are
> > thinking about defeat, and
> > >wishing for it, and they will take pleasure in it
> > should it happen.
> > >
> > >They began by hating the neoconservatives. They
> > came to hate their party 
> > >and
> > >their president. They have finished by hating their
> > country.
> > >
> > >This screed does not come out of the National
> > Review of Kirk, Burnham, and
> > >Meyer we grew up with. It is the language of the
> > radical Left and
> > >Trotskyism, the spawning pools of neoconservatism.
> > And rather than confirm
> > >the neocons as leaders of the Right, such bile
> > betrays their origins and
> > >repels most of the Right. One wonders if the
> > neocons even know how many are
> > >waiting in hopeful anticipation of their unhorsing
> > and humiliation.
> > >
> > >"There is no telling how far a man can go, as long
> > as he is willing to let
> > >someone else get the credit," read a plaque Ronald
> > Reagan kept in his desk.
> > >The neocons' problem is that they claim more credit
> > than they deserve for
> > >Bush's War and have set themselves up as scapegoats
> > if we lose the peace.
> > >
> > >Having enjoyed the prerogative of the courtesan,
> > influence without
> > >accountability, the neocons may find themselves
> > with that worst of all
> > >worlds, responsibility without power.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > 
> >
> _________________________________________________________________
> > STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months
> > FREE*  
> > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
> > 
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> http://sbc.yahoo.com
>
> This list is intended for planning, strategy and discussion around state-wide 
> peace and justice work
> Visit http://www.ncpeacehub.org for more information
> Post events at http://www.unitedforpeace.org
> Post artciles and photos at http://nc.indymedia.org
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to ncpeacejustice as: threehegemons@aol.com
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
> leave-ncpeacejustice-1991320V@listserv.unc.edu
> --- End Message ---