The Reemergence Of Discredited Neocons: Right-Wing Conference To Advocate A Surge In Afghanistan
The Reemergence Of Discredited Neocons: Right-Wing Conference To Advocate A Surge In Afghanistan
The Foreign Policy Initiative (aka “PNAC 2.0”), an organization which is headed by neoconservatives Bill Kristol, Robert Kagan, and Dan Senor, is holding a conference today and tomorrow on “Advancing & Defending Democracy.” FPI arose after its previous incarnation — the Project for a New American Century — suffered a massive blow to its credibility by staking its reputation on advocating for the “one of the worst foreign policy blunders in American history” — the Iraq war.
Kristol, Kagan, and Senor are now enthusiastically dedicating their efforts to building support for a U.S. troop surge in Afghanistan, calling such a strategy “politically smart for Republicans.” Kagan said recently that withdrawing from Afghanistan would be to “commit preemptive suicide.”
President Obama is thus far resisting the calls to rush more troops into Afghanistan. “I don’t want to put the resource question before the strategy question,” he said on CNN yesterday. “Because there is a natural inclination to say, if I get more, then I can do more. But right now, the question is, the first question is, are we doing the right thing? Are we pursuing the right strategy?” In a letter to Obama earlier this month, FPI made clear that the only “strategy” it’s interested in is escalation:
Since the announcement of your administration’s new strategy, we have been troubled by calls for a drawdown of American forces in Afghanistan and a growing sense of defeatism about the war. … There is no middle course. Incrementally committing fewer troops than required would be a grave mistake and may well lead to American defeat. We will not support half-measures that repeat the errors of the past.
Of course, no one knows more about repeating “errors of the past” than Bill Kristol. At its conference this week, FPI has two separate panels on Afghanistan. The right-wing organization is not hosting a single Democratic elected official (though Rep. Jane Harman did participate in its last event on Afghanistan in March). Instead, the conference is marked by the presence of right-wing luminaries, such as Sen. Jon Kyl, former Gov. Mitt Romney, Elliott Abrams, and Newt Gingrich. Washington Post editorial page editor Fred Hiatt is moderating a panel, while Michael O’Hanlon and Ken Pollack from the Brookings Institution are also participating. Finally, the conference will fittingly wrap up tomorrow with “A Conversation with John McCain.”
Matt Yglesias writes that the Obama administration needs to “reject the kind of discredited neocon logic that says the only way to deal with the problem of the moment is with maximum force.” He adds, “the situation in Afghanistan has gotten as bad as it has in large part precisely as a result of the last administration listening to the counsel of people like McCain.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Like any of these stooges knows the first thing about military policy or the right thing to do in Afghanistan…their only “qualification” for speaking on the topic is that they all hate scary bearded Muslim men who wear turbans…
September 21st, 2009 at 10:56 amHeh. These people are the very definition of “insanity” – they advocate doing the same thing over and over and over again, in spite of the fact that what they advocate results in failure and ruination over and over and over again.
IMO, they all belong in rubber rooms. With no belts. Or shoelaces.
September 21st, 2009 at 10:57 amBill Kristol’s Dad, Irving Kristol just died, and ‘Lil Billy is still going to a NeoNut conference?
Irving, known as founder of NeoNutConservatism, was given the ‘badly tarnished by Bush’ Presidential Medal of Freedumb in ‘04.
Yes, ‘Lil Billy’s been riding Daddy’s coattails for many years.
September 21st, 2009 at 10:58 amYou see, ‘Lil Billy never had an original thought. In fact, he can barely verbally summarize a small news event.
Kagan, Kristol & Senor = Mayberry Think Tank.
As long as it’s war, and more war, these clowns are all in.
September 21st, 2009 at 11:03 amThis crew always wants others to fight the wars they want.
September 21st, 2009 at 11:03 amWe will not support half-measures that repeat the errors of the past.
Do any of you gentlemen have even a single reason why your views should be considered important? You’re not in elected office, your party is not in power, and you have all proven yourselves failures at foreign policy in the past. Tell us again why we should care if you don’t support what President Obama wants to do. Spell it out. What will you do about it if the president doesn’t follow your advice?
September 21st, 2009 at 11:04 amKagan, Kristol & Senor = Mayberry Think Tank.
LOL! Great line, zimzone.
Why do these morons continually gather together and share their ignorance? They certainly aren’t gaining any converts. Perhaps they are just more comfortable spending time in their echo chamber.
September 21st, 2009 at 11:06 amWhere was Kristol when McCain said we could “muddle” through Afghanistnam.
September 21st, 2009 at 11:06 amMy guess is this think tank if funded 100% by defense contractors.
September 21st, 2009 at 11:07 am“Incrementally committing fewer troops than required would be a grave mistake and may well lead to American defeat.”
Later, they added:
P.S. Just don’t ask any of us, or any members of our family, or any of our well-connected friends to lift a finger or throw in an extra nickel to help in any way. Thank you.
September 21st, 2009 at 11:07 am***
i didn’t know jeremy piven
was a neo-con.
:|
September 21st, 2009 at 11:07 amI wonder if the three advocates of this nonsense will stand at the podium and first describe their extensive military service that prepares them to make judgements about how this or any other war should progress.
September 21st, 2009 at 11:10 amThere is never a war these draft-dodging chickenhawks won’t support, but would never actually fight in.
September 21st, 2009 at 11:11 amhttp://coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactSenatorCoburn.Home
I have sent a letter to Sen. Coburn and let him know that the comments by his chief of Staff are appalling. I told him that its very scary that he is a physician and spews hate.
PLEASE SEND HIM AN EMAIL!!!!!!!!!!!!
September 21st, 2009 at 11:14 am“Advancing & Defending Democracy.”
neocons holding a conferernce for the above?
All of thier programs are opposite programs, like the clean air initiative which allows more pollution, etc.
they are dishonest and that’s about as nice as I can put it.
September 21st, 2009 at 11:15 amMichael O’Hanlon and Ken Pollack from the Brookings Institution are also participating.
Oh, goodie!
O’Hanlon, the Lyle Lovett of NeoNuts, has a remarkable talent for getting media exposure and saying absolutely nothing.
What’s really amazing is the media continues to quote him…on nothing said.
Kind of like Palin with less winks…
September 21st, 2009 at 11:15 amAnytime these three musketeers want to lead the charge I’m all for a “surge”. It’s so easy for woosies to recommend war when there’s not a snowball’s chance in Hell that they will suffer from it in any way.
I’m going to vomit.
September 21st, 2009 at 11:17 amIt’s so nice of these guys to let Obama know what not to do.
This isn’t quite as bad as asking Detroit how to win a SuperBowl since they won a game or two a couple years ago.
September 21st, 2009 at 11:17 am(sigh)
These are people who believe we can “win” in Afghanistan.
What foolish, foolish people…
A “surge” sure as hell won’t accomplish victory but, at the same time, immediate withdrawal would be catastrophic (Iraq, at least, is surrounded by stable…if not exactly pro-American…neighbors. An immediate withdrawal from Afghanistan alienates us from the very European allies we pissed off with Iraq AND creates a massive power vaccum that will allow the Taliban to run rampant).
It appears we must choose between two admittedly regrettable, but nevertheless, distinguishable post-war environments…
September 21st, 2009 at 11:18 amWhere was Kristol when McCain said we could “muddle” through Afghanistnam.
Giving KKKarl Rove the reach-around?
September 21st, 2009 at 11:18 amhistory is once again repeating itself.
Does the right know how to do anything except fail?
September 21st, 2009 at 11:19 amDid you mention how many of these belligerant neocons have children in the miliary currently serving in Afghanistan? After 8 years of combat and how many combat deaths they want more. But where is their family sacrifice?
September 21st, 2009 at 11:20 amWTF?? How can the GOP tout [“Advancing & Defending Democracy] when for all intents and purposes, they are current agenda is to destroy democracy?
September 21st, 2009 at 11:20 amOn second thought, maybe we haven’t finished the job in Afghanistnam…..there is still vast amounts of opium for the CIA to harvest.
September 21st, 2009 at 11:23 amAnd there are actually people in this country who say Rascism is dead… Please!
September 21st, 2009 at 11:24 am(update to Dallas sports-talk radio interview with Bush: the host announced the topics will focus on his tumultuous 8 year term, not just sports… begins in 5 min, not sure if they have RSS stream)
http://www.theticket.com/
September 21st, 2009 at 11:27 amjestephens @ # 24: John Fogerty put it best 40 years ago.
September 21st, 2009 at 11:29 am
On second thought, maybe we haven’t finished the job in Afghanistnam
September 21st, 2009 at 11:29 am…then there’s the issue of a pipeline which needs defending…
Discredited Neocons
I love that phrase. It rings true.
September 21st, 2009 at 11:31 amNone of these “experts’ (emphasis on “ex”) spent even a day in the U.S. military. Hence they have no appreciation for fighting and dying for one’s country. They do have a thirst for blood and oil.
I am going to vomit.
September 21st, 2009 at 11:32 amIncrementally committing fewer troops than required would be a grave mistake and may well lead to American defeat….. How many troops are they wanting killed? How many troops over there are enough?
September 21st, 2009 at 11:37 amThese people dont know what they want but they want it anyway.
Mike Hunt says: I wonder if the three advocates of this nonsense will stand at the podium and first describe their extensive military service that prepares them to make judgements about how this or any other war should progress.
I know what you mean Mike, but of course military service isn’t a prerequisite for producing sound military strategy or for comprehending the realities of armed conflict.
September 21st, 2009 at 11:37 amAll that’s really needed is some brains.
such a strategy would be “politically smart for Republicans.”
These bloodthirsty chickenhawks advocate sending more of other peoples children to war to score imaginary political points! It’s only about winning elections, not national security or the public interest.
These soul-less ghouls are beyond contempt!
September 21st, 2009 at 11:40 am“FPI arose after its previous incarnation — the Project for a New American Century — suffered a massive blow to its credibility”
Clearly the PNAC suffered not one jot to its “credibility”.
BTW, the money quote is Kristol, Kagan, and Senor calling a US troop surge in Afghanistan “politically smart for Republicans”.
September 21st, 2009 at 11:45 amWhen these idiots had connections into the administration, there was reason to believe that they might be privy to more information that the rest of us. Now that they are on the outside, there is no reason to listen to any of their discredited opinions.
Personally, I am not inclined to believe that the surge in Iraq was phenomonally successful; we’re not out of there yet. Certainly, its success was hyped by the right wing but without a great deal of evidence and little or no independent corroboration.
Now, the neo-cons and Republicans want to escalate the situation in Afghanistan by using a simialr ’surge’ strategy, but again they only ‘assert’ the surge worked in a jingoistic way.
I find their ‘jingos’ turn out to be lies more often than not, and I find they press most vigorously and aggressively when they have the least factual support for their posistions.
I think trusting their analysis and advice to be utterly ill-advised.
September 21st, 2009 at 11:47 amThese people just LOVE to hate!
And they just LOVE to kill! Kill! KILL!
…and then they portray themselves as moral and holy.
Joke!
September 21st, 2009 at 11:49 amSo then how come George Will wants out?
http://www.political-buzz.com/
September 21st, 2009 at 11:56 amthe participants of the opening panel were “in favor of more everything in Afghanistan.”
more contracts for the military/medical/corporate industrial complex…
September 21st, 2009 at 12:00 pmThe fact that FPI was wrong about Iraq speaks volumes. Obama and the military are not going to listen to a word they say. If any Republican tries to use FPI as support, their views on Iraq will come back. The FPI has no influence in the Obama government, so I have no doubt that the advice will be ignored.
September 21st, 2009 at 12:05 pm‘Kristol, Kagan, and Senor are now enthusiastically dedicating their efforts to building support for a U.S. troop surge in Afghanistan, calling such a strategy “politically smart for Republicans.”‘
Which begs the question, “How would these Neo-Nitwits know what “SMART” really is?”
The Neo-Nitwits world view has been discredited after taking OUR country into the quagmire called the War of Choice for Iraqi Oil under the Bush maladministration. Why in hell should anyone listen to them now? I don’t care if they are PNAC 2.0, they’re still Neo-Nitwits!
September 21st, 2009 at 12:12 pmWhich one of these Neo-Nitwits has the strong military background? Are they just looking to “Surge” simply for political reasons? Are they saying to “Surge”, send young men and woman into combat to kill and be killed for a political advantage for Repuglicans?
How disgusting of them!!
September 21st, 2009 at 12:16 pmAccording to the Old Testament, if what a prophet says will happen does not occur, then you should 1) not be afraid of them as they are a false prophet and 2) you should stone them to death as a false prophet.
Don’t these folks like the Old Testament ?
September 21st, 2009 at 12:21 pmWilliam Kristol is also the guy who met with Sarah Palin for a year prior to INSISTING that John McCain make her his running mate.
September 21st, 2009 at 12:23 pmInstead of being paraded around the media these clowns need to be admitted on a 72 hour hold at the nearest mental health facility. Drooling over more war is seriously warped.
September 21st, 2009 at 12:27 pmHoodathunk says:
“Instead of being paraded around the media these clowns need to be admitted on a 72 hour……”
tour of the mountains on the Afghan/Pakistan border with a helmet, pack and a rifle. After a few firefights with the locals, and a few shitted pants, they might change their minds to “Let’s get the hell out, NOW!”
September 21st, 2009 at 12:38 pmWhy, YES!
When asked what went wrong, some of these new clowns have insisted their plans were right, but the Chimperor incompetence f cked up.
Take a look at Afghanistan, a shining bacon of Chimpocracy.
And Iraq, it is already paying for itself and paying back to the coalition of the unsuspecting morons.
WHY DO YOU LBRULS argue with suckcess?!
September 21st, 2009 at 12:51 pmWe will lose the war in Afghanistan without more troops.
So says Stanley McChrystal, the Decider General, who is, coincidentally, the same man who chose to cover up the Pat Tillman friendly fire incident. It would seem that Stanley is like the man who gave him his third star, George W. Bush: He only tells the truth on the occasion that it is advantageous to do so.
Of course, let’s not forget the flip side of that statement: We will lose the war in Afghanistan WITH more troops, too.
September 21st, 2009 at 12:54 pmThe FPI is consistent. They believe in war regardless of who’s in the White House.
President Obama should (and I believe, will) do what he thinks is right in Afghanistan.
What the FPI advocates should be irrelevant. Their views shouldn’t be used to justify a surge or oppose one.
I believe President Obama will take the right course whether it conflicts with FPI interests or happens to coincide.
September 21st, 2009 at 1:05 pmWhen it comes to war, these asshats are very comfortable — after all, their last fiascoes went so well!
Kristol is a nobody who is where he is because of his father – he is a know-nothng doofus.
Kagan, with Kristol, co-founded PNAC, the warmongering group of always-wrong politicos.
Dan Senor(FOX) is a former spokesman for the CPA (remember Bremer?), who put a smiley face on Iraqi operations. He married Campbell Brown (CNN). He is a zionist.
These three guys should be exiled.
September 21st, 2009 at 1:07 pmShouldn’t these guys be embarrassed for their previous performance and the gross failure of PNAC strategy?
Oh wait — repugniscum don’t feel shame, one needs a conscience, or a sense of morality or ethics — never mind.
September 21st, 2009 at 1:09 pmArms merchants. I recall that the 2002, the stats on armaments said that sales were down 46%: I turned to my husband and said, “There’s going to be a war”. And my goodness, one appeared.
Look at the oil and arms dealers that are behind each and every one of these pseudo intellectuals and their fake ‘think tanks’.
September 21st, 2009 at 1:11 pmAh, for the good old days when America didn’t resort to military action as a first choice, where economic and political gain didn’t drive US policy. When there were people leading who listened to the Constitution leading our country as a beacon of liberty and equality rather than the manipulation of the world like it was some giant piggy bank waiting to be cracked open.
September 21st, 2009 at 1:17 pmNeocon idiots. Haven’t they learned any thing from the Solviet debachel and our own problems when it comes to this part of the world? Lets get the F out of Afganistan and let the people of the country deal with their own problems. But warn them that if they support terrorism, that we will bomb them back to the stone age.
September 21st, 2009 at 1:33 pmHoodathunk. When was that?
September 21st, 2009 at 1:51 pmHow about Jimmy Carter who’s admin hosted the Afgan trap that cost Russia the war in Afganistan?
How agout Clinton who used police action to arrest and convict the first world trade center bombers and worked with the UN unilaterally in serbia, etc.
September 21st, 2009 at 2:08 pmWell, you can expect CNN to be beating the drum rolls loudly and often.
CNN’s Campbell Brown is married to Dan Senor.
Her affiliation with Repubes of dubious repute seems congenital.
Her father,Jim Brown(R), State Insurance Commissioner was a Louisiana politico that landed in the Federal pen for his hijinks a few years back.
September 21st, 2009 at 2:11 pmAgain I will bring up Carter under who’s leadership peace broke out across the globe.
September 21st, 2009 at 2:13 pmThe question must be asked: Is Dan Senor a Martian…?
====
September 21st, 2009 at 2:17 pmFred. The history of America is basically an uninterrupted march of exploitation.
(The same could be said for other powerful nations throughout history).
Europeans came. Colonized. Pushed the natives back and basically exterminated them. Used slaves for about 300 years to profit economically. Pushed the domain from one coast to another by the late 1800’s then engaged in imperialism in the Pacific, Caribbean, and Central America. In the 20th century, there was focus on domestic policy to address the Depression, but otherwise the imperialism continued. America has employed the Truman Doctrine that could be consider imperialistic. And now we are involved in the Middle East.
I like your Jimmy Carter example. I think he tried to govern with the intention that you and hoodathunk suggest.
Although, we can agree on Carter, it was shortlived. The American people didn’t seem to value it much at the time, because Carter was soundly defeated in his reelection bid against Reagan.
If we act as imperialist today, I only suggesting that is the norm and not the exception.
I’m not trying to justify it.
September 21st, 2009 at 2:26 pmbackup, what expolitation happened under FDR?
The war mongers have always been on the right. Johnson was the closest the left has to someone who fought war for what could be deemed as profit.
In the same war, who bombed hanoi for 300 days?
Who takes us to war strictly for profit? Only the right.
September 21st, 2009 at 2:36 pmThe FPI is trying to create an issue for Republicans in the next elections. Republicans have used the lame excuse that Dems are lax on security and defense issues. This is going to be one of the issues used against Dems in 2010. The Republicans have used this issue many times with some success. It is merely a diversion from the real issues.
September 21st, 2009 at 2:39 pmFred. FDR is another great example.
It’s possible that he was a great guy that had no desire for imperialism. Some of it could have been that domestic issues needed so much attention, there was little motivation or capability for imperialism.
FDR was assistant secretary of the navy under President Wilson:
wikipedia.
September 21st, 2009 at 2:52 pmFor practical purposes, I agree with the neocons in this instance.
One thing I feel too many people are forgetting on both sides is that there is an important difference between a just war and an unjust war. We invaded Afghanistan with the blessing and support of the entire world community, in response to an egregious attack on our population. To say that we should withdraw from Afghanistan just because we think it’s too difficult blurs the difference between a just and unjust war just as much as does those who say we should bomb Iran just because we could maybe get away with it.
We were right to go into Afghanistan, and it is no less right to complete our mission objectives there now. The justification for undertaking war should not be based on how convenient it is.
Wingnuts are the ones who only care about principles only when it gets them political advantage, not us. Some of them are saying we should withdraw from Afghanistan because they know that success there would be attributed to Obama. But the simple fact is, if responding to 9/11 ever actually meant anything, then it still does now. Just because the sides have changed doesn’t mean that right has become wrong, or vice versa. We are there on a valid and important principle, and principles should not be disposable.
Sending enough troops to actually complete the mission within a limited time frame is far less dangerous than sending too few indefinitely. This does not mean that neocons know what they’re doing when it comes to military strategy though. I know the wingnuts like to trumpet “the surge worked,” but the fact is Gen. Shinseki warned the White House back in 2002 that they would need far more troops than they had authorized, and he was fired for it. Just because they halfheartedly adopted his original conclusions five years later doesn’t mean they suddenly knew what they were doing; they merely belatedly ameliorated a previous error. The idea that using more than enough combat units actually decreases losses was enunciated by Colin Powell back during the First Gulf War. Furtheremore, Obama has pointed out (and was attacked by wingnuts for it) that having too few ground troops in Afghanistan results in tactical methods that increase the number of civilian casualties; thus, “doing it right” is a humanitarian as well as a strategic issue.
As for those who point to the history of Britain and the USSR failing there, the trick to not being the next imperial power to crash there is to not attack like an imperial power. We should employ intelligence, respect and anthropological analysis to approach their culture as it is, rather than ignoring it as irrelevant, or believing we can change it. Just because other stupid people have behaved stupidly there does not mean we have to. For example, I saw a documentary describing how each tribe only listens to a council of three elders; for thousands of years invaders have come in to tell them what to do, and as soon as those invaders turn their backs, the tribe returns to consulting their council of elders no matter what. So it would seem prudent for the democratic system in Afghanistan to run through the elders’ councils instead of ignoring them. If the people outside of Kabul don’t have representation, then they aren’t going to buy into the system. And that’s just one example off of the top of my head.
September 21st, 2009 at 3:27 pmElBruce. I absolutely agree.
September 21st, 2009 at 3:30 pmElBruce says:
I doubt that more troops will be able to do much in the area. Al Queda is gone but the Taliban will never be wiped out. They need to be brought into the governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Neither country will be able to control the frontier areas. The second problem is that there are too many warlords in the area whose loyalty changes with the amount of money they get. These warlords are never going to give up their power and influence. Last, there is the problem with Karzai who is corrupt as the day is long. He stole the recent election and expects the international community to keep propping him up. Money that is poured into both countries need to be kept out of the governments hands. At best we can achieve a modicum of stability, but it will always be fragile. It is up to the governments to find a way to keep balance on all of these issues, but I have serious doubts they can.
September 21st, 2009 at 4:42 pmI agree somewhat, ElBruce
You make some good points, but there’s also the opium quandary. The worlds number one supplier depends on that income, as unemployment there is quite high.
People seem to forget that the US had 500,000 troops in Vietnam, dropped more tonnage of bombs than all of WW2, killed
over two million Vietnamese, sacrificed 58,000+ brave souls,
and failed to defeat a nation that had previously fought off
the Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, and French.
I believe that the Afghans are the only people that the Roman
September 21st, 2009 at 8:00 pmarmy had tried ,but failed to conquer.
The primary reason why Osama Bin Laden attacked the US was due to our meddling in the middle East which was directly related to Americas life blood, oil. If this particular resource wasn’t in the middle east we wouldn’t give a god damn about them and all their religious wars. But since 2/3’s of the worlds oil reserves are located within the middle east and with the majority of friendly countries having exhausted or coming close to exhausting their inter country supply, we see no alternative but to plunge ourselves into a conflict that would otherwise have nothing to do with American interests. People like Osama Bin Laden and Al Queda forces scare the crap out of the American military because they want to cut off American access to middle eastern oil. The invasion of Iraq was a stepping stone for us to inject our influence on the eastern oil bearing nations. The Afghanistan war is nothing more than trying to destroy the people who wish to cut off oil exports to the United States. Problem is that no politician wants to come out and say that because it’s not good PR. But the truth of the matter is that without eastern oil imports our American way of life would and could not be supported. So we will continue to fight in that region until there is no oil left. Then we will turn in on ourselves as the government attempts to maintain any sense of control over a devastated oil starved country.
September 22nd, 2009 at 3:09 amUnAmericanDanny
The ignorant punkass troll with the brain of a fruitfly. Weighing in to tell us what Rush TOLD him to think about this. You are a moron Danny. An ignorant pool of buzzard piss. Just go kill yourself punk. No one cares WHAT your ignorant take is on this issue
September 22nd, 2009 at 4:48 amStill SCUM, still educated idiots, and still haven’t served their Country, only their Military Industrial Complex Masters.
September 22nd, 2009 at 2:07 pmWonder how long they’d stick around if required to divest their L3, Northrup, Mc Donnell Douglas, etc. stock……………….
-just to show they’re not biased
Or, better yet, send THEIR kids off to die in their Good Little Wars.
I keep trying to become one of them high-paid Democratic consultants. estetik ameliyatlar
September 25th, 2009 at 9:19 am