PittsburghAfterDark
08-18-2006, 04:43 PM
Progressives Try to Plagiarize National Security Strategy?Again
The Fifth Column Sam Pender
August 18, 2006
The Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) is a more centrist element of today?s Democratic Party. After Sen. Lieberman?s primary defeat last week, I decided to go to the DLC website and see how the centrist Democrats were reacting to their defeat as well as the victory of the far left. There wasn?t a canned response at that time. I had hoped that the DLC would have prepared both win and lose positions in advance, but apparently the party just can?t figure out how to pander to their base of pacifists, appeasers, geo-political procrastinators, Bush-haters, socialists etc. while at the same time seeking support from that critical centrist and right side of the spectrum needed to win general elections.
At the DLC website I came across some articles describing the Democrats? national security strategies. I thought they?d be interesting since I really don?t know where the party stands. Given that their recent ?Real Security? publication was only 8 double-spaced pages with no details on anything, I was surprised to see that there?s a great deal of text on liberal national security strategies.
A further examination of the site showed that there?s an associated magazine called, Blueprint. Now, Blueprint magazine had a very intriguing cover story. It was called, ?Fighting Smarter? By Will Marshall and Jeremy Rosner; Adapted from the book, With All Our Might: A Progressive Strategy for Defeating Jihadism and Defending Liberty.
Oddly enough, the strategy seemed to make very good sense. There was the usual rhetoric that bashed conservatives, President Bush, and it sang the songs of praise for liberalism, progressive leaders, but once I saw past that I couldn?t escape the feeling that this national security strategy was a good plan. It was also a familiar plan.
The article?s core, published in the May 17, 2006 edition of Blueprint, was ?A five-part progressive plan to defend liberal democracy:?
"What shocked me the most about this wasn?t the hypocrisy, audacity, or arrogance of using the PNAC principles as their own progressive national security strategy, and it wasn?t the irony of the deliberately divisive Democrats who had just cast aside Senator Lieberman; their last vestige of bi-partisanship. No?what shocked me the most was that they actually copied the 9 year old neoconservative principles in order!"
First, we must marshal all of America's manifold strengths, starting with our military power but going well beyond it, for the struggle ahead.
Second, we must rebuild America's alliances, because democratic solidarity is one of our greatest strategic assets.
Third, we must champion liberal democracy in deed, not just in rhetoric, because a freer world is a safer world.
Fourth, we must renew US leadership in the international economy and rise to the challenge of global competition.
Fifth, we must summon from the American people a new spirit of national unity and shared sacrifice.
Does that seem like a good strategy to anyone? Try reading it again without the word ?liberal.? Does it seem familiar? It should. It?s the same exact plan that the neoconservatives have been saying for 9 years.
Project for a New American Century
Statement of Principles
June 3, 1997
? We need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future
? We need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values
? We need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad
? We need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles
The centrist Democratic Leadership Council just proposed a national security strategy identical to the PNAC's. The only thing they added was an item calling for bi-partisan unity (irony has no bounds to progressives apparently). What shocked me the most about this wasn?t the hypocrisy, audacity, or arrogance of using the PNAC principles as their own progressive national security strategy, and it wasn?t the irony of the deliberately divisive Democrats who had just cast aside Senator Lieberman; their last vestige of bi-partisanship. No?what shocked me the most was that they actually copied the 9 year old neoconservative principles in order!
DLC: First, we must marshal all of America's manifold strengths, starting with our military power but going well beyond it, for the struggle ahead.
[PNAC#1] We need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future
DLC: Second, we must rebuild America's alliances, because democratic solidarity is one of our greatest strategic assets.
[PNAC#2] We need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values.
DLC: Third, we must champion liberal democracy in deed, not just in rhetoric, because a freer world is a safer world.
[PNAC#3] We need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad
DLC: Fourth, we must renew U.S. leadership in the international economy and rise to the challenge of global competition.
[PNAC#4] We need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.
DLC: Fifth, we must summon from the American people a new spirit of national unity and shared sacrifice.
[Apparently the PNAC never thought they needed to call for bi-partisanship 9yrs ago]
Since September 11th, 2001, I?ve been unable to find a national security strategy that is viable, reasonable, and liberal or progressive. In 2001-2002 Democrats supported President Bush?s national security strategies. In 2002-2004 the DNC party platform ?Plan for America? attempted to take elements of President Bush?s strategy for the War on Terror, re-number them, and present them as their own. In 2005, Sen. Kerry ?demanded? that 20,000 American troops be pulled from Iraq, but years earlier the Pentagon had published its plans to pull 20,000 troops from Iraq after the December election.
Arrogance, hypocrisy, irony, audacity, and deceit apparently have no bounds among progressives when it comes to national security plans.
Sam Pender is the author of several books on the Global War on Terror and the Iraq Wars in particular. His works include: Iraq's Smoking Gun, How Did It Come to This?, The Ignored War, America's War With Saddam, and Saddam's Ties to Al Qaeda.
Link (http://www.therant.us/guest/pender/08182006.htm)
The Fifth Column Sam Pender
August 18, 2006
The Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) is a more centrist element of today?s Democratic Party. After Sen. Lieberman?s primary defeat last week, I decided to go to the DLC website and see how the centrist Democrats were reacting to their defeat as well as the victory of the far left. There wasn?t a canned response at that time. I had hoped that the DLC would have prepared both win and lose positions in advance, but apparently the party just can?t figure out how to pander to their base of pacifists, appeasers, geo-political procrastinators, Bush-haters, socialists etc. while at the same time seeking support from that critical centrist and right side of the spectrum needed to win general elections.
At the DLC website I came across some articles describing the Democrats? national security strategies. I thought they?d be interesting since I really don?t know where the party stands. Given that their recent ?Real Security? publication was only 8 double-spaced pages with no details on anything, I was surprised to see that there?s a great deal of text on liberal national security strategies.
A further examination of the site showed that there?s an associated magazine called, Blueprint. Now, Blueprint magazine had a very intriguing cover story. It was called, ?Fighting Smarter? By Will Marshall and Jeremy Rosner; Adapted from the book, With All Our Might: A Progressive Strategy for Defeating Jihadism and Defending Liberty.
Oddly enough, the strategy seemed to make very good sense. There was the usual rhetoric that bashed conservatives, President Bush, and it sang the songs of praise for liberalism, progressive leaders, but once I saw past that I couldn?t escape the feeling that this national security strategy was a good plan. It was also a familiar plan.
The article?s core, published in the May 17, 2006 edition of Blueprint, was ?A five-part progressive plan to defend liberal democracy:?
"What shocked me the most about this wasn?t the hypocrisy, audacity, or arrogance of using the PNAC principles as their own progressive national security strategy, and it wasn?t the irony of the deliberately divisive Democrats who had just cast aside Senator Lieberman; their last vestige of bi-partisanship. No?what shocked me the most was that they actually copied the 9 year old neoconservative principles in order!"
First, we must marshal all of America's manifold strengths, starting with our military power but going well beyond it, for the struggle ahead.
Second, we must rebuild America's alliances, because democratic solidarity is one of our greatest strategic assets.
Third, we must champion liberal democracy in deed, not just in rhetoric, because a freer world is a safer world.
Fourth, we must renew US leadership in the international economy and rise to the challenge of global competition.
Fifth, we must summon from the American people a new spirit of national unity and shared sacrifice.
Does that seem like a good strategy to anyone? Try reading it again without the word ?liberal.? Does it seem familiar? It should. It?s the same exact plan that the neoconservatives have been saying for 9 years.
Project for a New American Century
Statement of Principles
June 3, 1997
? We need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future
? We need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values
? We need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad
? We need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles
The centrist Democratic Leadership Council just proposed a national security strategy identical to the PNAC's. The only thing they added was an item calling for bi-partisan unity (irony has no bounds to progressives apparently). What shocked me the most about this wasn?t the hypocrisy, audacity, or arrogance of using the PNAC principles as their own progressive national security strategy, and it wasn?t the irony of the deliberately divisive Democrats who had just cast aside Senator Lieberman; their last vestige of bi-partisanship. No?what shocked me the most was that they actually copied the 9 year old neoconservative principles in order!
DLC: First, we must marshal all of America's manifold strengths, starting with our military power but going well beyond it, for the struggle ahead.
[PNAC#1] We need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future
DLC: Second, we must rebuild America's alliances, because democratic solidarity is one of our greatest strategic assets.
[PNAC#2] We need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values.
DLC: Third, we must champion liberal democracy in deed, not just in rhetoric, because a freer world is a safer world.
[PNAC#3] We need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad
DLC: Fourth, we must renew U.S. leadership in the international economy and rise to the challenge of global competition.
[PNAC#4] We need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.
DLC: Fifth, we must summon from the American people a new spirit of national unity and shared sacrifice.
[Apparently the PNAC never thought they needed to call for bi-partisanship 9yrs ago]
Since September 11th, 2001, I?ve been unable to find a national security strategy that is viable, reasonable, and liberal or progressive. In 2001-2002 Democrats supported President Bush?s national security strategies. In 2002-2004 the DNC party platform ?Plan for America? attempted to take elements of President Bush?s strategy for the War on Terror, re-number them, and present them as their own. In 2005, Sen. Kerry ?demanded? that 20,000 American troops be pulled from Iraq, but years earlier the Pentagon had published its plans to pull 20,000 troops from Iraq after the December election.
Arrogance, hypocrisy, irony, audacity, and deceit apparently have no bounds among progressives when it comes to national security plans.
Sam Pender is the author of several books on the Global War on Terror and the Iraq Wars in particular. His works include: Iraq's Smoking Gun, How Did It Come to This?, The Ignored War, America's War With Saddam, and Saddam's Ties to Al Qaeda.
Link (http://www.therant.us/guest/pender/08182006.htm)