{"id":6419,"date":"2011-11-30T00:02:22","date_gmt":"2011-11-30T08:02:22","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/2011\/11\/30\/are-you-ready-for-some-neocons\/"},"modified":"2011-11-30T00:02:22","modified_gmt":"2011-11-30T08:02:22","slug":"are-you-ready-for-some-neocons","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/2011\/11\/30\/are-you-ready-for-some-neocons\/","title":{"rendered":"Are You Ready for Some Neocons?"},"content":{"rendered":"

As the popularity of Newt Gingrich grows, it\u2019s critically important that we understand that Newt is a Neocon, just how dangerous Neocons are, and what kind of foreign policy we could expect from Newt.  Those of you who have been active long enough to remember PNAC, know what I\u2019m talking about here.  For starters, lets look at Newt\u2019s foreign policy advisors.<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\"30NEOCONS\"When it comes to foreign policy, the Republican frontrunner likes it old-school. Neo-old school.<\/p>\n

We\u2019ve had two foreign policy themed debates in the GOP primary now, which have provided ample opportunity to see what a Republican foreign policy would look like in 2013. And in the case of Newt Gingrich, it would probably look like a kind of neocon fantasy land.<\/p>\n

Foreign Policy published an excellent rundown<\/a> of Gingrich\u2019s foreign policy advising team, most of whom \u201chave known Newt for decades, and see themselves as helping a candidate who already boasts a long track record and well-formed intellectual identity when it comes to foreign policy.\u201d<\/p>\n

Here\u2019s a taste of World Team Gingrich:<\/p>\n

David Wurmser<\/strong>: Gingrich\u2019s Middle East policy adviser was a notorious member of Vice President Cheney\u2019s inner circle that pushed the U.S. into war in Iraq. Once he was questioned during an espionage probe<\/a> while in the vice president\u2019s office, and he was one of the names driving the initial support for the later disgraced Ahmed Chalabi. Asked by the Daily Telegraph in 2007<\/a> if he was a neocon, he offered this: \u201cThere\u2019s nothing \u2018neo\u2019 about me. I\u2019m a very medieval sort of guy.\u201d<\/p>\n

James Woosley<\/strong>: A former director of the CIA, Woolsey recently spoke at a panel hosted by the founder of Judicial Watch focused on President Obama\u2019s \u201cpolitical jihad<\/a> promoting Islam around the world.\u201d Woolsey is a serious Iran hawk, warning that the way the West is dealing with the nation at the moment \u201crhymes with what was taking place in the 1930s [with Nazi Germany]\u201d. Woolsey is a Democrat (of the Lieberman school) but he\u2019s helped Republicans running for president before. In 2008, he advised<\/a> John McCain. <\/p>\n

Stephen Yates<\/strong>: Another ex-Cheney national security team member, Yates is known among other things for his work on China. One former U.S. ambassador<\/a> to China familiar with Yates says he views \u201cChina as the solution to \u2018enemy deprivation syndrome.\u2019\u201d As Counterpunch<\/a> explained the theory, \u201cYou need some unifying enemy after the collapse of the Soviet Union.\u201d Not exactly the most productive way to view one of America\u2019s most important trading partner, perhaps… [emphasis original<\/em>]<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Inserted from <TPM<\/a>><\/p>\n

Quite a rogues gallery, aren\u2019t they?  From the Neocon perspective, war is the solution to all foreign policy problems.  You man not be aware that the Neocons in charge during the Bush Regime intended to attack and conquer seven different nations after Afghanistan.  Here is a clip from October 2007, in which General Wesley Clark lists these countries and explains how he came to know about this Republican scheme.<\/font><\/p>\n