Francis Galton Posted April 11, 2004 Report Share Posted April 11, 2004 The following is from http://www.amconmag.com/ March 24, 2003 issue Copyright © 2003 The American Conservative Whose War? A neoconservative clique seeks to ensnare our country in a series of wars that are not in America’s interest. by Patrick J. Buchanan The War Party may have gotten its war. But it has also gotten something it did not bargain for. Its membership lists and associations have been exposed and its motives challenged. In a rare moment in U.S. journalism, Tim Russert put this question directly to Richard Perle: “Can you assure American viewers ... that we’re in this situation against Saddam Hussein and his removal for American security interests? And what would be the link in terms of Israel?” Suddenly, the Israeli connection is on the table, and the War Party is not amused. Finding themselves in an unanticipated firefight, our neoconservative friends are doing what comes naturally, seeking student deferments from political combat by claiming the status of a persecuted minority group. People who claim to be writing the foreign policy of the world superpower, one would think, would be a little more manly in the schoolyard of politics. Not so. Complete text at http://www.amconmag.com/03_24_03/cover.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WGD Posted April 11, 2004 Report Share Posted April 11, 2004 The following is from http://www.amconmag.com/ March 24, 2003 issue Copyright © 2003 The American Conservative Whose War? A neoconservative clique seeks to ensnare our country in a series of wars that are not in America’s interest. by Patrick J. Buchanan The War Party may have gotten its war. But it has also gotten something it did not bargain for. Its membership lists and associations have been exposed and its motives challenged. In a rare moment in U.S. journalism, Tim Russert put this question directly to Richard Perle: “Can you assure American viewers ... that we’re in this situation against Saddam Hussein and his removal for American security interests? And what would be the link in terms of Israel?” Suddenly, the Israeli connection is on the table, and the War Party is not amused. Finding themselves in an unanticipated firefight, our neoconservative friends are doing what comes naturally, seeking student deferments from political combat by claiming the status of a persecuted minority group. People who claim to be writing the foreign policy of the world superpower, one would think, would be a little more manly in the schoolyard of politics. Not so. Complete text at http://www.amconmag.com/03_24_03/cover.html Buchanan never says how these wars are not in America's interest. His argument is, the wars help Israel, therefore Jews in the government are doing Israel bidding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard_Halley Posted April 11, 2004 Report Share Posted April 11, 2004 It seems to me that this Galton person is here for the sole purpose of posting essays which directly contradict Objectivism. Meanwhile, his claims that he is an "objectivist" are absurd, since he explicitly aruges that ethics is subjective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Praxus Posted April 11, 2004 Report Share Posted April 11, 2004 They estimated a few thousand American casulties before the war, there are 650 now and they act as if we are losing patheticly. We are losing the initiative because we fear Iraqi public opinion, I hardly say we are in an unwinnable war. It is certainly winable we just refuse to win it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.