Khalilzad is Wolfowitz's boy...one of the most toxic of the neocons. He has also worked for Cheney, and before he was in government he worked for the oil company Unocal. They were the guys who were working with the Taliban, and Khalilzad was a big supported of the mujahadeen. I can't even begin to understand the twisted machinations that drive this guy.
He wrote the first intellectual work regarding American global hegemony in 1992. He has also written a book on the subject, called "From Containment to Global Leadership". Apparently, this book contains the beginnings of the Project for a New American Century platform. The next step in their agenda (forgetting, of course, that their previous steps were shockingly disastrous in every way) is to take on Iran, which will most likely anger other world powers, such as various countries in Europe, China, etc. A plan and analysis of just such a grotesque chessgame is laid out in his book, mentioned above.
So the idea is that Khalilzad has the big picture in his mind, and is ready to take the neocon agenda to the next level. Bolton was a braggart, who did some of the pre-positioning for this on the global stage. But, he is not very subtle, and the next stage will require a softer touch than Throwy McStapler could handle. Also, he would not have been confirmed.
When you remember that Wolfowitz, his mentor, is now head of the World Bank, part of the larger picture becomes clear. It seems like the administration is looking to step up the aggressive foreign policy in the next two years, and Khalilzad will facilitate movement in that direction.
Well then, that makes a lot of sense. But do you really think that the neocons are going to try and take this to the next level at this point? I'm not so sure they have the footing anymore. I could just be naive though...
PS good word choice with 'braggart' there Mr(s).Mystery Political Analyst.
The neocons definitely have the footing...they just don't have the political support (not in the US, anyway). Unfortunately, they don't need that. The congress has little say about foreign policy, and even less say about what the military does. The neocons have painstakingly strengthened the executive branch's role over the past 25 years, and they have been rewarding their corporate supporters lavishly for the past six.
Also, they have stacked the decks. People who don't agree with them get canned, and replaced by people who DO agree (or who don't care). This has been going on for six years. So they don't really need the support of the people anymore. In fact, they treat the American people with utter contempt. We will see where this leaves them in two years, but for now they are sitting pretty.
The Democrats might slow them down, but only if the people who elected them FORCE them to. I don't see the Democrats rolling back any of the marshal-law legislation, any of the stuff that destroys the BIll of Rights etc, or doing anything to address the signing statement enigma. Unless, of course, there is some kind of popular uprising which forces this upon them. There are some fantastic democrats who were elected, but the "establishment" democrats hold seniority, AND a majority within the party. Those guys won't do anything significant to change the terrifying momentum of these problems.
But, something important is happening in Iraq right now. Alongside the troop escalation, Bush seems to be implementing a kind of Marshall plan, with 1 billion dollars in DOMESTIC aide to Iraqis. So this isn't a payoff to the contractors, this money will actually jumpstart the Iraqi economy. With unemployment at around 60% there, and contractors driving around wasting resources (and people), its no wonder the area is war torn. PEople would much rather have a job than shoot at their neighbor...so hopefully this $1 billion will make a positive impact. Of course, any improvement will be chalked up to the "surge", which will allow the neocons to continue their military aggression...it will seem as though they have snatched an impossible victory from the Islamic jaws of defeat, and by then...things will be taken to the next level.
Just so you don't think I'm some wackjob, I have gleaned these interpretations from Scott Ritter, David Sirota, and Juan Cole. Those guys are way smarter than me, and I think that they are among the few who really understand what is going on around here.
By 'marshal-law legislation' I'm assuming you're referring to the patriot act and other such restrictive legislation, correct?
Despite your claim of not being a 'wackjob' and the subsequent qualification of that statement by citing your sources, truth-be-told you're an anonymous person posting on my insignificant little livejournal...so you very well could be a wackjob...an eloquent wackjob...but still a wackjob. :)
For the most part, the patriot act and similar legislation do not promote martial law. What I am talking about is the legislation (and I use that term advisedly) that establishes a parallel justice system or provides a framework to control the populace with force. The establishment of the Department of Homeland Security is a worrying step in this direction on both accounts, for example.
So basically, that phrase refers to the Military Commission act, a dozen executive orders, and the formation of the DHS. A few of the executive orders are: 10995: Allows the executive to seize control over all domestic media and communication networks 11000: Allows the executive to organize civilians (!!!) into work camps, under government control 11002: Allows the Postmaster General to begin a national registration program for all citizens
Theres a bunch more, these are what I can recall. As you said, this is just an insignificant LJ post :P
These executive orders are "activated" (if you will) when the executive himself declares an emergency. Congress has no oversight over this for six months.
This worries me, and I don't hear any major Democrats making any noise over this. The Military Comissions act is no longer an issue, either (though Conyers may take it on eventually).
He wrote the first intellectual work regarding American global hegemony in 1992. He has also written a book on the subject, called "From Containment to Global Leadership". Apparently, this book contains the beginnings of the Project for a New American Century platform. The next step in their agenda (forgetting, of course, that their previous steps were shockingly disastrous in every way) is to take on Iran, which will most likely anger other world powers, such as various countries in Europe, China, etc. A plan and analysis of just such a grotesque chessgame is laid out in his book, mentioned above.
So the idea is that Khalilzad has the big picture in his mind, and is ready to take the neocon agenda to the next level. Bolton was a braggart, who did some of the pre-positioning for this on the global stage. But, he is not very subtle, and the next stage will require a softer touch than Throwy McStapler could handle. Also, he would not have been confirmed.
When you remember that Wolfowitz, his mentor, is now head of the World Bank, part of the larger picture becomes clear. It seems like the administration is looking to step up the aggressive foreign policy in the next two years, and Khalilzad will facilitate movement in that direction.
Reply
But do you really think that the neocons are going to try and take this to the next level at this point? I'm not so sure they have the footing anymore. I could just be naive though...
PS good word choice with 'braggart' there Mr(s).Mystery Political Analyst.
Reply
Also, they have stacked the decks. People who don't agree with them get canned, and replaced by people who DO agree (or who don't care). This has been going on for six years. So they don't really need the support of the people anymore. In fact, they treat the American people with utter contempt. We will see where this leaves them in two years, but for now they are sitting pretty.
The Democrats might slow them down, but only if the people who elected them FORCE them to. I don't see the Democrats rolling back any of the marshal-law legislation, any of the stuff that destroys the BIll of Rights etc, or doing anything to address the signing statement enigma. Unless, of course, there is some kind of popular uprising which forces this upon them. There are some fantastic democrats who were elected, but the "establishment" democrats hold seniority, AND a majority within the party. Those guys won't do anything significant to change the terrifying momentum of these problems.
But, something important is happening in Iraq right now. Alongside the troop escalation, Bush seems to be implementing a kind of Marshall plan, with 1 billion dollars in DOMESTIC aide to Iraqis. So this isn't a payoff to the contractors, this money will actually jumpstart the Iraqi economy. With unemployment at around 60% there, and contractors driving around wasting resources (and people), its no wonder the area is war torn. PEople would much rather have a job than shoot at their neighbor...so hopefully this $1 billion will make a positive impact. Of course, any improvement will be chalked up to the "surge", which will allow the neocons to continue their military aggression...it will seem as though they have snatched an impossible victory from the Islamic jaws of defeat, and by then...things will be taken to the next level.
Just so you don't think I'm some wackjob, I have gleaned these interpretations from Scott Ritter, David Sirota, and Juan Cole. Those guys are way smarter than me, and I think that they are among the few who really understand what is going on around here.
Reply
Despite your claim of not being a 'wackjob' and the subsequent qualification of that statement by citing your sources, truth-be-told you're an anonymous person posting on my insignificant little livejournal...so you very well could be a wackjob...an eloquent wackjob...but still a wackjob. :)
Reply
For the most part, the patriot act and similar legislation do not promote martial law. What I am talking about is the legislation (and I use that term advisedly) that establishes a parallel justice system or provides a framework to control the populace with force. The establishment of the Department of Homeland Security is a worrying step in this direction on both accounts, for example.
So basically, that phrase refers to the Military Commission act, a dozen executive orders, and the formation of the DHS. A few of the executive orders are:
10995: Allows the executive to seize control over all domestic media and communication networks
11000: Allows the executive to organize civilians (!!!) into work camps, under government control
11002: Allows the Postmaster General to begin a national registration program for all citizens
Theres a bunch more, these are what I can recall. As you said, this is just an insignificant LJ post :P
These executive orders are "activated" (if you will) when the executive himself declares an emergency. Congress has no oversight over this for six months.
This worries me, and I don't hear any major Democrats making any noise over this. The Military Comissions act is no longer an issue, either (though Conyers may take it on eventually).
Reply
Leave a comment