Paul Craig Roberts

[TPS]

I'm always amazed when I agree with a former Reagan Adviser....

 

P.C. Roberts

[GG]

Why don't you just come out and say what you've been implying - Wolfowitz, Perle & Libby are Likud spies, who hijacked US foreign policy to reelect Sharon at the expense of US lives.

[TPS]

I stated a couple of years ago that I thought Iraq was (mainly) about two things: Israel and oil. I've posted many articles by former and current CIA analysts that said the same thing. One doesn't have to be a spy to support those goals; the US has always supported Israel, and we've always tried to keep supply of ME oil to the US open. Other than that, your insinuations of what I'm saying are assinine. But for some reason you always feel the need to attack me, so I'm used to it.

[GG]

I stated a couple of years ago that I thought Iraq was (mainly) about two things: Israel and oil.  I've posted many articles by former and current CIA analysts that said the same thing.  One doesn't have to be a spy to support those goals; the US has always supported Israel, and we've always tried to keep supply of ME oil to the US open.  Other than that, your insinuations of what I'm saying are assinine.  But for some reason you always feel the need to attack me, so I'm used to it.

65889[/snapback]

 

 

Maybe it's my selective reading, but I recall zero articles that you have posted that talk about the need to maintain a steady supply of oil as one of the justifications for the war (which it is) But you don't have to go far to read your links about the Pentagon's neocon wars with CIA & State.

 

What am I supposed to infer when you say that you agree with an opinion that believes that Iraq was a counterweight to Likud's territorial ambitions, and now that Saddam is gone with US help Israel can do what she wants? Doesn't that flat out state that neocons hijacked the US to help Likud?

[TPS]

My interpretation of the article, or at least the part you focus on, is that the goals of the Neocons are consistent with Israel's goals. That doesn't mean they are conspiring to help Israel;however, it does imply that they may help each other achieve their goals. I certainly believe that is plausible.

 

There are people who do believe that some of the neocons are in bed with Israel--Pat Buchanan for example.

 

I posted the article because of Robert's criticism that Kerry and Bush do not differ much on Iraq, not for what you tried to pull out of it.

[GG]

My interpretation of the article, or at least the part you focus on, is that the goals of the Neocons are consistent with Israel's goals.  That doesn't mean they are conspiring to help Israel;however, it does imply that they may help each other achieve their goals.  I certainly believe that is plausible. 

 

There are people who do believe that some of the neocons are in bed with Israel--Pat Buchanan for example.

 

I posted the article because of Robert's criticism that Kerry and Bush do not differ much on Iraq, not for what you tried to pull out of it.

65954[/snapback]

 

If this was the only thing that you posted, then I wouldn't pull anything out of it. But when this followed the previous links, which (co?)incidentally included the Pat Buchanan's theories, you're making it easy to spot a pattern.

 

Yeah, Roberts says there's not much difference between Kerry & Bush in their views, because they're missing the big picture of "neoconservative goal of conquest."

[TPS]

As I just stated, I believe that the goals of the Neocons are consistent with the goals of hardline Israelis, so it wouldn't surprise me if they helped each other achieve their goals. If the Neocon goals are in the best interest of the US, then it's not a bad thing; but I don't believe they are.

 

Yes, I am absolutely guilty of posting articles about the battles between the Neocon-controlled Pentagon and the State Dept or the CIA. That tells me there are people who in those agencies who also believe that the interests of the Neocons are not in the best interests of the US.

 

As for spies, Israel would never infiltrate US security agencies, would they?

[GG]

Actually the goals of US and Israel (not just factions) are aligned in not having rogue regimes in Mid East - Israel for direct protection, US for no meddling in the supply of a major global economic commodity, and no proliferation of geopolitical destabilization.

 

But since you bring Pollard up, what connection does he have to the neocons in office?

[TPS]

I agree, those are goals and reasons why we've always been aligned with Israel. The neocons have grander goals in mind.

 

I made the spy statement because you made it sound ludicrous that Israel would have spies in the Pentagon. There is currently an investigation of Israeli spying in the Pentagon, so I was not only thinking of Pollard. That said, I don't believe that some of the top officials that you mentioned are spies, nor are they beholden to Sharon. However, their goal of using military force to bring "democracy" to the ME certainly helps Israel and Sharon in more ways than just eliminating enemies. I think their domino theory will fail and create more instability and more terrorists, neither of which is good for US.

[GG]

And you lost me again. What grander goals do the neocons have in mind?

 

All I've seen is the theory that the US should not be afraid to use its military might to assert its interests anywhere in the world, especially if there's a threat to the US, its people and its economy. A major way to accomplish the goal is to spread democracy and economic freedom to countries that don't have it.

 

Whether you agree or not with that theory should have little bearing on whether it benefits some countries over others (but it makes better headlines)

 

As to the Pollard mention, seems that you're more than ready to make a direct connection between a spy convicted 20 years ago and nearly the entire upper echelon of the Pentagon's civilian leadership now.

 

Yes, you had linked the recent Pentagon "spy" story as well. Of course in the previous thread you backed down from the spying allegations, as apparently the documents in question were not classified. But, why bother remembering that in this thread?

[TPS]

And you lost me again.  What grander goals do the neocons have in mind? 

 

As to the Pollard mention, seems that you're more than ready to make a direct connection between a spy convicted 20 years ago and nearly the entire upper echelon of the Pentagon's civilian leadership now. 

 

Yes, you had linked the recent Pentagon "spy" story as well.  Of course in the previous thread you backed down from the spying allegations, as apparently the documents in question were not classified.  But, why bother remembering that in this thread?

66269[/snapback]

I'll respond to the first question when I have more time--this is where many of us have fundamental differences.

 

Second point, not at all. Once again, YOU made it seem outlandish that Israel could spy on the US; but you know otherwise. Are they currently? It's possible, but I don't think need to because they have a close enough relationship with the Neocons.

 

Third point: once again you are trying to put words in my mouth. I never made the allegation. Most of the time when I post an article like that I pose a question like, "Israeli spying at the Pentagon?" As a lead-in to the article.

 

I would appreciate it if you could find the post where I made the allegation, and then backed down from it. While I read a couple of articles on it, I don't remember ever seeing any resolution. What I also seem to remember, is that I viewed it as yet another battle between the Neocon Pentagon and their opponents at other security agencies. Like that article I posted about the CIA waging an "insurgency" against the administration; it might have been another attempt by the CIA to embarrass and discredit the Neocons...??

[Alaska Darin]

I'll respond to the first question when I have more time--this is where many of us have fundamental differences.

 

Second point, not at all. Once again, YOU made it seem outlandish that Israel could spy on the US; but you know otherwise.  Are they currently? It's possible, but I don't think need to because they have a close enough relationship with the Neocons.

 

Third point: once again you are trying to put words in my mouth. I never made the allegation.  Most of the time when I post an article like that I pose a question like, "Israeli spying at the Pentagon?"  As a lead-in to the article. 

 

I would appreciate it if you could find the post where I made the allegation, and then backed down from it.  While I read a couple of articles on it, I don't remember ever seeing any resolution.  What I also seem to remember, is that I viewed it as yet another battle between the Neocon Pentagon and their opponents at other security agencies.  Like that article I posted about the CIA waging an "insurgency" against the administration; it might have been another attempt by the CIA to embarrass and discredit the Neocons...??

66425[/snapback]

What planet do you reside on? Your continued "global conspiracy theory" is virtually impossible, given the competence and secrecy it would take from the numerous parties involved. Know a politician who can keep his mouth shut?

 

The Israeli's aren't spying on us because they don't "need" to? Oh, OK. We're also not spying on them. You'd make an excellent statesman.

[TPS]

What planet do you reside on?  Your continued "global conspiracy theory" is virtually impossible, given the competence and secrecy it would take from the numerous parties involved.  Know a politician who can keep his mouth shut?

 

The Israeli's aren't spying on us because they don't "need" to?  Oh, OK.  We're also not spying on them.  You'd make an excellent statesman.

66881[/snapback]

 

Not sure why you think I've stated there's a global conspiracy. All I've stated is that the interests of the Neocons and the interests of the hardliners in Israel coincide, so it wouldn't surprise me if they help each other in achieving their goals.

 

We've historically supported Israel and its self-determination, so there are many instances where we've worked together because their goals have been consistent with our goals, and they've been in the best interest of the US--no conspiracy. The difference this time, I don't believe the goals of the Neocons is in the best interest of the US. From what I've read, there seem to be a lot of people in the State Dept and CIA who are also opposed to the Neocon agenda because they must believe that as well. Here's one example (there are several others from different people) of an article by another "Anonymous" CIA analyst who summarizes the issue in an article speculating what will happen after Powell resigns in term 2.

 

Anonymous

 

I'm not so naive as to think these kinds of machinations don't go on.

[GG]

Second point, not at all. Once again, YOU made it seem outlandish that Israel could spy on the US; but you know otherwise.  Are they currently? It's possible, but I don't think need to because they have a close enough relationship with the Neocons.

 

I made it seem outlandish that senior Pentagon officials are double dealing as agents for Israel, and directly setting US policy to benefit Israel over the benefit to US. Not quite the same as having a spy passing documents around.

 

 

Third point: once again you are trying to put words in my mouth. I never made the allegation.  Most of the time when I post an article like that I pose a question like, "Israeli spying at the Pentagon?"  As a lead-in to the article. 

 

I would appreciate it if you could find the post where I made the allegation, and then backed down from it.  While I read a couple of articles on it, I don't remember ever seeing any resolution.

 

What I also seem to remember, is that I viewed it as yet another battle between the Neocon Pentagon and their opponents at other security agencies.  Like that article I posted about the CIA waging an "insurgency" against the administration; it might have been another attempt by the CIA to embarrass and discredit the Neocons...??

66425[/snapback]

 

That is the point. You started off with the spying angle, then turned it into a big turf battle between Pentagon vs CIA & State. Here

 

As to the Slate article, it's written by an Anonymous State Dept (not CIA) employee lamenting about Powell losing power. Not much bias?

 

While I'm certainly not naive to believe that heavy political machinations don't occur inside the Beltway, I'm still enough of a Polyanna not to think that 4 men hijacked US foreign policy to help Israel.

[TPS]

I made it seem outlandish that senior Pentagon officials are double dealing as agents for Israel, and directly setting US policy to benefit Israel over the benefit to US.  Not quite the same as having a spy passing documents around.

Point taken. However the only reason I mentioned Pollard was to imply that Israel has certainly spied on us before; it was not to imply the leadership at the Pentagon are spies.

That is the point.  You started off with the spying angle, then turned it into a big turf battle between Pentagon vs CIA & State. Here

Looking through that thread I don't see where "I started off with the spying angle." Look at the title of the thread--Fued between Pentagon and CIA. In fact, what I read from my posts is essentially what I've been arguing here, again.

 

As to the Slate article, it's written by an Anonymous State Dept (not CIA) employee lamenting about Powell losing power.  Not much bias?

Of course; we are all biased, though most won't admit it, or think their beliefs somehow have a monopoly on truth. There is a lot in that article that I believe is correct; you may not agree. Time will tell.

 

While I'm certainly not naive to believe that heavy political machinations don't occur inside the Beltway, I'm still enough of a Polyanna not to think that 4 men hijacked US foreign policy to help Israel.

67159[/snapback]

I don't believe that either. What I believe is that the Iraq war was mutually beneficial to the goals of the Neocons (and there are a lot more than 4) and the Likud party, and I'm sure they did things like share information; especially information that helped justify the war. That's not a conspiracy, and it's not spying. Think of it as two special interest groups (Likud Party and Bush Admin) combining their efforts to bring about an outcome that benefits both groups.

 

On a side note, it's embarrassing to re-read an old post and find a spelling error that someone like Richio would make...