aceventura3

I don't know what is real, exaggerated, politicized, or made up, regarding the organization from the websites I have visited. It seems the constant is that the organization is or was made up of a group of conservatives with a belief in maintaining and using US military strength. It seems that the philosophy of the people in the organization comes from the Reagan administration and has influenced Bush 41 and Bush 43.

I still don't understand the relevance of the organization. If I want to know what Chaney thinks about our military and how he would like it used in the world, all I have to do is trace his very public track record and public statements on the subject. He has not been deceptive on this topic, nor has he been deceptive about his views regarding executive power. Bush has not been deceptive either. I don't get it.

Host, I am one of the people in the world who felt Saddam Hussein should have been removed from power during the Gulf War. If I had been an elected official with any influence, I would have made the case for his removal. I would have had a plan for his removal and I would have had conditions under which I would have wanted those plans executed - given the fact we failed to march into Bagdad during the Gulf War. If this is what you fault PNAC for, o.k. - I get your point of view. Again, I just don't have a problem with having a plan and conditions under which the plan should be executed. My guess is that even Jimmy Carter had military plans and conditions for execution that he gave thought to. I agree, that these plans and the conditions for execution may not look "pretty" when published.

__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."