Just recently Obama announced that he’s sending an additional 30,000 troops into Afghanistan. Nobody seems to have any idea why. I don’t really claim to either, but I’ll share what my own personal research has led me to. If you want my opinion, I’m guessing we’ll soon find ourselves in Iran before long. Here’s what I’m basing my guess upon.
Between 1997 and 2006 a think-tank existed called “Project For A New American Century” or PNAC for short. Some prominent members of the group included: Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, and Dick Cheney, not to mention many other “high-ups” with big political influence. They wrote up a document called “Rebuilding Americas Defenses.” The document was all about their agenda to keep American dominance throughout the world. You can read about it here:
In this document they tell how Saddam Hussein was a threat who needed to be removed at all cost. Within its statement of principles you find this:
[What we require is] a military that is strong and ready to meet both present and future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles abroad; and national leadership that accepts the United States’ global responsibilities. Of course, the United States must be prudent in how it exercises its power. But we cannot safely avoid the responsibilities of global leadership of the costs that are associated with its exercise. America has a vital role in maintaining peace and security in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. If we shirk our responsibilities, we invite challenges to our fundamental interests. The history of the 20th century should have taught us that it is important to shape circumstances before crises emerge, and to meet threats before they become dire. The history of the past century should have taught us to embrace the cause of American leadership.
Next in the Preface you find this:
ESTABLISH FOUR CORE MISSIONS for the U.S. military:
- defend the American homeland;
- fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars;
- perform the “constabulary” duties associated with shaping the security environment in critical regions;
transform U.S. forces to exploit the “revolution in military affairs”;
Just listen to that. “fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous theater wars.” It’s incredible, though not really surprising, to hear that Dick Cheney was involved in writing a document like this. Theater wars. *Sighs* It continues:
To carry out these core missions, we need to provide sufficient force and budgetary allocations. In particular, the United States must:
MAINTAIN NUCLEAR STRATEGIC SUPERIORITY, basing the U.S. deterrent upon a global, nuclear net assessment that weighs the full range of current and emerging threats, not merely the U.S.-Russia balance.
RESTORE THE PERSONNEL STRENGTH of today’s force to roughly the levels anticipated in the “Base Force” outlined by the Bush Administration, an increase in active-duty strength from 1.4 million to 1.6 million.
REPOSITION U.S. FORCES to respond to 21st century strategic realities by shifting permanently-based forces to Southeast Europe and Southeast Asia, and by changing naval deployment patterns to reflect growing U.S. strategic concerns in East Asia. (iv)
Later they go on to emphasize details in military spending and projects, such as the F-22 stealth fighter, naval ships, and other things. They also stress that military budgets must increase every year by like 3% of GDP.
To continue, if you’re wondering what’s going on with these Afghanistan, Iraq, and (my guess) soon to be Iran wars, this same document states: (quoting from Wikipedia)
In relation to the Persian Gulf, citing particularly Iraq and Iran, Rebuilding America’s Defenses states that “while the unresolved conflict in Iraq provides the immediate justification [for U.S. military presence], the need for a substantial American force presence in the [Persian] Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein” and “Over the long term, Iran may well prove as large a threat to U.S. interests in the [Persian] Gulf as Iraq has. And even should U.S.-Iranian relations improve, retaining forward-based forces in the region would still be an essential element in U.S. security strategy given the longstanding American interests in the region.“
What those “American interests in the region” are, I have no clue. But it seems to me that the news is at work to prepare us for an Iranian invasion. Here’s just a few clips:
The PNAC document also talks about setting up missile defense shields in Europe.
Considering that these guys were running things under George Bush’s administration, and nothing has really changed under Obama, I’m guessing this this agenda is still being carried out. Former President Jimmy Carter had this to say about PNAC:
At first, argues Carter, Bush responded to the challenge of September 11 in an effective and intelligent way, “but in the meantime a group of conservatives worked to get approval for their long held ambitions under the mantle of ‘the war on terror’.” The restrictions on civil rights in the US and at Guantanamo, cancellation of international accords, “contempt for the rest of the world”, and finally an attack on Iraq “although there is no threat to the US from Baghdad” – all these things will have devastating consequences, according to Carter. “This entire unilateralism”, warns the ex-President, “will increasingly isolate the US from those nations that we need in order to do battle with terrorism.
Section V of Rebuilding America’s Defenses, entitled “Creating Tomorrow’s Dominant Force” says this:
“Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor”
Conspiracy theorists say the 9/11 attacks were an inside job by the Bush administration in order for these same guys behind PNAC to get in the middle east and fulfill this agenda. *Shrugs*
I mean really, what can you say? The guys running the government, right there on our TV screens every night, wrote a document outlining everything that has happened since Bush came into office, and now Obama is continuing these policies. So, I’m guessing we’ll be in Iran soon, for some unknown strategic reason in relation to the American dominance agenda that is being played out.
I hope I’m wrong, but I really don’t thinks so. My guess is I’ll wake up one morning, open the New York Times and there it will be on the front page – we’ll be invading Iran, and there’ll be some reason why we did so. It’ll probably be weapons of mass destruction, similar to Iraq.