# Did the PNAC really hope for a "Pearl Harbor event"? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 14, 2003, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-pnac-really-hope-for-a-pearl-harbor-event/188376 "2003-07-14T14:05:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2003, 1:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-pnac-really-hope-for-a-pearl-harbor-event/188376/21 "2003-07-15T13:05:46Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by jjimm \* > \*\*Apologies. I was trying to establish whether or not Paul was misrepresenting Ledeen and/or the PNAC. I now believe he is. > > The post of mine that you jumped on was actually me trying to explain why opponents of the neo-cons would find the quotes, if they were made as represented, useful. \*\* Ah. Your ambiguous “And that ain’t nice.” statement threw me, since it wasn’t clear if you meant: [ul][li]It ain’t nice to suggest Pearl Harbor was lucky, or[/li][li]It ain’t nice to falsely accuse others of suggesting Pearl Harbor was lucky.[/ul][/li] The problem is that even the second choice is an odd thing to start an thread about, since it kind of implies “should we be concerned that other people may be stupid enough to fall for this?” ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2003, 1:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-pnac-really-hope-for-a-pearl-harbor-event/188376/22 "2003-07-15T13:08:07Z")
Speaking of Ron Paul and conspiracy theories… here’s some articles **by** Ron Paul over at [Conspiracy Planet](http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?ChannelID=90). I get the impression that much of Paul’s commentary on PNAC should be taken with a grain of salt or two. > [@](#): > > **Bryan** -it’s that he’s warning the American people that complacency invites another Pearl Harbor, Actually he’s not even doing that. He’s simply saying that a Pearl Harbor event would speed changes in public willingness to following PNAC leads. A true enough statement, as has been demonstrated.(if we can compare a Japanese military strike on an American forward base with a plane hijack into a civilian target) ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2003, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-pnac-really-hope-for-a-pearl-harbor-event/188376/23 "2003-07-15T13:47:20Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by CarnalK \* > Actually he’s not even doing that. He’s simply saying that a Pearl Harbor event would speed changes in public willingness to following PNAC leads. Fair enough. Of course, that makes the statement even _less_ dramatic, and the response should be to look at Ron Paul while saying “What makes you think I’d be dumb enough to get worked up over this, you doofus?” ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2003, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-pnac-really-hope-for-a-pearl-harbor-event/188376/24 "2003-07-15T14:50:40Z")
> [@](#): > > Fair enough. Of course, that makes the statement even less dramatic, and the response should be to look at Ron Paul while saying “What makes you think I’d be dumb enough to get worked up over this, you doofus?” I agree. As I said the statement isn’t even inaccurate. Also if you peruse those articles in the link you can see Ron Paul is quite prone to giving Libertarian spin. So the final answer to the OP: > [@](#): > > Is this in fact real, or is it misinformation? is that the Ron Paul speech twisted the PNAC statement. The original statement can only be seen as realpolitik discussion. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-pnac-really-hope-for-a-pearl-harbor-event/188376.md?page=1)