# (Iraq-Related) Am I the only one... **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 3, 2005, 11:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-related-am-i-the-only-one/315406 "2005-08-03T11:17:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 14
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2005, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-related-am-i-the-only-one/315406/261 "2005-08-05T14:05:40Z")
Did I say there are no bodyguards, no organizations providing protection in Iraq? No, I did not. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2005, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-related-am-i-the-only-one/315406/262 "2005-08-05T14:06:26Z")
> [@yojimbo](#): > > I find it maddening that people are still only finding out about the PNAC. The cunts have had their game plan on the web for all to see for a very long time now and people still think it was a relativly new decision to go after SH and Iraq. So, what’s wrong about the PNAC? Look, here are the four basic principles the organization holds…what’s wrong with any of them? > [@](#): > > • we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future; > • we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values; > • we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad; > • we need to accept responsibility for America’s unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles. These are all good goals. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2005, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-related-am-i-the-only-one/315406/263 "2005-08-05T14:09:38Z")
> [@Monty](#): > > Hey, jackass, I see “hired for service in a foreign army.” I don’t see “armed bodyguard.” You, therefore, lie. Did you also see “Motivated solely by a desire for monetary or material gain”? What’s got your knickers in a twist, is your daddy a merc? ---
**Author:** ![light\_strand](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a6a055/32.png) [@light\_strand](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/light_strand)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2005, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-related-am-i-the-only-one/315406/264 "2005-08-05T14:09:46Z")
> [@tagos](#): > > Thanks Light - I knew all that. Maybe I’m dense but I just don’t understand what debating point it addressed regarding Red Fury. Genuine question, no intention to be snarky. PNAC has a theory that if there was a single Arabic democracy that the neighbors would see it, demand democracy themselves, and voila! Safe Israel, safe source or oil, and world peace. Of course, the advantage is that all of these people will be pro-American, and we will remain a world power. It’s self-serving, but altruistic in a strange way. They don’t particularly want anything specifically. They don’t want oil, they don’t land, they just want the US to maintain its status. It’s weird. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2005, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-related-am-i-the-only-one/315406/265 "2005-08-05T14:09:50Z")
> [@light strand](#): > > My dear **RedFury** it would behoove you to read about [the Project for the New American Century](http://www.newamericancentury.org/) prior to deciding whom you choose to distain. Please note the dates, and people who are involved in this little “think tank”. > > Get back to me when you are better informed. Mt beloved **lightstrand** , perhaps it would behoove you read some of my earlier posts on this issue. I became aware of PNAC, their influence and agenda, at a time when mentioning their plans made one subject to all kinds of “tin-foilery” remmarks. In point of fact, it was [this article by Jay Bookman](http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2319.htm), published in the Atlanta Journal Constitution, on \*\*29 September 2002 \*\*, that opened my eyes to them. Right. Now that that’s out of their way, your point? That the neocons are pure at heart? Because that only confirms initial comments about you. Have a wonderful day. ---
**Author:** ![light\_strand](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a6a055/32.png) [@light\_strand](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/light_strand)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2005, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-related-am-i-the-only-one/315406/266 "2005-08-05T14:14:35Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > Mt beloved **lightstrand** , perhaps it would behoove you read some of my earlier posts on this issue. I became aware of PNAC, their influence and agenda, at a time when mentioning their plans made one subject to all kinds of “tin-foilery” remmarks. > > In point of fact, it was [this article by Jay Bookman](http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2319.htm), published in the Atlanta Journal Constitution, on \*\*29 September 2002 \*\*, > that opened my eyes to them. > > Right. Now that that’s out of their way, your point? That the neocons are pure at heart? Because that only confirms initial comments about you. > > Have a wonderful day. Hay Sparky. If you know so much, why is it you think PNAC wanted to go into Iraq? ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2005, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-related-am-i-the-only-one/315406/267 "2005-08-05T14:15:04Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Did you also see “Motivated solely by a desire for monetary or material gain”? Sure did, jackass. Got any proof that’s their sole motivation? > [@](#): > > What’s got your knickers in a twist, is your daddy a merc? Nope. FWIR, your country was famous for that. Is your daddy also, like you, dishonest? ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2005, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-related-am-i-the-only-one/315406/268 "2005-08-05T14:20:39Z")
> [@Captain Amazing](#): > > So, what’s wrong about the PNAC? Look, here are the four basic principles the organization holds…what’s wrong with any of them? > > These are all good goals. Well for one thing the rest of the world doesn’t see the US maintaining itself as the sole super-power pursuing its own interests over the common good as a good goal. And no - the interests of the USA as defined by the PNAC do not equate to the global interest. It’s just this sort of ideological absolutism that we fear. Their wrong call on Iraq WMD’s should permanently discredit them all as bunch of dangerous, hysterical idealogues with no grasp of reality. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2005, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-related-am-i-the-only-one/315406/269 "2005-08-05T14:26:17Z")
PS-[ligth strand]The Project for the New American Century is an insidious little group led by, and with the deep involvement of, many, many members of the Bush Administration including, among others Rumsfeld, Wolfolwitz, and Bolton. **They have been advocating the overthrow or Iraq since at least 1998** [/quote] Much, _much_ earlier than that in fact. Wolfowitz actually wrote the original blueprint for gettining rid of Saddam and the basis of their ideology way back in Poppy Bush’s time. Problem was, it was leaked and published in the NYT and became – at the time – quite a bit of an embarrasment for them. He – Wolf – was asked to “tone it down” and eventually, the whole thing went underground, only to resurface - as you mention – during Clinton’s second term…and the rest, as they say, is history. For a through primer on everything PNAC, try here [RISE OF THE NEOCONS](http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/index.php/PNAC_101) Mayhaps we’ll have something to debate after we are _all_ equally informed. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2005, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-related-am-i-the-only-one/315406/270 "2005-08-05T14:28:20Z")
> [@light strand](#): > > Hay Sparky. If you know so much, why is it you think PNAC wanted to go into Iraq? Why to get flowers strewn in their paths. Isn’t that clear to you as well? ---
**Author:** ![Ithaka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e0b2c6/32.png) [@Ithaka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ithaka)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2005, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-related-am-i-the-only-one/315406/271 "2005-08-05T14:32:14Z")
> [@Monty](#): > > Did I say there are no bodyguards, no organizations providing protection in Iraq? No, I did not. Fair enough, but you seem to have quite a narrow definition of what a mercenary is. Why’s it such a big issue anyway? ---
**Author:** ![light\_strand](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a6a055/32.png) [@light\_strand](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/light_strand)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2005, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-related-am-i-the-only-one/315406/272 "2005-08-05T14:33:18Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > Why to get flowers strewn in their paths. Isn’t that clear to you as well? Look. I have asked you a straightforward question. Why exactly do you think the neocons wanted Iraq? This is not a tough question. You clearly have an opinion, including that I’m an idiot because of my beliefs, so give me the opportunity to mock yours. Oh and quite frankly. I think the PNAC knuckleheads honestly thought they would indeed have flowers strewn in their paths. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2005, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-related-am-i-the-only-one/315406/273 "2005-08-05T14:47:11Z")
> [@Ithaka](#): > > Fair enough, but you seem to have quite a narrow definition of what a mercenary is. Why’s it such a big issue anyway? Tossing a “loaded” word around willy-nilly for cheap debating tricks is dishonest. That’s why. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2005, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-related-am-i-the-only-one/315406/274 "2005-08-05T14:56:21Z")
> [@tagos](#): > > Well for one thing the rest of the world doesn’t see the US maintaining itself as the sole super-power pursuing its own interests over the common good as a good goal. > > And no - the interests of the USA as defined by the PNAC do not equate to the global interest. I’d be more sympathetic to your concerns if you weren’t writing from a country that had done just that from the 1760s to the 1940s. And why doesn’t it equate to the global interest? Historically, a single dominant power, be it regional or global, serves to bring about international peace, stabilitity and wealth, and times when you don’t have a Great Power or when a Great Power is collapsing are times of global chaos, economic uncertainty and war. And since there’s got to be a hegemon, one that promotes democracy and human rights worldwide is better than one that promotes dictatorship and repression worldwide. If somebody’s got to be in charge, it might as well be the US. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2005, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-related-am-i-the-only-one/315406/275 "2005-08-05T14:56:49Z")
> [@light strand](#): > > Look. I have asked you a straightforward question. Why exactly do you think the neocons wanted Iraq? This is not a tough question. You clearly have an opinion, including that I’m an idiot because of my beliefs, so give me the opportunity to mock yours. > > Oh and quite frankly. I think the PNAC knuckleheads honestly thought they would indeed have flowers strewn in their paths. Well, not sure you’re an idiot – I’ve only exchanged and read a couple of messages of yours in this this thread. However, on this particular matter, I’ve already made it quite clear what I think [you are.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=6441608&postcount=242) As for your new query, no need for _me_ to elucidate on what the neocons wanted in Iraq. It’s all right there in black and white tight on their mission statement and other papers. In short, the plan, as outlined in the PNAC documents, is to start with the invasion of Iraq, removal of Saddam Hussein as the first of several planned wars which would include attacks on Syria and Iran. The purpose of these military campaigns is to demonstrate the military might that will intimidate other nations, while at the same time permanently installing US military bases around the world to act as world cops, imposing and enforcing a law and order (Pax Americana in their Orwellian parlance) beneficial to the United States’ interests first and foremost. IOW, their version of 21st Century Empire. And then came their Pearl-Harbour But surely you knew this already…being so well informed and all, the following summation is right on their [bloody home page](http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm). > [@](#): > > As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world’s preeminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests? ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2005, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-related-am-i-the-only-one/315406/276 "2005-08-05T15:06:00Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > For a through primer on everything PNAC, try here [RISE OF THE NEOCONS](http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/index.php/PNAC_101) > > Mayhaps we’ll have something to debate after we are _all_ equally informed. Maybe if you want us to be informed, you could link us to a less biased, deceptive, and inflammatory site? ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2005, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-related-am-i-the-only-one/315406/277 "2005-08-05T15:07:29Z")
> [@Captain Amazing](#): > > I’d be more sympathetic to your concerns if you weren’t writing from a country that had done just that from the 1760s to the 1940s. And why doesn’t it equate to the global interest? Historically, a single dominant power, be it regional or global, serves to bring about international peace, stabilitity and wealth, and times when you don’t have a Great Power or when a Great Power is collapsing are times of global chaos, economic uncertainty and war. > > And since there’s got to be a hegemon, one that promotes democracy and human rights worldwide is better than one that promotes dictatorship and repression worldwide. If somebody’s got to be in charge, it might as well be the US. Translated as ‘fuck you’ we can do what we want cos we got the power. :rolleyes: That’s an unbelievably rosy and uninformed view of history too. Ancient UK history has no bearing on moral judgement. If your might makes right and sins of the fathers count, well, don’t whine the next time some terrorist flies jets into a building. They got the might and well, hey, you did have slavery. Me? i’ll call them fucking terrorists and righteously call for the asses of any co-conspirators without being a hypocrite. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2005, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-related-am-i-the-only-one/315406/278 "2005-08-05T15:07:54Z")
> [@Monty](#): > > Sure did, jackass. Got any proof that’s their sole motivation? Well, if it was patriotism they’dve signed up as real troops, wouldn’t they? Oh, you could be right, maybe they also just like killing people. I know the local ones are in it for the money - which brings us to: > [@Monty](#): > > FWIR, your country was famous for that. Was? _Was?_ . [the ratio of South Africans in the “mercenary ranks” could be as high as one in eight.](http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=13&art_id=vn20050514093849858C676132). Of course, I think you meant “countrymen” there, not “country”. I sincerely doubt they are government-sanctioned. [Or the government wouldn’t be trying to prosecute them](http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=13&art_id=qw1120051620952B256) . Note where it says: > [@Safety and Security Minister Charles Nqakula](#): > > ‘We have information that others are involved in actual fighting in the actual conflict’ 'course, I never said all the mercs were American, did I, so that was a pointless little dig, anyway. I’m not some sort of uber-patriot, and my fellow countrymen can be plenty embarrassing when they’re running around all tooled-up and “dogs of war” styley. > [@Monty](#): > > Is your daddy also, like you, dishonest? Are you, like your father, still beating your wife? ---
**Author:** ![Ithaka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e0b2c6/32.png) [@Ithaka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ithaka)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2005, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-related-am-i-the-only-one/315406/279 "2005-08-05T15:08:36Z")
> [@Monty](#): > > Tossing a “loaded” word around willy-nilly for cheap debating tricks is dishonest. That’s why. Fine, we’ll call them “private security firms” then. And when the same firms are working for African dictatorships we’ll call them mercenaries. Weird ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2005, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-related-am-i-the-only-one/315406/280 "2005-08-05T15:25:53Z")
> [@Ithaka](#): > > Fine, we’ll call them “private security firms” then. If “Mercenaries” is good enough for my country’s media, it’s good enough for me. “My country right or wrong”, and all that 😉 BTW, **Monty** , still no cite for this massive groundswell of support for me being a lying jackass? When it comes to the “mercenary” issue, of course. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-related-am-i-the-only-one/315406.md?page=13) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-related-am-i-the-only-one/315406.md?page=15)