Statement of Principles - Project for a New American Century

[Anonymous]

June 3, 1997

American foreign and defense policy is adrift. Conservatives have criticized the incoherent policies of the Clinton Administration. They have also resisted isolationist impulses from within their own ranks. But conservatives have not confidently advanced a strategic vision of America's role in the world. They have not set forth guiding principles for American foreign policy. They have allowed differences over tactics to obscure potential agreement on strategic objectives. And they have not fought for a defense budget that would maintain American security and advance American interests in the new century.

We aim to change this. We aim to make the case and rally support for American global leadership.


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?


We are in danger of squandering the opportunity and failing the challenge. We are living off the capital -- both the military investments and the foreign policy achievements -- built up by past administrations. Cuts in foreign affairs and defense spending, inattention to the tools of statecraft, and inconstant leadership are making it increasingly difficult to sustain American influence around the world. And the promise of short-term commercial benefits threatens to override strategic considerations. As a consequence, we are jeopardizing the nation's ability to meet present threats and to deal with potentially greater challenges that lie ahead.

We seem to have forgotten the essential elements of the Reagan Administration's success: 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 or 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 this century should have taught us to embrace the cause of American leadership.

Our aim is to remind Americans of these lessons and to draw their consequences for today. Here are four consequences:

? 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.

Such a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity may not be fashionable today. But it is necessary if the United States is to build on the successes of this past century and to ensure our security and our greatness in the next.

Elliott Abrams    Gary Bauer    William J. Bennett    Jeb Bush

Dick Cheney    Eliot A. Cohen    Midge Decter    Paula Dobriansky    Steve Forbes

Aaron Friedberg    Francis Fukuyama    Frank Gaffney    Fred C. Ikle

Donald Kagan    Zalmay Khalilzad    I. Lewis Libby    Norman Podhoretz

Dan Quayle    Peter W. Rodman    Stephen P. Rosen    Henry S. Rowen

Donald Rumsfeld    Vin Weber    George Weigel    Paul Wolfowitz

[Anonymous]

Let's speculate for a moment that our country is facing an ecomomic crisis never before seen.  Basically, the dollar which is backed by nothing but debt is about to crash.  How does  our military superiority save us from this?  Are we going to use brute strength to take from other countries what we need to keep the facade going?  Are we going to become the hired gun of the New World Order?

Just some thoughts from the Contrarian.

[Antigen]

http://www.webarchivist.org/minerva/catalog/1127.html

I couldn't make this shit up!

He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion.

--James Burgh 1774

[Anonymous]

I know you didn't make it up.  I do wonder how it will be manifested in the future, though.  You see, I'm more than a Contrarian, I'm also a speculator.  I know that the world is changing exponetially at this time, and at thit pace, we will, in our lifetime, experience a very new world.  I like to think about what it's going to be like.  If we accept the premise that our government is corrupt, then we have to question everything they do, and I DO!!!!

I know people don't like to hear that their cozy, safe lifestyles will ever be taken from them, but the truth is we are now experiencing the result of globalization.  It was inevitable, and it has consequences.   The first consequence is that as the world rises from the bottom toward the middle (India), and some toward the top (China), America will decend from the top toward the middle, (hopefully not to the bottom.)  

Please let me know if you disagree.  I am the Contrarian, I live on disagreement.

[Deborah]

Contrarian,
Some believe that part of the larger plan is to depopulate the masses- without them noticing.

Here's a link to that thinking. It is definitely a controversial hypothesis- but plausible; and whether a diabolical plot or just a by-product of rampant greed, more and more folks will be departing. What better way to depopulate the masses covertly? You don't have to round folks up and haul them to a gas chamber and risk facing criminal charges. Sooo clever. The US has a large (and growing) disposable, unemployed workforce that needs to be 'dealt with'.

http://thepostman.50megs.com/articles/p ... uction.htm

The timeline is really interesting:
http://thepostman.50megs.com/timeline/0000-1849.htm

Grab a cup of tea or java. There's lots there for your consideration.