With all this Iran talk I remind you "The Men from Jinsa and the CSP"

[underpants]

For example, the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board--chaired by JINSA/CSP adviser and former Reagan Administration Defense Department official Richard Perle, and stacked with advisers from both groups--recently made news by listening to a briefing that cast Saudi Arabia as an enemy to be brought to heel through a number of potential mechanisms, many of which mirror JINSA's recommendations, and which reflect the JINSA/CSP crowd's preoccupation with Egypt. (The final slide of the Defense Policy Board presentation proposed that "Grand Strategy for the Middle East" should concentrate on "Iraq as the tactical pivot, Saudi Arabia as the strategic pivot Egypt as the prize.")

Almost thirty years ago, a prominent group of neoconservative hawks found an effective vehicle for advocating their views via the Committee on the Present Danger, a group that fervently believed the United States was a hair away from being militarily surpassed by the Soviet Union, and whose raison d'être was strident advocacy of bigger military budgets, near-fanatical opposition to any form of arms control and zealous championing of a Likudnik Israel. Considered a marginal group in its nascent days during the Carter Administration, with the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980 CPD went from the margins to the center of power.
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20020902&s=vest&c=1

[ewagner]

1. Thanks for the link

Excellent read!

The inmates are truly running the asylum.............

[underpants]

2. I can't find a list of the Jinsa members - they are running the elections

My wife has been working on this. As she traces down PNAC/Jinsa/AEI names they all keep popping up on election boards as well as the corporate boards of those making the most money off the Pax Americana that has begun.

[ewagner]

4. Damn! Election Boards!!???

Ya know......it's really, really hard to refrain from using the word conspiracy .

[redqueen]

5. Aww crap.

Please tell me that will be posted here when she's finished. I think it would be prudent to share that info with BBV researchers.

[underpants]

6. She already e-mailed Bev once

I haven't checked to see if we got anything back yet. I'll tell her to hit the gas and get it done but this weekend. Thanks.

[redqueen]

7. No, thank your wife!

Seriously, tell her thanks for us. For all of us.

:hi:

[wadestock]

3. They don't understand the enemy....

That's one of their fundamental problems....especially when you think of the world as "good vs evil"....you get essentially blinded to reasonable dialog and the possibility of detente.

Here's the deal....the Israel's have a potent nuclear force....
We support them in a very hidden and illogical way regarding this nuke capability...

Thus....the inherent instability in the Middle East.

If you understand the enemy...it's very disheartening having the potential use of nukes staring you in the face....

#1 - by the US who is the only country to ever use them and uses "built in doctrines" to use them if necessary
#2 - by the Israelis who have historically had a trigger finger and who could very easily be viewed as USING their nukes.

JINSA/CSP and co would think of it this way...
Only the "good side" should have the nukes. This is not an issue of terrorists having nukes that could be brought in boats to the US...this is a development of a "nuclear paranoia" that forces

After the fall of the Soviet Union...the emphasis was off the apparent nuclear threat in Europe.

Now it is centered on the Middle East....and the JINSA/CSP's next push will be to attack and remove the nuke capability in IRAN.

BTW...they essentially shoot themselves in the foot because the emphasis on war and use of force simply RAISES the nuclear ante.