Posted by Specs on 12/23/52 11:28

"Richard Crowley" <rcrowley@xpr7t.net> wrote in message
news:11k7nl9nn533s2b@corp.supernews.com...
> "Specs" wrote ...
> > By any measure the War on Terror is an utter failure if reducing world
> > terror was the aim. But, hey we're not all that blinkered to believe
> > that
> > was the aim are we?
>
> What utter humbug. If you were really privy to the information
> it would take to make such an authoratitive statement, you wouldn't
> be making it here. (and you would likely be employed doing something
> more sighificant than you are.)
>
So you think the war on terror has been a resounding success do you Richard?

Have you not read any documents from the Project for the New American
Century think tank or any of the key NeoCon figures? How can you be so sure
what I say is humbug? Its very easy to just say humbug and run so how about
the argument that the War on Terror is a success and the destruction of WMD
was the only reason for the Iraq war?

My authority comes from the vast amount of research I have carried out on
the origins of neoconservatism and their development as a political force in
the US. Its my job to know. I am employed doing the most significant job I
could ever want, producing documentaries that hopefully make people think.
Thanks for the career advice.

In 1992, Paul Wolfowitz outlined plans for a war in Iraq with one of its
stated aims to assure access to Persian Gulf oil. Check out the 1992
Defense Planning Guide written by Wolfowitz that was leaked to the NYTimes.
Its online if you would like to track it down.

End of coffee.....

[Back to original message]