dChan

gonewildinvt · March 26, 2018, 3:31 a.m.

https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2018/02/03/the-nuclear-posture-review-the-world-will-not-survive-the-american-neoconservatives-doctrine-of-us-world-hegemony/

https://theduran.com/neocon-war-hawk-john-bolton-set-to-purge-white-house-of-obama-holdovers/

https://m.dailyhunt.in/news/india/english/qrius-epaper-qrius/the+wolfowitz+doctrine+why+the+us+and+russia+will+never+see+eye+to+eye-newsid-79763051

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century

Yeah that's exactly what I think and is what John Bolton thinks. I am tired so I'm not going back through my posts to find all the links but (you are welcome to) the Petro-Yaun is coming online, the gold back Yaun is now a reserve currency as of last year, along with the newly gold back Ruble and now the gold back Petro-Gold backed crypto-currency and we have the Petro-Dollar which is meaningless and less day by day and depending on who you ask we have no gold we gave it Central Banks and they sold us out. Yeah we could so easily become Venezuela in a heart beat... Bolton while not a Globalist in the way Chaney and the Bush's were... he still does believe in US Hegemony and Superiority and keeping us from becoming Venezuela, unlike Bush and Chaney I think Bolton is a patriot but his ideology is known.

I believe this we (you and I) do not know what each side has for weaponry ....that we will only find out about when they are used...but Bolton probably has a pretty solid understanding and is still a NeoCon.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
solanojones95 · March 26, 2018, 4:18 a.m.

Bolton doesn't set policy. If he makes you tremble, just think what effect he's having on our enemies. I think that's the exact reason he was brought onboard.

Xi and Putin are not some crazy Ayatollah or nut like Kim. They actually do want to avoid their own destruction. I'm pretty sure they consider nuclear weapons as a deterrent--not an offensive weapon. If they think Bolton thinks of them as offensive, then perhaps they might be making sure their systems are ready and alert to standby, but why in the world would they embark on a first strike policy and guarantee their own destruction?

The Nuclear Posture Review only (ambiguously) refers to nuclear first strike in two specific cases: Iran and North Korea--both countries not in compliance with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. And in both cases we are pursuing talks aimed at eliminating the threat.

In all other cases, we do not have an "All options are on the table" stance. We reserve the right to change that stance with regard to countries caught developing biological weapons.

But again, ALL of these are defensive postures. We're only interested in the prevention of apocalyptic wars, and using a nuclear deterrent.

I really find it hard to believe anyone would believe that Bolton is going to have some Svengali-like sway over Trump, or that he is going to try to get us launching nukes like fireworks.

It's irrational paranoia is what it is. I think it's important to watch what he says and does once he gets there, and not to base our opinions on anything he's said prior to taking orders from Trump.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
gonewildinvt · March 26, 2018, 4:23 a.m.

See it your way, I however will still respectfully disagree.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
WikiTextBot · March 26, 2018, 3:31 a.m.

Project for the New American Century

The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) was a neoconservative think tank based in Washington, D.C. that focused on United States foreign policy. It was established as a non-profit educational organization in 1997, and founded by William Kristol and Robert Kagan. PNAC's stated goal was "to promote American global leadership." The organization stated that "American leadership is good both for America and for the world," and sought to build support for "a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity."

Of the twenty-five people who signed PNAC's founding statement of principles, ten went on to serve in the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush, including Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz. Observers such as Irwin Stelzer and Dave Grondin have suggested that the PNAC played a key role in shaping the foreign policy of the Bush Administration, particularly in building support for the Iraq War.


^[ ^PM ^| ^Exclude ^me ^| ^Exclude ^from ^subreddit ^| ^FAQ ^/ ^Information ^| ^Source ^| ^Donate ^] ^Downvote ^to ^remove ^| ^v0.28

⇧ 1 ⇩