Robin heard from Irving
Kristol, the father of William Kristol, the central figure of the
warmongering Project for a New American Century, whose web site was vainly calling
for full-scale war with Iraq during Clinton’s second term. Kristol lamented that the US
was
too focused on economic prosperity, and was not sufficiently aggressive in the
defense of its global hegemony. “It’s too bad,” complained Kristol. “I think it would be
natural for the United States ... to play a far more dominant role in world affairs... to
command and give orders as to what is to be done. People need that. There are many
parts of the world where an authority willing to use troops can make.. .a healthy
difference.” Kristol reserved particular scorn for any concern about the health or well¬
being of the population in general, which he scorned as a matter for accountants.
“I think
it’s disgusting that … presidential politics of the most important country in the world
should revolve around prescriptions for elderly people.” Robin found that the neocons prized “mystery and vitality over calculation and
technology,” and even over money and markets. Lewis I. “Scooter” Libby, one of the
schemers who brought us the Iraq war, commented that “the cult of peace and prosperity
found expression in President Clinton’s weak and distracted foreign policy,” which had
made it easier for Bin Laden to run wild. Robin commented further: “Though
conservatives reputedly favor wealth and prosperity, law and order, stability and routine,
they disdained Clinton for his very pursuit of these virtues. His quest for affluence, they
argued, produced a society that lost its depth and political meaning.” And again:
“Clinton’s vision of a benign international order, conservatives argued, betrayed an
unwillingness to take on a world of power and violence, of mysterious evil and
unfathomable hatred. Coping with such a world requires pagan courage and barbaric
virtu, qualities many conservatives embrace over the more prosaic goods of peace and
prosperity.”
The neocons, according to Robin, see 9/11 as an opportunity to exalt their
“political
virtues such as heroism and struggle” over “the numbing politics of affluence” because of
their new-found ability to go to the public with “calls for sacrifice and destiny.” The
neocons were afflicted by a self-righteous and hypocritical megalomania: t
hey fervently
believed that the United States, with its $500 billion yearly trade deficit and its hollow
army of ten divisions could “govern events - and determine the outcome of history.” Based on this evidence, it is fair to say that at the turn of the millennium, the neocon
faction was searching for new opportunities for conflict and violence.
When those
opportunities arrived, the neocons rejoiced and rushed into their favorite enterprise of
sending other people’s children into useless wars. (Washington Post, May 2, 2004)
https://archive.org/stream/WebsterTarpley911SyntheticTerror/Webster%20Tarpley%20-%209-11%20Synthetic%20Terror_djvu.txt
