the OP is By Whacky Conspiracyst website HenryMakow.com.
Henry of board-game-fame/now infamy, whose main theory is the Lesbian-Marxist plot takeover the world. (and Penelope's womb).
Then in post #2, and others, Joo-Hater Jorge-Phillip chimes in with 'GlobalResearch', Another Wack-job Conspiracy website.
Then, in post #22, we have a Moderator/flacaltenn Validating the theory of the Conspiracy OP.
These are Garbage strings that don't belong up here.
Moderation 101.
`
The original OP (such as it is) was about AMERICAN strategic plans to change the Middle East.. Georgie (and others) of course don't seem to care about AMERICA'S bungling of Mid-East policy -- so like MOST threads in this forum -- it ends up focusing on George's pile of toxic reading material about Jews.
If it seems to you that I validated an American strategic plan to Democratize and Westernize the Mid-East, that's because of the large number of proponents in Govt foreign policy planning that actually BELIEVE(D) they can set up the pins and bowl a strike. This was largely the thinking behind developing Iraq, courting moderates in Iran, helping to incite the Arab spring and aiding in the Libyan revolts. A pacified Pro-Western Iraq was suppose to set an example for Arab cohesion and unity. And instill a desire for Intl. trade and relations. Worked on the Kurds. Not so much the Shia and Sunnis.. All of this is in the open at PNAC and CFRelations documents. And in the statements of our own leaders.
The New American Isolationism Hoover Institution
An inclination to retreat from an engaged foreign policy already began to emerge during the first months of the George W. Bush presidency, with its initial resistance to the nation-building policies associated with its predecessor. Yet in the wake of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the prosecution of the war on terror pulled the US into the Middle East and Central Asia, redefining foreign-policy goals toward the ambitious project to spread democracy. While this policy turn resulted primarily from the terrorist attacks and the pursuit of Al Qaeda, it is important to note how the democracy agenda also displayed a striking continuity with the emphasis on human rights from the Clinton years as well as from the Republican legacy of Ronald Reagan, all of which based foreign-policy goals on understanding American values as having universal validity.
At first, those ambitions seemed bold but certainly credible in the light of recent historical experience. The dictatorships of Communist Eastern Europe had collapsed with little violence (except in the sorry case of Romania), and it could seem plausible that a similar democratic wave would sweep triumphantly, and peacefully, through the Arab world in the wake of the toppling of Saddam Hussein. (Nor was that aspiration fully wrong, since, with some delay, the Arab Spring would follow and unsettle the old order of Middle East dictators. But it would quickly involve significant violence, and the response from Obama’s Washington would be quite different, much more hesitant and confused, than the Bush administration’s unambiguous support for the transformation of Eastern Europe.) The optimistic illusion that the changes in the Arab world would take place as smoothly as those in the post-Communist world after 1989 may have contributed to the catastrophic insufficiency of political postwar planning by the US as to how to rebuild Iraq after the fall of Saddam. At the very apex of the American victory, the moment of military victory in Baghdad, the limits of American political thinking became apparent. We could topple the dictator, but we had no plans to help the nation rebuild, especially when the extent of devastation caused by the years of Baathist rule became apparent.
All of the other crap about Israel's plans for conquering land IS conspiracy theory (no empirical evidence or sane documentation) and changing the subject. Moderation at USMB does not judge content. We try to keep thread alive in the PROPER forums. And if this thread was on the topic of the OP -- it would never be a problem. But if no one WANTS to discuss the OP -- there's always a risk that some moderator will close it..