View attachment 972615
how do you feel about your soc security ...you know the fund you paid into for most of your life...
could this be any more unamerican and of course it is the gop
vote blue
Republicans who aren't defending Project 2025 are distancing themselves from it. Downplaying the power it's authors have over Republicans. If Trump wins, Project 2025 gets implemented.
This reminds me of the 1990's when I was warning voters about PNAC and voting for Bush.
en.wikipedia.org
In 1998, Kristol and Kagan advocated
regime change in
Iraq throughout the
Iraq disarmament process through articles that were published in the
New York Times.
[24][25] Following perceived Iraqi unwillingness to co-operate with
UN weapons inspections, core members of the PNAC including
Richard Perle,
Paul Wolfowitz,
R. James Woolsey,
Elliott Abrams,
Donald Rumsfeld,
Robert Zoellick, and
John Bolton were among the signatories of an open letter initiated by the PNAC to President
Bill Clinton calling for the removal of
Saddam Hussein.
[19][26] Portraying Saddam Hussein as a threat to the United States, its
Middle East allies, and oil resources in the region, and emphasizing the potential danger of any
weapons of mass destruction under Iraq's control, the letter asserted that the United States could "no longer depend on our partners in the
Gulf War to continue to uphold the sanctions or to punish Saddam when he blocks or evades UN inspections". Stating that American policy "cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the
UN Security Council", the letter's signatories asserted that "the U.S. has the authority under existing UN resolutions to take the necessary steps, including military steps, to protect our vital interests in the Gulf".
[27] Believing that UN sanctions against Iraq would be an ineffective means of disarming Iraq, PNAC members also wrote a letter to
Republican members of the
U.S. Congress Newt Gingrich and
Trent Lott,
[28] urging Congress to act, and supported the
Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (H.R.4655)
[29][30] which President Clinton signed into law in October 1998.
In February 1998, some of the same individuals who had signed the PNAC letter in January also signed a similar letter to Clinton, from the bipartisan
Committee for Peace and Security in the Gulf.
[26][31]
In January 1999, the PNAC circulated a memo that criticized the December 1998 bombing of Iraq in
Operation Desert Fox as ineffective. The memo questioned the viability of Iraqi democratic opposition, which the U.S. was supporting through the Iraq Liberation Act, and referred to any "containment" policy as an illusion.
[32]
Shortly after the
September 11 attacks, the PNAC sent a letter to President
George W. Bush, specifically advocating regime change through "a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq". The letter suggested that "any strategy aiming at the eradication of terrorism and its sponsors must include a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq", even if no evidence linked Iraq to the September 11 attacks. The letter warned that allowing Hussein to remain in power would be "an early and perhaps decisive surrender in the war on international terrorism."
[33] From 2001 through the
2003 invasion of Iraq, the PNAC and many of its members voiced active support for military action against Iraq, and asserted leaving Saddam Hussein in power would be "surrender to terrorism".
[34][35][36][37][38]
Some have regarded the PNAC's January 16, 1998, letter to President Clinton urging "the removal of Saddam Hussein's regime from power",
[27][39] and the involvement of multiple PNAC members in the Bush Administration
[10][11] as evidence that the PNAC had a significant influence on the Bush Administration's decision to invade Iraq, or even argued that the invasion was a foregone conclusion.
