Why Neoconservatives Are Right
52 | Amazon Price: $14.07 List Price: $27.95 |
 | Amazon Price: $17.99 |
 | Amazon Price: $4.70 List Price: $17.99 |
 | Amazon Price: $32.50 |
 | Amazon Price: $29.95 |
 | Amazon Price: $12.99 List Price: $19.95 |
 | Amazon Price: $3.75 List Price: $29.95 |
Why Neoconservatives Are Right
One of the more famous and recent additions to the America political ideologies is neoconservative. It actually originated in the 1950’s, but has had a renewal of interest over recent years due to American intervention abroad. Neoconservatives believe in utilizing America’s military and economic power to bring our ideals of democracy and human rights to other countries. It is most often associated with the Republican Party and has come to the forefront of politics again because of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, along with recent world events. Since 9/11, neoconservatives have risen in prominence in both academia and in government. They support the above actions taken and believe it is our duty to continue to bring our ideals to other countries.
Neoconservatives have joined fiscal conservatives and social conservatives to encompass the majority of what comprises the Republican Party today. Below is a list of some prominent neoconservatives:
1) President Ronald Reagan
2) Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher
3) President George W. Bush
4) Vice President Dick Cheney
5) Senator John McCain
These political leaders are just some of the famous names that are associated, rather recently, with the neoconservative movement. Whether it can be admitted or not, it is necessary for the United States to spread democracy around the world and to use our force for good, because of the world we live in. Neoconservatives also believe in a strong military force in order to protect our country and our allies. This belief helped to topple the Soviet Union and is currently being used to fight the War on Terror on our enemies. In this post 9/11 world that we live in, it is important to have a strong defense, because that is a good offense. With radicals all over the world threatening our way of life, we must be ready to defend ourselves.
Critics blast neoconservatives for being warmongers and for creating false wars. Well they are just weak people. They either lack the courage or the intelligence to realize what is going on in the world. The United States must be prepared to do whatever is necessary to fight the evil regimes and organizations throughout the world. These critics are usually hippy liberals who do not understand that launching a missile strike, interrogating terrorists harshly, and using our law enforcement agencies to track down terrorists are necessary to keep our country safe. Their weakness requires the existence of neoconservatives because someone has to have the mindset to protect our country from attacks, both on the inside and the outside.
Resources
- Center-Right America
- Neoconservatism - Conservapedia
- Neoconservatism (worldwide) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- About Neoconservatism
The Christian Science Monitor's Conversations With the Enemy series. - The Neoconservative Persuasion
From the August 25, 2003 issue: What it was, and what it is. - NeoConservative
- An Introduction to Neoconservatism by Gary North
CommentsLoading...
The neocons have endangered our country rather than kept it safe. The reckless, needless, foolish invasion of Iraq created a magnet and training ground for terrorists from all over the Middle East, and it endangered our economy by running up the national debt to an historic high.
Who said it, Give me liberty or give me death. Wasn't it Patrick Henry. Great words. So I think if we agree with this, this should over lap to other countries, where freedoms are lost.
Also, this also spill over into our lifes. If our government limits our rights, give me liberty or I will fight until my death for it.
And thanks for keeping simple so liberals can understand
it.
Keep on hubbing!
I'm not a big Reagan fan, but it's not correct to call him a neocon. If he had been one we would probably still be fighting the Cold War--
By definition Reagan was a neocon, that definition being he was once a Democrat and became a conservative Republican, ergo, new conservative. I do not think John McCain is a conservative much less a "neocon!" All of the things you discussed are conservative values except fighting wars is not what we wanted they attacked us we have continued the fight in their country! Iraq was a success, costly in lives and money but we removed a dictator and Iraq is better off because of it! There is no such thing as a neocon as defined here! I'm sorry I just don't get it!
To Ralph Deeds Conservatives or neocons have not made America less safe! We were less safe before 9/11 than we were on January 20th of this year! Before 9/11 at least 3 major terrorist attacks on US soil! Since 9/11 zero, I fear one is coming and it will be Obama's and everyone who voted for him fault! If you wanted Obama you wanted a weak leader!
Did you read the linked article? Apparently not. The Neocons opposed Reagan's raprochment with the USSR.
In 1985, Mr. Reagan sent a long handwritten letter to Mikhail Gorbachev assuring him that he was prepared ''to cooperate in any reasonable way to facilitate such a withdrawal'' of the Soviets from Afghanistan. ''Neither of us,'' he added, ''wants to see offensive weapons, particularly weapons of mass destruction, deployed in space.'' Mr. Reagan eagerly sought to work with Mr. Gorbachev to rid the world of such weapons and to help the Soviet Union effect peaceful change in Eastern Europe.
This offer was far from the position taken by the neoconservative advisers who now serve under Mr. Bush. Twenty years ago in the Reagan White House, they saw no possibility for such change, and indeed many of them subscribed to the theory of ''totalitarianism'' as unchangeable and irreversible. Mr. Reagan was also informed that the Soviet Union was preparing for a possible pre-emptive attack on the United States. This alarmist position was taken by Team B, formed in response to the more prudently analytical position of the C.I.A. and then composed of several members of the present Bush administration. The team was headed by Richard Pipes, the Russian historian at Harvard, whose stance was summed up in the title of one of his articles: ''Why the Soviet Union Thinks It Could Fight and Win a Nuclear War.''
Not only did the neocons oppose Mr. Reagan's efforts at rapprochement, they also argued against engaging in personal diplomacy with Soviet leaders. Advisers like Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz and Donald Rumsfeld, now steering our foreign policy, held that America must escalate to achieve ''nuclear dominance'' and that we could only deal from a ''strategy of strength.'' Mr. Reagan believed in a strong military, but to reassure the Soviet Union that America had no aggressive intentions, he reminded Leonid Brezhnev of just the opposite. From 1945 to 1949, the United States was the sole possessor of the atomic bomb, and yet, Mr. Reagan emphasized to Mr. Brezhnev, no threat was made to use the bomb to win concessions from the Soviet Union.
There's more to being a Neocon than switching from the Democratic party to the Republican party. The founders of Neoconism started out as communists in the thirties and forties and fifties, became Dems and then Gopers while still retaining their original Trotskyite and Socialist rigidity and dogmatism. Irving Kristol is credited with founding Neoconservatism, and his son Bill is now carrying the torch at National Review. Norman Podhoretz is another Neocon whose son John is following in his daddy's footsteps. Other current Neocons who deserve credit for our moronic invasion of Iraq include Jeanne Kirkpatrick, Elliott Abrams (of Iran Contra fame) and of course Paul Wolfowitz, Bush's undersecretary of defense. Here's a good summary on Neoconservatism--
Wow, I learned a few things about neocons. It looks like neocan's definition and points of view changed with almost every presidency. They do not have a certain stance, but take a different stance based on the circumstance. So one must be careful about reference neocons.
Thanks for helping me learn more about this.
Colin 2 years ago
I was expecting something a bit more intellectually honest.