Iowa, Valerie Plame Wilson and the Neocons

by Paul Deaton

“If
the Bush administration team of Neocons, Vice President Cheney,
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary of Defense
Paul Wolfowitz, executed a strategy of intimidation in dealing with
rogue states, Blog for Iowa has one question. How is that policy working
for us in Iran and North Korea?“

When Valerie Plame Wilson lectured at the Iowa Memorial Union in Iowa City Wednesday night, she referred to Vice President Dick Cheney's request to President Bush to pardon Scooter Libby's conviction for his role in outing Plame as a CIA covert operative. According to Plame, the conversation was revealed in President Bush's recent memoir as occurring in the car, enroute to President Obama's inauguration. She described Cheney as a “Neocon.” What does that mean?

In his book, Promises to Keep, Joe Biden described the views of Neocons as follows,

“As I read more of their seminal tracts, it became clear that there was one place where the Neocons found agreement, and that was in using force (and the threat of force) as the dominant tools in the struggle against terror. They really believed the way to avoid further and greater war was to exercise power in a way that frightened potential state sponsors of terrorists. What was the use of being the world's only military superpower, they asked, if political leaders were shy about demonstrating and exploiting our overwhelming force capabilities? 'Shock and awe' was more than just a slogan. They believed they could scare rogue states into subjection.”

If the Bush administration team of Neocons, Vice President Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, executed a strategy of intimidation in dealing with rogue states, Blog for Iowa has one question. How is that policy working for us in Iran and North Korea? It isn't.

No one the author knows in Iowa admits to being a “Neocon,” although that may change after this article. President Bush does not regret his decision to invade Iraq, but he regrets that the decision was made on faulty intelligence. The Neocons surrounding Bush made sure they created a narrative about Iraq that supported their views. They supported it with “facts,” coerced Secretary of State Colin Powell to present those “facts” to the United Nations and the “facts” are now proven to be untrue. They punished people like the Wilsons when Joe Wilson spoke the truth to their power. Because they had the ear of the president, the Neocon narrative prevailed.

There is a different narrative, and Iowans should communicate that to our elected officials. From the White House web site:

“President Obama has committed himself and his Administration from the beginning of his presidency to a foreign policy that ensures the safety of the American people. But he also refuses the false division between our values and our security; the United States can be true to our values and ideals while also protecting the American people. We will use all elements of American power to achieve objectives, and consult closely with the Congress so that our policies may have the broad and bipartisan support that makes them most effective. Finally, while there are instances and individuals who can be met only by force, the United States will be prepared to listen to and talk with our adversaries in order to advance our interests.”

As Valerie Plame Wilson pointed out, and what seems clear to most Iowans, is that the way the Bush White House exercised power was wrong and resulted in injustices beyond her personal situation. It is another demonstration of the stark difference between Democrats and Republicans, and evidence of why progressives should support President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton in the foreign policy work they are doing.

~Paul
Deaton is a native Iowan living in rural Johnson County and weekend
editor of Blog for Iowa. E-mail Paul
Deaton

2 Responses to Iowa, Valerie Plame Wilson and the Neocons

Anonymous says:

November 12, 2010 at 11:36 am

Paul, thanks for the article. I have known quite a few neocons and, if I were a Republican, would probably be one. Cheney and Rumsfeld, in particular, may be neocons, but their grave tactical
errors overshadow the neocon idea.
The difference between neocons and most other Republicans are largely in the facts that neocons are forward-looking, internationalist, optimistic, and aggressive in their liberalism. Their social tolerance and anti-racism help them believe that once they lift the yoke of oppression, liberal societies will form. That was the gravest error these few men made in Iraq. They underestimated the momentum of cultural baggage that impeded spontaneous creation of liberal democracy in Iraq.
There is a reason why many of the ideological founders of the neocon idea are former leftists. They have maintained many of the socially liberal values they held as leftists, but now seek to spread those values in a fashion that does not preclude the use of force. As Democrats and liberals, we should want neocons to be more successful on the right. Their views are a major bulwark against the nativist, isolationist, intolerant, and downright racist elements on the right.

LikeLike
Anonymous says:

November 15, 2010 at 10:37 pm

Paul – thanks for posting this. It's important for Americans to discuss and be involved in politics to be sure our country is headed in the right direction. I don't see how the Bush administration's approach of threats and force was believed to be the best strategy for defeating terrorism and making us safer. At one point Mr. Bush specifically mentioned, in addition to “pre-emptive” nuclear first strikes against Iran, the possibility of World War 3 occurring if Iran, who was next on the hit list, didn't obey the commands of the U.S. I mean, this is how our country was supposed to be safer? It sounds more like how we might finally have ended up destroying ourselves.

LikeLike

Comments are closed.