|
| 1 |
Lunch with the Chairman |
archived:
ref
55 |
New Yorker
Seymour Hersh
March 17, 2003 |
Why was Richard Perle meeting with Adnan Khashoggi? |
|
| 2 |
What Terrorists Want: Is there a better way to defeat Al Qaeda? |
ref
45 |
New Yorker
Nicholas Lemann
October 29, 2001 |
Adelman told me that rather than talk in terms of hawks and doves he preferred to discuss "narrow" and "wide" options. "The narrow end would be, focus on nine-eleven"€the September 11th attacks. "A manhunt for Osama bin Laden and his organization, and, at the outside, the Taliban," he said. "The wide group would say, 'Don't do that. Instead, go after weapons of mass destruction, networks, and countries that house them.' That's more doable than the first option. The chance of finding the man and his top lieutenants is infinitesimal. The argument against the narrow approach is that you'd be bound to be disappointed, and you won't teach the right lesson. The lesson would be, you almost have to knock down the World Trade Center and the Pentagon to get us to go after you." |
|
| 3 |
Rebuilding America's Defenses |
ref
187 |
Project for the New American Century (PNAC) report
...
September 1, 2000 |
"Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event -- like a new Pearl Harbor. [p. 51] |
|
| 4 |
Senior U.S. Officials Assail Lone-Superpower Policy |
archived:
ref
90 |
New York Times
Patrick E. Tyler
March 11, 1992 |
Senior White House and State Department officials have harshly criticized a draft Pentagon policy statement that asserts that America's mission in the post-cold-war era will be to prevent any collection of friendly or unfriendly nations from competing with the United States for superpower status.
One Administration official, familiar with the reaction of senior officials at the White House and State Department, characterized the document as a "dumb report" that "in no way or shape represents U.S. policy." |
|
| 5 |
Lone Superpower Plan: Ammunition for Critics |
archived:
ref
89 |
New York Times
Patrick E. Tyler
March 10, 1992 |
The Pentagon's draft policy statement that foresees a one-superpower world in which no collection of allies or foes is allowed to become a rival reflects intense pressure in the American military establishment to define a robust mission for itself in the post-cold-war era.
Should this draft policy be issued this month to the military chiefs under Defense Secretary Dick Cheney's signature, the Bush Administration will find itself at odds with a number of its international allies and, domestically, with the Democratic majority that controls Congress. |
|
| 6 |
U.S. Strategy Plan Calls For Insuring No Rivals Develop |
archived:
ref
86 |
New York Times
Patrick E. Tyler
March 8, 1992 |
A 46-page document that has been circulating at the highest levels of the Pentagon for weeks, and which Defense Secretary Dick Cheney expects to release later this month, states that part of the American mission will be "convincing potential competitors that they need not aspire to a greater role or pursue a more aggressive posture to protect their legitimate interests."
The classified document makes the case for a world dominated by one superpower whose position can be perpetuated by constructive behavior and sufficient military might to deter any nation or group of nations from challenging American primacy. |
|