REBUILDING AMERICA’S DEFENSES

[Scared Chicken]

I recently stumbled across this very scary report:"REBUILDING AMERICA’S DEFENSES" (http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf) dated september 2000. It's from an organization called "Project for the new american century":

"Established in the spring of 1997, the Project for the New American Century is a non-profit, educational organization whose goal is to promote American global leadership."

This sounds like an obscure, extreme right, imperialistic splinter fraction.. and it looks a lot like it. The entire report is about "Pax Americana" and "American global leadership". It really looks like a roadmap to world domination, and I am hardly exaggerating. However, as I will show a bit further, this organization is anything BUT obscure. But first a few quotes:

"America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievement of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favourable to American principles and interests?"

"[What we require is] a military that is strong and ready to meet both present and future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles abroad; and national leadership that accepts the United States' global responsibilities."

"ESTABLISH FOUR CORE MISSIONS for U.S. military forces:
<..>
• fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars;"

"While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force present in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein."

They plain call the regime of Hussein an excuse to install a large military presence in the area.

As if this is not worrying enough, the next quote really gave me shivers:

"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." (page 63)

This was written in the year 2000. One year before the "new Pearl Harbor" took place on 9-11. They literally say they would need such an event as a catalyst to accelerate their military build up. In more recent publications, they refer to 9-11 as an opportunity

And now the really scary part. This is not an obscure small time organization. This organization is formed around people like Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Jeb Bush,... Check it out yourself: http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm

<removed in order to keep the focus on the actual issue: the PNAC>

If you want to believe this is all coincidental, and with honorable intentions, feel free to. But I urge the American citizens to remain alert, and critical towards their leaders, because this is very, very troublesome. Many Americans compare Sadam with Hitler, and say a pre-emptive attack is required to prevent worse things from happening... but the report linked below shows many more parallels with Hitler's Third Reich than anything else. Just replace "Aryan" with "Americans" and "Jews" with "Muslim", and there you have your Third Reich. Americans, please, remain alert, I urge you. As a European, I feel no hate towards your country or your people whatsoever, on the contrary, but your current leaders scare me ********. Please don't make the same mistake the German citizens made 70 years ago

Fight for your constitutional rights, have the courage to question your political leaders, and have the courage to investigate events that are more than just a little suspicious. This is not about not showing solidarity or respect with your troops fighting in Iraq, this is not about being disrespectful about the victims of 9-11. Ask those questions, I beg you. Open your eyes, and don't be fooled or scared by daily warnings of possible terrorist attacks. The biggest terrorist ever may very well be your own president, or more likely, the people behind him.

"Ich habe nicht gewußt."
dixit approx 70 million Germans in 1945.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

[Scared Chicken]

Edited

[Tony]

Why is this scary?

An article about the same thing. http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2003/10/ma_273_01.html

[Scared Chicken]

Originally posted by Tony
Why is this scary?

Are you kidding ? It wouldnt scare you to know your elected president (or the people behind him) might be responsible for killing political opponents, allowing or even staging 9-11 to be able to implement a plan for "world domination" ?

If that doesnt scare you.. well.. I guess you deserve your 'president' (I assume your American).

Who knows, maybe Europe or China might have to liberate you in 50 years..

[Michael Redman]

Troll.

[Scared Chicken]

Originally posted by Michael Redman
Troll.

Who ? me ?

[Aoidoi]

Heck, I'll bite.

October 2000
Democratic governor Carnahan dies in an inexplicable plane accident when running a close race for the Senate against Ashcroft... 3 weeks before the elections.And yet Ashcroft still loses the election. Guess those silly assassins didn't think to wack his wife while they were at it.

November 2000
Bush was elected in a campaign that (to say the least) was dubious. 6 months later, "irregularities" where noted in reports, but no one cares anymore.Um, numerous papers covered the story and did recounts in Florida, IIRC had the recount proceeded as Gore wanted Bush would have won, the only scenario in which Gore would have come out on top was a statewide recount (which neither side was arguing for). This got a great deal of coverage, not sure what the point here is? That the Republicans are too incompetent to effectively buy an election like JFK did?

January 2001
Bush wants to increase defence budget by more than $20 billion to protect America "from the real threats of the 21st century". Just like outlined in the report linked below. He faces stiff opposition, few people understand why this is necessary in the post Cold War time.Gee, a Republican who wants to increase defense spending. What a shocker. I'm sure people will keel over in the streets upon hearing that.

September 2001
9-11. The "new pearl harbour" happens. The catalyst needed to change US public opinion, and the excuse needed to massively increase defence budgets, and start wars left and right. Just like announced/hoped for in the report one year earlier. Many mysteries surrounding these events remain unexplained, but no one dares ask these questions.. its concidered politically incorrect.Mysteries? Like what? The whole "that plane didn't really crash into the Pentagon" bit that's been so thoroughly debunked it's rarely mentioned any more? The "Israelis warned not to go to work" thing that's been totally blown out of the water? Despite being demonstrably false and ridiculous these both got considerable coverage, which allegations are too "politically incorrect" to mention?

October 2002
Another bizarre plane crash of a Democratic candidate. Senator, Paul Wellstone, running a close race for the Senate and seriously threatening the republican majority in the senate, dies 2 weeks before election day in another inexplicable plane crash.."Inexplicable?" Wasn't it in a thunderstorm in the mountains? Perhaps I'm getting my plane crashes mixed up, but I guess it's irrelevant since the Republicans apparently control the media, the NTSB, and the weather anyway.

The rest is on the current war which is being done to death in a dozen other threads.

[Scared Chicken]

<removed>

[gnome]

Originally posted by Scared Chicken
I dont buy the cruise missile theory on the pentagon for a second, but I am thoroughly convinced intelligence agencies (American and Isreali) had knowledge of an attack on the WTC. People have been warned, including an Isreali relative of mine, that was warned two days prior to the attack to stay home on 9-11. He worked at the WTC. Feel free not to believe though.


This one interests me. Do you know the relative personally, or was the story told to you by another relative that knows him? Did the person that told you find out before, or after, the incident, that this relative had been warned? Who warned them?

Did they stay home? Are they still alive to ask about this? It's an interesting story, some more details would be worth hearing.

[Scared Chicken]

<removed>

[renata]

Bullsh!t

http://slate.msn.com/id/116813/
www.snopes.com/rumors/israel.htm

"Hello, David Rosenberg? This is the Mossad. Listen, don't go to work on Tuesday. Yeah, another terrorist attack on the U.S. . . . call in sick. And remember, not a word to any of your gentile relatives, friends, or co-workers."

So your relative is a heartless criminal who was all too happy to have thousands die.

His name? The company he worked for? Names of the 4000 Israelis who all called in sick?

[Wayne Grabert]

Originally posted by Scared Chicken
I recently stumbled across this very scary report:"REBUILDING AMERICA’S DEFENSES" (http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf) dated september 2000. It's from an organization called "Project for the new american century":

I have been trying to bring attention to PNAC for the last few months on this Board. Some light bulbs have gone on; some remain dim.

Here is some additional background (http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=2869) on the US-Iraq conflict that includes background on PNAC. It is an article adapted from a chapter of a book in progress by Chalmers Johnson (professor emeritus, U. of California, San Diego).

[Wayne Grabert]

Originally posted by Scared Chicken


Are you kidding ? It wouldnt scare you to know your elected president (or the people behind him) might be responsible for killing political opponents, allowing or even staging 9-11 to be able to implement a plan for "world domination" ?

Don't muddy the waters with wild speculation that people in the White House or in Israel were in any way responsible for the planning and execution of the 9/11 attacks. They are responsible for turning that tragedy into an opportunity. Unless you have a sound foundation for going further than that, then don't.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Wayne Grabert

Don't muddy the waters with wild speculation that people in the White House or in Israel were in any way responsible for the planning and execution of the 9/11 attacks. They are responsible for turning that tragedy into an opportunity. Unless you have a sound foundation for going further than that, then don't.

i think you will find this http://host.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=16128 is a less hysterical view of the matter. Yes, there is a plan for continual use of military power. No, I don't think GWB would be involved in causing 9/11.

[Wayne Grabert]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


i think you will find this http://host.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=16128 is a less hysterical view of the matter. Yes, there is a plan for continual use of military power. No, I don't think GWB would be involved in causing 9/11.
Thank you.

[Scared Chicken]

<removed>

[Wayne Grabert]

Originally posted by Scared Chicken
But as Wayne Grabert pointed out, Im not trying to prove Isreal or the CIA planned the WTC crash.
Wait a minute. Wayne Grabert was not defending your intentions; he was asking you to not introduce wild speculation. He'll now add that he finds your story about your relative difficult to believe.

[Scared Chicken]

Originally posted by Wayne Grabert

Wait a minute. Wayne Grabert was not defending your intentions; he was asking you to not introduce wild speculation. He'll now add that he finds your story about your relative difficult to believe.

Thats okay.. I have tried getting this point across before, and I know basically no one even wants to consider the possibility its true. I guess I wouldnt either, and that is why I left it out of my original post. I shouldnt have brought it up, but its kinda hard to be quiet about it, since I surely didnt dream that phone conversation. oh well.. the day you'd see an actual UFO or some aliens having a BBQ in your garden, you'd know how I feel :(

Anyway, I edited/removed my posts to avoid this discussion going in all sorts of directions, while the main issue (atleast to me), is the very existence and the ideas of the PNAC, and the people behind it.

[ssibal]

I think the 9/11 conspiracy claims have to be some of the most ridiculous to date.

[Scared Chicken]

Originally posted by ssibal
I think the 9/11 conspiracy claims have to be some of the most ridiculous to date.
Maybe. but just ditching any analysis or theory that does not correspond with the official line as BS , is just as dangerous. Its called blind faith.. and though faith in your government might be justified, it should never be blind. And if you believe the official line that Sadam has ties with Al Quada, you are blind. If you believe 1441 is anything else but an excuse to invade Iraq, I'd say your blind as well. Read the PNAC report.

[Wayne Grabert]

Originally posted by Scared Chicken

I shouldnt have brought it up, but its kinda hard to be quiet about it, since I surely didnt dream that phone conversation.
Refresh my memory. Did that conversation take place after 9/11/01? If so, is it not possible that your relative was lying to you? He/she may have been--either for sport or to make him/herself seem more important.

You are right to withdraw the issue, but consider my questions above before you are tempted to bring it up again.

[renata]

Originally posted by Scared Chicken


Thats okay.. I have tried getting this point across before, and I know basically no one even wants to consider the possibility its true. I guess I wouldnt either, and that is why I left it out of my original post. I shouldnt have brought it up, but its kinda hard to be quiet about it, since I surely didnt dream that phone conversation. oh well.. the day you'd see an actual UFO or some aliens having a BBQ in your garden, you'd know how I feel :(




This is the same conspiracy theory crap spouted by anyone with a pet theory. I did not believe in aliens either this until I saw the alien stick a probe in my nostril with my own eyes! And now I am pregnant with alien babies! Really! Why don't you believe me??? Why would I, an anonymous person on the internet make up a story like that! Are you calling me a liar???

Respond to my earlier post, please. I will repeat it here in case you forgot. Please provide the information requested and address the snopes article.


Bullsh!t

http://slate.msn.com/id/116813/
www.snopes.com/rumors/israel.htm


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Hello, David Rosenberg? This is the Mossad. Listen, don't go to work on Tuesday. Yeah, another terrorist attack on the U.S. . . . call in sick. And remember, not a word to any of your gentile relatives, friends, or co-workers."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



So your relative is a heartless criminal who was all too happy to have thousands die.

His name? The company he worked for? Names of the 4000 Israelis who all called in sick?

[ssibal]

Originally posted by Scared Chicken

Maybe. but just ditching any analysis or theory that does not correspond with the official line as BS , is just as dangerous. Its called blind faith.. and though faith in your government might be justified, it should never be blind.

You are right, but I do not ditch those claims merely because they are contrary to the official line.

And if you believe the official line that Sadam has ties with Al Quada, you are blind. If you believe 1441 is anything else but an excuse to invade Iraq, I'd say your blind as well. Read the PNAC report.

I do not believe Saddam has ties to al Qaeda, I do not think the government has made a compelling case for that claim (then again they have not made that big a deal about it). As for 1441, I guess it was an excuse to invade Iraq since we knew Saddam would not comply with it or the previous resolutions. He had the chance and he blew it.

[Scared Chicken]

Originally posted by renata
[B]
Respond to my earlier post, please. I will repeat it here in case you forgot. Please provide the information requested and address the snopes article.


I sent you a PM.

[renata]

I do not publicize the contents of other people's PMs to me. However, I do want to indicate that you did not provide the detailes of your relative's name and work location. I understand you do not want to reveal it to a stranger, however, you make this allegation, and you have to supply the proof.

I would prefer to discuss this matter on this thread. You made a serious allegation and I want the debate about it to continue here. Indeed, there are probably others who would like to weigh in on your opinion.

Therefore, I request you to post what you wrote to me in the PM here, for open discussion. If you choose not to do it, I will not discuss this issue.

[Scared Chicken]

Well, if you must.. feel free to publish the contents of my pm if you post it a new thread. But I doubt it will get us anywhere, I dont have the proof your asking for, since I didnt tape my phone converstations. I've been through this drill more than once.

[renata]

Originally posted by Scared Chicken
Well, if you must.. feel free to publish the contents of my pm if you post it a new thread. But I doubt it will get us anywhere, I dont have the proof your asking for, since I didnt tape my phone converstations. I've been through this drill more than once.

OK, I am starting a new thread and quoting the PM. Thanks for the permission.

[Wayne Grabert]

Originally posted by renata

I would prefer to discuss this matter on this thread.
It sounds like a dead end, renata.

[renata]

Originally posted by Wayne Grabert

It sounds like a dead end, renata.

Perhaps

But suggesting that Israeli knew of this monstrous disaster and only warned Jews is a horrible accusation that I will not let rest so easlity. If that thread dies, so be it. Too many Jews died in WTC attacks to be subjected to this. Too frequently veiled accusations about Jews rest on these kinds of relative of a friend rumors. I am sick of hearing about it.

[Kthulhu]

*wanders into thread*

...hats for sale! Tinfoil hats for sale! Made from 100% imported British al-oo-min-ee-um. Guaranteed to keep out the secret government mind control lasers. Now with 15% more protection against the Illuminati. Tinfoil hats for sale! Tinfoil...

*wanders away*

~The Thing That Should Not Be

[Scared Chicken]

Originally posted by Kthulhu
*wanders into thread*

...hats for sale! Tinfoil hats for sale! Made from 100% imported British al-oo-min-ee-um. Guaranteed to keep out the secret government mind control lasers. Now with 15% more protection against the Illuminati. Tinfoil hats for sale! Tinfoil...

*wanders away*



LOL.. good one :)
But if these hats also help protect me from misinterpreting official documents signed by current US leaders, I'll gladly buy a couple.

[The Fool]

Cool, we've got another conspiracy theorist. Is this one into "government sprays us with chemicals from commercial planes" too?

[Scared Chicken]

Instead of labeling me as a "conspiracy theorist", maybe you could react to the document itself ? I didnt write it, and Im very curious to find out what you people think of it.

[Reginald]

Originally posted by The Fool
Cool, we've got another conspiracy theorist. Is this one into "government sprays us with chemicals from commercial planes" too?

No its aliens, guided by dowsers, spraying us with homeopathic remedies from a grassy knoll, having sabotaged the Hindenburg using a time displaced Elvis, cloned by Hitler from Argentina.

[Scared Chicken]

maybe you could react to the document itself ? Im still dying to find out what you people think of it.

Everyone loves to make fun of these conspiracy stories, dismiss them without having to argue.. but more than a theory, this is a document that is being signed by your Vice President, and your Secretary of Defense. Its not a fake.

Do you subscribe the ideas outlined in that document? do you take issue with the clear "world domination" tone of the document ? Or do I read it completely wrong ?

Please answer those question first. Then have your fun.

[Reginald]

Originally posted by Scared Chicken
maybe you could react to the document itself ? Im still dying to find out what you people think of it.

Everyone loves to make fun of these conspiracy stories, dismiss them without having to argue.. but more than a theory, this is a document that is being signed by your Vice President, and your Secretary of Defense. Its not a fake.

Do you subscribe the ideas outlined in that document? do you take issue with the clear "world domination" tone of the document ? Or do I read it completely wrong ?

Please answer those question first. Then have your fun.

Ok then, this document has been around for years, it has a kind of Nostrodamus quality about it, in that anything that "sort of" fits is heralded as some kind of prediction or preplanned event. It has been used by everyone at some point, Conspiracy theorists, anti-war protestors, lots of people, reasonable and unreasonable.

Its old hat, sorry but you did ask.

[Wayne Grabert]

Originally posted by Scared Chicken
maybe you could react to the document itself ? Im still dying to find out what you people think of it.

You've spoiled the opportunity for any serious discussion of the PNAC document by bringing speculative accusations into the thread. That has made it easy for people to ignore the useful and valid points of your initial post.

For everyone else:

Did the discovery that the Piltdown Man was a hoax invalidate Darwin's theory of evolution? Just because Scared Chicken made the mistake of polluting his argument with some wild speculation does not invalidate his main point about the philosophical basis of the US's current foreign policy under Bush.

If you doubt the authenticity of the "Rebuilding America's Defenses" document as anything significant, then compare its principals to those in
The National Security Strategy of the United States (http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.html) released last September, also known as "the Bush Doctrine." The similarities should not be surprising since some of the same people were involved in writing both documents.

There has been some discussion of this connection on PBS's Frontline. Following that broadcast, washingtonpost.com sponsored an interview (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/liveonline/03/regular/tv/r_tv_frontline022103.htm) with the show's producer.
Austin, Tex.: Have you found that the horrible events of 9/11 opened a window for Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz to implement the agenda of their think tank, Project for a New American Century, especially by following their report of "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century," submitted two months before the 2000 election? Is this just a little too much Manifest Destiny?

Michael Kirk: There's no doubt that one can find the roots of the Bush Doctrine, as currently articulated, in just a few places. One of them is the draft policy guidance written by Paul Wolfowitz in 1992. The other is under the Project for a New American Century, "Rebuilding America's Defenses." Another is in the regular writings of a number of key administration figures during the 1990s.
A few weeks ago there was also an episode of ABC's Nightline that discussed the connection.

If you travel up the thread, you will find a post by me that links to an article by a respected historian who discusses the background of PNAC and how its members hold policy positions in the Bush administration and how they shaped policy towards Iraq following the 9/11 attacks.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Wayne Grabert

There has been some discussion of this connection on PBS's Frontline. Following that broadcast, washingtonpost.com sponsored an interview (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/liveonline/03/regular/tv/r_tv_frontline022103.htm) with the show's producer.

A few weeks ago there was also an episode of ABC's Nightline that discussed the connection.

If you travel up the thread, you will find a post by me that links to an article by a respected historian who discusses the background of PNAC and how its members hold policy positions in the Bush administration and how they shaped policy towards Iraq following the 9/11 attacks.

i also raised this issue in the 'first of many wars... ' thread.

you would have thought that this would have been an important topic, but most seem to want to avoid it completely. Even JK isn't acting like it's a great idea.

I would have thought that the idea that the USA now has the right to start a war, anywhere, anytime, on it's own terms, would be cause for serious concern. Some do see it as such, most seem to be avoiding the issue.

Except for, say, skeptic, who thinks that it is a good idea.

For me, it makes the world seem like a scary place. wars have a habit of going in directions that weren't intended to go, and getting a lot of people hurt on the way.

[Wayne Grabert]

Originally posted by a_unique_person

Except for, say, skeptic, who thinks that it is a good idea.

Probably because he holds the misguided notion that making war throughout the Middle East will be good for Israel's security. In the long run, it won't. It will empower radical Islam and terrorism.

[Wayne Grabert]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


i also raised this issue in the 'first of many wars... ' thread.


Indeed, there are some who do see this as the first of many wars. For example, the Likud party and its neoconservative supporters in the Bush League Administration. According to the Israeli newspaper Haaretz : (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=275282&contrassID=2&subContrassID=15&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y)
After the war in Iraq, Israel will try to convince the U.S. to direct its war on terror at Iran, Damascus and Beirut. Senior defense establishment officials say that initial contacts in this direction have already been made in recent months, and that there is a good chance that America will be swayed by the Israeli argument.

[Reginald]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


I would have thought that the idea that the USA now has the right to start a war, anywhere, anytime, on it's own terms, would be cause for serious concern. Some do see it as such, most seem to be avoiding the issue.



Ok yes, look any country has the "right" to start a war anywhere, anytime on its own terms. Since, in those circumstances the "Right" is declared by the country itself.

As for most seem to be avoiding the issue.

As in "Every time they mentioned this subject, I had to look at the ground and quickly make my excuses and leave"?.......erm nope.

[Scared Chicken]

Originally posted by Reginald
Ok yes, look any country has the "right" to start a war anywhere, anytime on its own terms. Since, in those circumstances the "Right" is declared by the country itself.

So there was no harm in Iraq invading Kuwait then ?
They had the "right".

As in "Every time they mentioned this subject, I had to look at the ground and quickly make my excuses and leave"?.......erm nope.

I would find it interesting if you subscribe to these views or not. This is only the third time I ask you, but you keep evading the question, saying the report is old, and blah blah...

[Reginald]

Originally posted by Scared Chicken


So there was no harm in Iraq invading Kuwait then ?
They had the "right".



I would find it interesting if you subscribe to these views or not. This is only the third time I ask you, but you keep evading the question, saying the report is old, and blah blah...

I said right, as determined internally, not international legitimacy. Iraq believed it had a right to do so, everyone else didnt.

Why is it when people "want" to see something sinister in such a thing, and others dont, they accuse people of evading?

Some of the elements proposed within make sense, some dont. Its like any document of this type, lots of ideas proposed, the authors hope some will get traction.

and to be frank I think that comments such as.....

It wouldnt scare you to know your elected president (or the people behind him) might be responsible for killing political opponents, allowing or even staging 9-11 to be able to implement a plan for "world domination" ?

Far from being evaded, are simply ignored.

You are however fully entitled to your opinion, and to voice it.

[Scared Chicken]

and to be frank I think that comments such as.....
Far from being evaded, are simply ignored.

Indeed... thats what frightens me. People seem to assume such a thing would simply not be possible in a democracy, and ignore the thought al together. Much worse plans have been made in histrory by democratically elected leaders (and I am definately not only alluding to Hitler), and each time someone waved a red flag, it was ignored. Im not saying you should believe my theory, share my fear, as long as "you" keep your eyes open.

A second thought that frightens me, is the following. Looking at the US presidents' speeches, he cant say two sentences without appealing to patriotism (which is of course no crime) and the interests of America... so if he can convince the US public it would be in the interest of the USA and its security to first invade Iraq, then Iran, then maybe Syria.. THen most likely other muslim states would start to revolt, so lets kill the terrorists in Saudi Arabia, and while we are it, North Korea.. If China doesnt like that, well.. too bad, we'll have to fight another major war. If US citizens believe this serves their interests they will support it.. And who is going to stop them then ?

Feel free to dismiss this as idiocracy, and believe the war against Iraq is justified because Sadam had a few missiles that had a range that was 30 Km too far, or that he still had some biological agents stored somewhere that the US and other countries had given him. That there where any links with Bin Laden, and that of all regimes, this one was by far the worst to its people.. but try to remember these red flags it when the US starts its third or fourth war in 2 years.