Wilkerson on how Cheney turned down talks with Iran, and wants regime change across the Middle East.
From what Wilkerson says, Cheney actually believes that Neo-con enemies are evil - he's acting to some degree on principle.
"WILKERSON: It's more visceral than that. The vice president is committed to not talking to Evil, period. All you do if you talk to Evil is corroborate that Evil; you give that Evil legitimacy."
Although he also says that Setting unfavourable conditions is a route to no talks at all, which is why Cheney advocates such these policies. To me this is more of a rationale approach, more about acting in Neo-con/big business geo-strategic interests.
This scares me:
"WILKERSON: I think their purpose was regime change even more broadly than that. It was regime change throughout the Middle East, starting with Baghdad, Damascus, Tehran, and rolling on through the Middle East, ultimately even probably rolling on to Riyadh, one of our erstwhile allies for the last half-century, Saudi Arabia."
Just think of how much carnage such regional regime change would cause.
And Wilkerson goes on to say that to achieve this they would like to use "hard power, military power, principally, to initiate this and even continue it if they found it was necessary to do so. That keeps the military-industrial complex alive, it keeps Halliburton alive, it keeps Lockheed alive, it keeps the entire complex the United States had developed that I call the national security state alive and well."
I'm not surprised to hear this, but it is unsettling to say the least, to hear an insider confirm it.
More here: http://therealnews.com/...