The blueprint for everything, absolutely everything, this administration of neocons has done is right here on the website of Bill Kristol's think tank:

http://www.newamericancentury.org/defensenationalsecurity.htm and click "Rebuilding America's Defenses" from 2000.

Believe this paper is signed by Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc. ~ even Jeb Bush. Don't have time to pour over so many pages? Search the text for these sections & read. Item 1 below indicates Saddam Hussein was *never* the reason for invading that country. Item 2 is their wish for 9/11. Item 3 and 4 lay out the "axis of evil" countries, as well as a plan for constant wars. Etc. Don't take my word for it:

1. ". . . The United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein."

2. "A transformation strategy that solely pursued capabilities for projecting force from the United States, for example, and sacrificed forward basing and presence, would be at odds at larger American policy goals and would trouble American allies. 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." Scary enough? This is under a section entitled: "Creating Tomorrow's Dominant Force"

3. "Fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars." All war, all the time? (see item 5 below) That would be a permanent scare tactic.

4. Regime change not only in Iraq, but in Iran, North Korea, China, etc. Speaking of Iran, a BBC story may indicate that Iran could be the next "Axis" country in the White House gunsights:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2835091.stm Plus, we have just 'accidentally' bombed Iran.

5. Constabulatory missions to police the globe. A quote: ". . . facing up to the realities of multiple constabulary missions will require a permanent allocation of U.S. armed forces." And: "the preponderance of American power is so great and its global interests so wide that it cannot pretend to be indifferent to the political outcome in the Balkans, the Persian Gulf or even when it deploys forces in Africa. . . . Further, these constabulary missions are far more complex and likely to generate violence than traditional "peacekeeping" missions."

6. Advocates the Pentagon take "control of the new "international commons" of space and cyberspace." This falls under the "core mission" of military transformation, the Revolution in Military Affairs mentioned in the paper.

7. End the moratorium on nuclear testing. "If the United States is to have a nuclear deterrent that is both effective and safe, it will need to test." And, "...there may be a need to develop a new family of nuclear weapons designed to address new sets of military requirements, such as would be required in targeting the very deep underground, hardened bunkers...."

8. Steeply ramp up military spending, "adding $15 billion to $20 billion" per year. So that "...deploy global missile defenses to defend the American homeland and American allies, and to provide a secure basis for U.S. power projection abroad."

9. "Raising U.S. military strength in East Asia is the key to coping with the rise of China to great-power status....In sum, it is time to increase the presence of American forces in Southeast Asia…..No U.S. strategy can constrain a Chinese challenge to American regional leadership…For this reason, an increased naval presence in Southeast Asia, while necessary, will not be sufficient;…. For operational as well as political reasons, stationing rapidly mobile U.S. ground and air forces in the region will be required….Moreover, a return to Southeast Asia...."

10. "...and the ability to conduct strikes from space appears on the not-too-distant horizon - the need for ground maneuvers to achieve decisive political results endures. Regimes are difficult to change based upon punishment alone…."

11. First strike intentions: "Air Force: Toward a Global First-Strike Force"

One cannot group "the counterculture", "hippies" or whatever label you like for the alienated youth of the 60's. Since I lived those years of hiding draft dodgers, wearing flowered clothing, getting stoned, etc., I'd like to say one thing. The counterculture felt itself full of hope to end war and poverty, but it has always been a dreadful failure historically. Why? Personally, I believe part of the reason is this: those "kids" did extremely well at analyzing and articulating the problems with society, such as the Vietnam War, the draft, government oppression, poverty, etc. Nothing changed because of their great, glaring error. All the people I knew would always say that he/she refused to be or join "the system." And that, my friends, is why we didn't change the system. We left if for those who intended to make that system continue to work for them. We had the best and brightest of many years, who could have changed that "system" for the better, for social justice, but not enough of us was willing to work with what existed, turning away instead. That, I feel, is the failure of my generation.