It's seven years old - obviously an artifact of Republican wistfulness, during the Clinton years, for the Golden Age of Ronnie. I baldly admit to being nostalgic for some of that era, myself - even though Reagan's posturing scared the hell out of me at the time, I can give it credit in hindsight for hastening the end of the Cold War.

By the way... have you noticed yet, whose names are conspicuously absent?

The history of the 20th century should have taught us that it is important to shape circumstances before crises emerge, and to meet threats before they become dire.

Well, yeah, it should have... but it didn't. The "signatories", and those two conspicuous absentees, were (and in many ways still are) stuck in Cold War mode, treating the real threats as if they were nations, and vice versa.

The history of this century should have taught us to embrace the cause of American leadership.

For which one needs American leaders - not bureaucrats and businessmen who become leaders by default (or Supreme Court decree), who could not stir emotions with a spoon, let alone a speech . . .

• we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;

That's been done since 1997, with variable results. We're damn good at invasions; we're middlin' fair at surgical strikes; we currently look like fools when it comes to intelligence gathering. . . We suck loudly when it comes to aftermath, which is at least as much "our global responsibility" as the invasions are.

• we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;

Part One: failed completely. Part Two: see Raoul's post below. The "hostiles" that matter aren't national regimes any more, they're belief systems, and modes of behavior. To be fair, they weren't aware of that in 1997, though maybe they should have been.

• we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;

Promote the cause, absolutely! And the best way to do that is by example - by acting as if the principles we tout at home apply to all people on the planet. So far, another failure.

"Political and economic freedom" has a corollary, too. Just as freedom of speech and religion implies freedom from speech and religion, true political and economic freedom as applied to geopolitics implies self-determination, including the right to be free from political and economic systems imposed from elsewhere.

• we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.

Which "we" (that is, the signatories, the conspicuous absentees, and their cronies) have yet to do.

There's nothing at all wrong with the stated goals, especially if they're accomplished with the full engagement of the other nations and peoples they affect - which is to say, the rest of the planet. It's too damn bad the people who "signed" this document, and their designated hitters, have proven to be so ineffectual at implementing it.