Opinion

Georgia War a Neocon Election Ploy?

»

by: Robert Scheer, Truthdig

photo
Randy Scheunemann, foreign policy and national security adviser for John McCain, has lobbying ties with the nation of Georgia. (Photo: Jeff Chiu / AP)

    Is it possible that this time the October surprise was tried in August, and that the garbage issue of brave little Georgia struggling for its survival from the grasp of the Russian bear was stoked to influence the U.S. presidential election?

    Before you dismiss that possibility, consider the role of one Randy Scheunemann, for four years a paid lobbyist for the Georgian government who ended his official lobbying connection only in March, months after he became Republican presidential candidate John McCain's senior foreign policy adviser.

    Previously, Scheunemann was best known as one of the neoconservatives who engineered the war in Iraq when he was a director of the Project for a New American Century. It was Scheunemann who, after working on the McCain 2000 presidential campaign, headed the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, which championed the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

Also see below:     
While Aide Advised McCain, His Firm Lobbied for Georgia     •

    There are telltale signs that he played a similar role in the recent Georgia flare-up. How else to explain the folly of his close friend and former employer, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili, in ordering an invasion of the breakaway region of South Ossetia, an invasion that clearly was expected to produce a Russian counterreaction? It is inconceivable that Saakashvili would have triggered this dangerous escalation without some assurance from influential Americans he trusted, like Scheunemann, that the United States would have his back. Scheunemann long guided McCain in these matters, even before he was officially running foreign policy for McCain's presidential campaign.

    In 2005, while registered as a paid lobbyist for Georgia, Scheunemann worked with McCain to draft a congressional resolution pushing for Georgia's membership in NATO. A year later, while still on the Georgian payroll, Scheunemann accompanied McCain on a trip to that country, where they met with Saakashvili and supported his bellicose views toward Russia's Vladimir Putin.

    Scheunemann is at the center of the neoconservative cabal that has come to dominate the Republican candidate's foreign policy stance in a replay of the run-up to the war against Iraq. These folks are always looking for a foreign enemy on which to base a new Cold War, and with the collapse of Saddam Hussein's regime it was Putin's Russia that came increasingly to fit the bill.

    Yes, it sounds diabolical, but that may be the most accurate way to assess the designs of the McCain campaign in matters of war and peace. There is every indication that the candidate's demonization of Russian leader Putin is an even grander plan than the previous use of Saddam to fuel American militarism with the fearsome enemy that it desperately needs.

    McCain gets to look tough with a new Cold War to fight while Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, scrambling to make sense of a more measured foreign policy posture, will seem weak in comparison. Meanwhile, the dire consequences of the Bush legacy that McCain has inherited, from the disaster of Iraq to the economic meltdown, conveniently will be ignored. But the military-industrial complex, which has helped bankroll the neoconservatives, will be provided with an excuse for ramping up a military budget that is already bigger than that of the rest of the world combined.

    What is at work here is a neoconservative, self-fulfilling prophecy in which Russia is turned into an enemy that expands its largely reduced military, and Putin is cast as the new Josef Stalin bogeyman, evoking images of the old Soviet Union. McCain has condemned a "revanchist Russia" that should once again be contained. Although Putin has been the enormously popular elected leader of post-Communist Russia, it is assumed that imperialism is always lurking, not only in his DNA but in that of the Russian people.

    How convenient to forget that Stalin was a Georgian, and indeed if Russian troops had occupied the threatened Georgian town of Gori they would have found a museum still honoring the local boy, who made good by seizing control of the Russian revolution. Indeed five Russian bombs were allegedly dropped on Gori's Stalin Square on Tuesday.

    It should also be mentioned that the post-Communist Georgians have imperial designs on South Ossetia and Abkhazia. What a stark contradiction that the United States, which championed Kosovo's independence from Serbia, now is ignoring Georgia's invasion of its ethnically rebellious provinces.

    For McCain to so fervently embrace Scheunemann's neoconservative line of demonizing Russia in the interest of appearing tough during an election campaign is a reminder that a senator can be old and yet wildly irresponsible.

 :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

    »

    While Aide Advised McCain, His Firm Lobbied for Georgia
    Matthe Mosk and Jeffrey H. Birnbaum
    The Washington Post

    Wednesday 13 August 2008

    Campaign dismisses timing of phone call, contract.

    Sen. John McCain's top foreign policy adviser prepped his boss for an April 17 phone call with the president of Georgia and then helped the presumptive Republican presidential nominee prepare a strong statement of support for the fledgling republic.

    The day of the call, a lobbying firm partly owned by the adviser, Randy Scheunemann, signed a $200,000 contract to continue providing strategic advice to the Georgian government in Washington.

    The McCain campaign said Georgia's lobbying contract with Orion Strategies had no bearing on the candidate's decision to speak with President Mikheil Saakashvili and did not influence his statement. "The Embassy of Georgia requested the call," said campaign spokesman Brian Rogers.

    But ethics experts have raised concerns about former lobbyists for foreign governments providing advice to presidential candidates about those same countries. "The question is, who is the client? Is the adviser loyal to income from a foreign client, or is he loyal to the candidate he is working for now?" said James Thurber, a lobbying expert at American University. "It's dangerous if you're getting advice from people who are very close to countries on one side or another of a conflict."

    At the time of McCain's call, Scheunemann had formally ceased his own lobbying work for Georgia, according to federal disclosure reports. But he was still part of Orion Strategies, which had only two lobbyists, himself and Mike Mitchell.

    Scheunemann remained with the firm for another month, until May 15, when the McCain campaign imposed a tough new anti-lobbyist policy and he was required to separate himself from the company.

    Rogers said Scheunemann "receives no compensation of any type from Orion Strategies and has not since May 15, 2008." Scheunemann declined to be interviewed for this story.

    As a private lobbyist trying to influence lawmakers and Bush administration staffers, Scheunemann at times relied on his access to McCain in his work for foreign clients on Capitol Hill. He and his partner reported 71 phone conversations and meetings with McCain and his top advisers since 2004 on behalf of foreign clients, including Georgia, according to forms they filed with the Justice Department.

    The contacts often focused on Georgia's aspirations to join NATO and on legislative proposals, including a measure co-sponsored by McCain that supported Georgia's position on South Ossetia, one of the Georgian regions taken over by Russia this weekend.

    Another measure lobbied by Orion and co-sponsored by McCain, the NATO Freedom Consolidation Act of 2006, would have authorized a $10 million grant for Georgia.

    For months while McCain's presidential campaign was gearing up, Scheunemann held dual roles, advising the candidate on foreign policy while working as Georgia's lobbyist. Between Jan. 1, 2007, and May 15, 2008, the campaign paid Scheunemann nearly $70,000 to provide foreign policy advice. During the same period, the government of Georgia paid his firm $290,000 in lobbying fees.

    Since 2004, Orion has collected $800,000 from the government of Georgia.

    Rogers said Orion's representation of Georgia had no bearing on McCain's decision to speak with Saakashvili in April. "The Embassy of Georgia requested the call because of Georgian concerns over recent Russian actions dealing with South Ossetia and Abkhazia," he said.

    McCain has said that he has worked closely with Georgia and its top officials since the mid-1990s. On the campaign trail yesterday, McCain referred to Saakashvili as a close friend.

    But Rogers acknowledged that "Scheunemann and others on the foreign policy staff are involved in call requests and statements on foreign policy issues."

    After the April call, McCain issued a statement that day voicing support for Georgia's position.

    "We must not allow Russia to believe it has a free hand to engage in policies that undermine Georgian sovereignty," McCain said in the statement. "Georgia has acted with restraint in its response and should continue to do so."

    Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said it may be impossible to know whether Scheunemann's advice to McCain was truly unvarnished.

    "The question is, whose views are you really espousing?" Sloan said. "Are they really your own views, or are they the views that are bought and paid for by the clients of your top aides? McCain probably would be sympathetic to Georgia regardless, but having a guy like Scheunemann as a top aide raises questions."

    Hari Sevugan, a spokesman for the Democratic candidate, Sen. Barack Obama, said Scheunemann's business ties to Georgia raise questions about how much he influenced McCain's position on the Georgia conflict.

    "It's these sorts of appearances of a conflict of interest that are a natural consequence of having a campaign run by lobbyists, staffed by lobbyists and being ensconced in a lobbyist culture for over a quarter of a century," Sevugan said.

    --------

    Research editor Alice Crites contributed to this report.

»


IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. TRUTHOUT HAS NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS ARTICLE NOR IS TRUTHOUT ENDORSED OR SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATOR.

"VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS ARE PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE TO OUR READERS AND ALLOW FOR VERIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY. HOWEVER, AS ORIGINATING PAGES ARE OFTEN UPDATED BY THEIR ORIGINATING HOST SITES, THE VERSIONS POSTED ON TO MAY NOT MATCH THE VERSIONS OUR READERS VIEW WHEN CLICKING THE "VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS.

Comments

This is a moderated forum.  It may take a little while for comments to go live.

Is there a relationship

Is there a relationship between the release and promotion of Ron Suskind’s book The Way of the World: A Story of Truth and Hope in an Age of Extremism and developments in South Ossetia, Georgia? Beyond the impact on the election, what influence did these developments have on the news cycle? As Amy Goodman suggested in a recent editorial, if Speaker Pelosi is still looking for evidence of a crime warranting impeachment, what else does she need?

He's our Georgian boy. He's

He's our Georgian boy. He's always been our boy since we overthrew the election he supposedly lost to election fraud. Amazing how perfect and sacrosanct the exit polls were in Georgia and how ignorable and revisable they were in Florida (and Ohio). What utter hypocrisy to hear Republicans pointing and screaming on that one within months of their own fraudulent victory here. I don't doubt for a second that this Georgian provocation could have been or even was US/McCain instigated. Bush was in China, but more important Barak was vacationing in Hawaii. Talk about McCain being presumptuous!

Two important gains for the

Two important gains for the United States: 1.) The invasion temporarily shut down a 1.0 million barrel per day pipeline supplying non-Russian oil to Europe thus exposing Europe's energy vulnerability. The mighty Euro has been falling ever since. 2.) Did the invasion also increase the acceptance by Europe of the missile defense system the United States wants to install in Poland? Two major goals advanced, while most people look elsewhere.

Is there any proof to

Is there any proof to support the contention that Scheunemann, Rove and Saakashvili were together inYalta in late June or mid-July? If so, why is no one reporting this? If so, it would seem the ploy suspicion is right on target. And, if so, who could possibly be surprised?

To suggest that the actions

To suggest that the actions of Georgia, a sovereign nation, were influenced by a McCain aide, is 1) unduly cynical, 2) suggests that the Georgians are naive regarding past US failures to aid former Soviet-controlled countries (Hungary '56, Czechoslovakia '68), and 3) ignores the past history of the Caucasus region. Others have dealt with 1 and 2 above, but not 3. Armenians, Azerbajainis, Georgians, Abkhazians, Chechens and Ossetians have frequently been at odds over the centuries. The divisions have been religious, geographic, linguistic, and cultural. As Russians have oppressed Georgians (indeed, all of these groups) at various times, so too have Georgians oppressed both Ossetians and Abkhazians. Most human conflicts have been multipolar, involving many sides with a variety of grudges. We Americans prefer our conflicts to be bipolar and over a single issue. Manichean "good vs. evil" and "capitalism vs. communism" struggles are so much easier to understand, and we generally reduce the complex to the simple. The reality here *is* complex; let's not reduce it to "big bad Russian bear once again rears ugly head and tries to create new Iron Curtain." Russia repeatedly tried to provoke a Georgian military response. It eventually succeeded, whereupon Georgia sent its military into contested territories. That response was disproportionate. Russia's response, sending its troops beyond contested teritory into strictly Georgian territory, was even more disproportionate. It's more important that both sides stop escalating, then de-escalate, than to decide "who started it"; both sides share that blame. Aram Hollman

I've been agreeing with

I've been agreeing with Robert Scheer since Ramparts, so I am not surprised to find him writing this piece in complete agreement with this analysis that confirms predictions I began to express when I learned of the Scheunemann lobby ties to Georgia. As for America waking up, as one commenter shouts, when has that ever happened in any way other than one disillusioned citizen at a time, in other words, after it's already too late. Bill Kristol would have to detonate a nuke backpack on the Mall in Washington for the kind of necessary wake-up call needed to mobilize thinking people against the monstrous moves and machinations of America's right wing political and religious zealots. Since Kristol is the world's biggest loudmouth chickenshit, I don't think it will happen in this lifetime.

Georgia attacked first and

Georgia attacked first and killed over 1,000 civilians, many were women and children, before Russia attacked 18 hours later. There was to be meeting of peaceful purposes scheduled that day between Georgia and Russia; however Georgia attacked with the knowledge of Putin was in Bejing for the Olympics and their president was on vacation. There has been two elections and 90 percent voted to be included in Russia. There was always more Russians in this area of concern before Georgia became an independent nation. What is the difference between Kosovo and Ossetia? USA recognized Kosovo muslims because they have 90 percent of the population. Yet, this was a Serbia province for over 1,000 years. It was during World War II when Hitler, Mussolini and the Communist Tito allowed Albanians to infiltrate into Kosovo and became the majority of the population. These Muslims have destroyed over 150 Christian chruches since NATO took over Kosovo and has allowed over new 400 mosques to be constructed by the Wahabbis of Saudia Arabia, the extreme Islams. The USA cannot have it both ways. You can take away a province from the Serbs, but no to The Russians for South Ossitia. Remember UN resolution 1244 signed by the United States said no boundaries changes, but we are ignoring international laws of sovereignty . therefore what is the difference between Kosovo and South Osesstia? Remember Kosovo is the hot bed of Al Qaieda terrorists. Clinton brought 5,000 mujadins into Bosnia and most took arms with the Kosovo Liberation Army, including Osama bin Ladin who has a Bosnia passport. I believe why USA has an interest in Georgia is because of the oil pipelines going through Georgia. .

I heard a reliable news

I heard a reliable news source (PBS) comment that Georgia attacked South Ossetia every August since 2004 -- regular as clockwork. So, Russia finally got tired of it. This is like little brother hitting big brother. When big brother gets tired of it and hits back, little brother screams for Mother. And, yes, McCain is clearly influenced by the lobbyists on his campaign. This story has emerged from other sources.

Regardless of who poked and

Regardless of who poked and prodded the Georgians, the main issue is still the massive territorial violation of Georgia by Russia. South Ossetia is not a part of Russia, and therefore, it's invasion by Russia, is just as bad as America's invasion of Iraq. Furthermore, if Russia can repeatedly invade and brutalize Chechnya, then they have absolutely no standing to invade South Ossetia to protect them from Georgia. What if Iran or Turkey started giving passports to Chechens, or decided to invade Chechnya to protect their Muslim brethren from Russian aggression?

Where are we going, and why

Where are we going, and why are we in this handbasket???

If you don't know WHERE

If you don't know WHERE to get the truth on the internet,maybe you shouldn't be commenting, maybe a little research would insure what you are reading is not a plant

Thanks for the truthas

Thanks for the truthas usual. This is aother neocon deal.

Nobody has mentioned the oil

Nobody has mentioned the oil pipeline that runs through Georgia--controlled by the USA. It's the oil, everyone--the oil! All this fuss about a nation invading another nation, saying that the USA is for democracy, and is doing humanitarian aid is B. S. The real reason our government gives a darn about Georgia is just to keep that oil flowing for Exxon, Mobil, Chevron, Texaco, etc. So they can keep making billions in profit at our expense. Oil is why WE invaded Iraq.

I am reminded of these

I am reminded of these words. A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes. Mark Twain.

Obviously, the neocons

Obviously, the neocons believe that the majority of the citizens of the U.S. are too stupid to recognize when somebody is lying to them. Granted, enough are that they voted for Bush twice (that is, if voting had anything at all to do with any election since 2000, maybe even earlier) and continue to support the gang. Well, they're wrong, but, unfortunately, the people who will ultimately pay the price for the neocon legacy of lies, misinformation, distortions, and violence will, as usual, be the same people to whom they are lying. Frankly, I'm sick of it. We paid for the Neil Bush S&L scandal, we gave the airline industry $15 billion after 9/11 (where did it go?), we lost our shirts trying to deter the Bear Stearns collapse, and now we're keeping Fannie and Freddie afloat. Meanwhile, brave men and women in the military are dying for a lie in Iraq, struggling to stay even in Afghanistan, and, if the neocons have their way, will soon be 'bomb bomb bombing' Iran. And now the senile 'white-haired old guy' that wants to play president is taking sides in a confrontation that could result in a no-win game of missile toss with Russia. Gas prices are so high, and the price of everything else follows, that people are selling heirlooms to buy groceries, and we're told it's due to increases in the price of oil, yet the oil companies post record profits every quarter. How does that work? What I would like, for a change, (and I think I speak for at least a handful of other people with some kind of cognitive ability), is people in the white house and congress (a collection of public servants chosen by the electorate to represent them) who actually work to do the will of the people they've been entrusted to govern; with the intelligence to carry out real diplomacy, not the fabricated raft of BS that was used before the invasion of Iraq, or the posturing against Iran and North Korea (remember 'the axis of evil?'); who aren't owned and controlled by corporate bribery; who will do what's right even if they are outnumbered; who will listen to the people that elected them and make sincere efforts to fulfill the promises they made to get elected (thank you Nancy Pelosi for taking impeachment off the table - ouch, my back!!!). I would also like a certificate of ownership of stock in each corporate failure for which my tax money was used to rescue. The way I see it, I paid into those companies to keep them solvent or pay off their debt, so I own a part of those companies. In addition, the people that mismanaged those same companies should be fired with no severance pay, and their pensions forfeited. Why should people struggling to pay rent and buy food, scraping by from paycheck to paycheck, people barely surviving on minimum wage, pay to reward people who mismanage companies into near bankruptcy or just outright steal. While I'm ranting, let me add that, in my opinion, people who pull stunts like the Enron heist should be required to forfeit the entirety of their assets, every last cent in any and every account they have in any financial institution on the planet, and their homes and real estate down to the very last dust bunny, to pay back those they stole from, and they should be prohibited from holding any kind of management position again, and be restiricted to earning no more than minimum wage for the rest of their lives, with nothing to rely on for the future than what they left for those they stole from - social security.. Beer bottle's empty, gotta go. Please excuse typos.

It's an interesting idea

It's an interesting idea that Scheunemann might have triggered the Russo-Georgian War by convincing Saakashvili that the U.S. had his back, but it doesn't seem convincing to me for several reasons: First, it doesn't explain fully why the Georgians seem to have believed that the Russians would do nothing at all to save South Ossetia, and so took no measures to block a Russian invasion along the only direct path from Russia to South Ossetia, namely, the Roki Tunnel. The Roki Tunnel is 3,660 meters long, and a tunnel that long is not just a hole in the rock: It requires ventilation, and is vulnerable to attack at many points. They could not have been so stupid as to fail to perceive the limited capacity of the U.S. to directly intervene. Maybe the U.S. could have intervened to halt the Russians before they took back the South Ossetian capital of Tskhinvali, but it was hardly credible that the Russians would let the Georgians waltz through all of South Ossetia. At some point, Russian and Georgian forces had to conflict. But the biggest problem with the "McCain's people started it" theory is that no one seems to have coached McCain on how the war was going to develop and how to react to it. As a consequence, when the war first broke out, his initial pronouncements were just as namby-pamby as Obama's, more along the lines of "You should both go home and get along" than a condemnation of the Russians. Only after the the Russians crossed into Georgia and bombed civilians did McCain toughen his rhetoric. If there was a conspiracy to trigger this war to influence domestic politics, and a conspiracy seems entirely possible, I say it had to be at some remove from McCain's camp.

Has anyone considered the

Has anyone considered the possibility that the Russians did this to annoy the Chinese by taking attention away from the Olympic Games? The two countries have never been the best of friends, and a couple of decades ago they had a short border skirmish.

Why isn't this all over the

Why isn't this all over the mainstream media. This needs to be talked about openly and frequently because the ramifications are too important to ignore.

Meanwhile our idiot neocons

Meanwhile our idiot neocons haven forgotten the sage advice born of experience that has sunk far better warriors than this sad crew: Never fight a land war in Russia.

"This is the first time the

"This is the first time the Russians have sent troops outside their own country in combat in thirty years, last time was Afghanistan. It is a tragic event and the world can not ignore it. It will affect Russia's relations with the west." Richard Holbrooke's words from CNN interview titled... Holbrooke: Crisis preventable. http://www.cnn.com/video/savp/evp/?loc=dom&vid=/video/world/2008/08/12/intv.georgia.holbrooke.cnn I recall that ployings various were involved in that (not too) long ago luring/forcing of Russia into Afghanistan... that giving to them a Vietnam-style war of their own. Some blowback and some scandal eventually and eventfully resulted.

Response to "Any Damn Fool"

Response to "Any Damn Fool" above... Yes. You can get on the internet or on TV and read and hear lots of "truth," all of which has been packaged, spun, and presented with impeccable timing. It's easy to inflame an attack and appear blameless. Seymour Hersh’s report (Shakir, 2008) of a recent meeting in Dick Cheney’s office about creating a false flag casus belli to enflame the support of the US demos for a war with Iran. In the 1980s I worked as a US intelligence analyst. While not senior enough or central enough to have definitive insights beyond those which many others have reported, I did have a series of experiences and enough access to evidence of government sponsored spin, gross discrepancies between what you were told by the press, what we knew the press knew, and what we knew that the press didn’t know to believe that wars are manufactured. In one classified document entitled Lessons Learned in Viet Nam I’d expected to find strategic and tactical insights. Instead it focused on the importance of maintaining control of the US media and public opinion. Take a look at the work of Edward Bernays, father of propaganda.

I don't find the analysis

I don't find the analysis far-fetched at all. Indeed, as soon as I heard that Georgia was attacked by Russia, I went on to look for a the news that Georgia initiated the military act in that region. Sure enough, US media had never reported on the prelude! Then I started listening to all the right-wing talk shows ... and that left no doubt in my mind that this Georgian President is a megalomaniac, who was used by someone in the US! Also, it is noteworthy that Saakashvili's popularity had tanked just prior to the invasion! Makes you marvel at the parallel with September 2001, doesn't it?

" ridiculous analysis. Wed,

" ridiculous analysis. Wed, 08/13/2008 - 18:00 — Anonymous (not verified) ridiculous analysis." Yes, just as ridiculous as we exist. GW and McCain are ridiculous just as much so as the fools who support them. This is the real world not some fantasy sports or war game and the Neocons will stop at NOTHING to get their way. WAKE up America.

Everyone wins! (every

Everyone wins! (every imperialist). Everybody needs an enemy. Hard to say "who started it". But, no doubt, Putin *and W.* (and McCain) all benefit from rewarming up the Cold War, and scaring their respective populaces into submission.

Putin's Olympic Ploy: May I

Putin's Olympic Ploy: May I suggest another take. How about the fact that the Russians are doing very badly at getting Olympic gold -- it's humiliating after so many years of dominating. Perhaps this is Putin's Grenada punch. A little Reagan-like diversion from domestic failings.

War Is the Health of the

War Is the Health of the State.

Excellent research on this

Excellent research on this article. My initial intuitive (gut) reaction when I read the news about the Russian attack was "Duh - Georgie is begetting another war with his usual nasty flair for lies, deceit and, if I may say so, stupidity". Bush/Cheney Impeachment Hearings should immediately proceed if we are to avoid mushroom clouds blooming all over.

When McCain says we are all

When McCain says we are all Georgians, isn't he putting Georgia, not America first? How dare he speak for me. We are all Americans first who might/might not support Georgia. - - -Grander plots have been realized, but I need more evidence than given above. How can the Georgian President invade/escalate in his own country? These provinces were repopulated with Russians during the reign of the Soviet Union. They once belonged firmly to Georgia, and Russia has been making eyes on them. This is about Russian aggression and has nothing to do with John McCain. I do like to see theories like this one from Robert Scheer, hypothesised.

Instead of an off-hand

Instead of an off-hand remark, perhaps you'd be willing to offer something substantial to the conversation. As for the analysis, I don't find it unreasonable to suggest the yet another war-dog Republican is yet again trying to scare us. Neither do I find it unreasonable to suggest that the same person so involved in other BS "let's take over the world" enterprises would want to set Russia as the New/Old villian we must guard against, and build trillions of dollars in arms to defend ourselves. And I do find it hilarious that the same people who have been behind so much US interference now rail against Russia's involvement... most especially because they are doing what we did in other Eastern European separatist conflicts. What hypocrisy!!! Evil Russia is bad for siding with separatists, but we were the Good Guys when we did it. It would be sad and/or funny, if it weren't so dangerous. ~~ Lane Baldwin - alifewithspirit.blogspot.com

Ridiculous? In what sense?

Ridiculous? In what sense? The Neoconservatives have already been shown to have desire for empire at their core, were utterly at the center of the buildup to the Iraqi war, and have been anything but trustworthy on top of it all as they point fingers and shift blame after their plans go awry. One would think you would at least offer some analysis to defend your statement. The fact that John McCain, after all the truly disastrous mistakes made by these clowns, would hire one of them as his primary foreign policy advisor is just one more fact that proves, despite his decades of experience, that he is careless and misguided at best, but probably something far worse. Even though it is conjecture, I would not be at all surprised if the story is substantially true. These Neocons, never running for office -- or at least never running on platforms that resemble their real positions -- stand in the shadows influencing people like Bush and McCain, men who claw their way to power by any means necessary but are unfit to lead.

This makes perfect sense to

This makes perfect sense to me. There is no way that Georgia did this without the approval of the US. However, the US urged the Kurds to rise up against Saddam and look how that ended; he gassed the Kurds with the weapons of mass destruction we provided to him. Really, to justify the attack all Putin had to say was, "Georgia has weapons of mass destruction and they may be planning on using them against us." No excuses necessary according to the Bush/Rice doctrine.

sound familiar, remember GHW

sound familiar, remember GHW Bush giving Iraq the nod to invade Kuwait

this may explain the little

this may explain the little smile playing on Bush's lips while speaking to Bob Costas about this issue-he looked like he had a secret and the rest of weren't in on it. I did not think his smile was appropriate given this war is causing death and destruction to thousands of people. Made me suspicious at the time that there is more to this little war and I am glad to read that someone else shares my concerns. Sounds like something Duke in Doonesbury would be doing!

Brilliant... wars are

Brilliant... wars are manufactured. Noticing who benefits is more relevant than the known "facts" preceding the fighting.

It's a shame to see the

It's a shame to see the president of our United States on national TV once again lying to the people, about big bad Russia attacking poor Georgia, when any damn fool can get on the internet, and find out the truth. Georgia did the attacking, and guess who instigated that.

ridiculous analysis.

ridiculous analysis.