Blowback From Bear-Baiting

Bart

Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 6, 2005
Messages
4,329
Pat Buchanan hits the bulls eye. Sean Hannity won't like this.


http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=28053


(snip)


Vladimir Putin took the opportunity to kick the Georgian army out of Abkhazia, as well, to bomb Tbilisi and to seize Gori, birthplace of Stalin.

Reveling in his status as an intimate of George Bush, Dick Cheney and John McCain, and America's lone democratic ally in the Caucasus, Saakashvili thought he could get away with a lightning coup and present the world with a fait accompli.

Mikheil did not reckon on the rage or resolve of the Bear.

American charges of Russian aggression ring hollow. Georgia started this fight -- Russia finished it. People who start wars don't get to decide how and when they end.


Russia's response was "disproportionate" and "brutal," wailed Bush.

True. But did we not authorize Israel to bomb Lebanon for 35 days in response to a border skirmish where several Israel soldiers were killed and two captured? Was that not many times more "disproportionate"?

Russia has invaded a sovereign country, railed Bush. But did not the United States bomb Serbia for 78 days and invade to force it to surrender a province, Kosovo, to which Serbia had a far greater historic claim than Georgia had to Abkhazia or South Ossetia, both of which prefer Moscow to Tbilisi?

Is not Western hypocrisy astonishing?

When the Soviet Union broke into 15 nations, we celebrated. When Slovenia, Croatia, Macedonia, Bosnia, Montenegro and Kosovo broke from Serbia, we rejoiced. Why, then, the indignation when two provinces, whose peoples are ethnically separate from Georgians and who fought for their independence, should succeed in breaking away?

Are secessions and the dissolution of nations laudable only when they advance the agenda of the neocons, many of who viscerally detest Russia?


(snip)
 

Colonel_Reb

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 9, 2005
Messages
13,987
Location
The Deep South
Yes, thanks for posting this article Bart. I always enjoy reading Buchanon's work.
 
G

Guest

Guest
I agree, Buchanan is a fantastic analyst and writer. His public speaking and personality lag far behind his writing, otherwise he would be a more successful politician.
 

Bart

Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 6, 2005
Messages
4,329
89Glory said:
I agree, Buchanan is a fantastic analyst and writer. His public speaking and personality lag far behind his writing, otherwise he would be a more successful politician.


His speaking skills and personality are better than most politicians.His convention speech in the early nineties was fantastic. He may have made a couple mistakes along the way running his campaigns, but the biggest barrier to his success has been...?Ahh, what's the use?!It's hopeless.
 

Don Wassall

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
31,194
Location
Pennsylvania
Paul Craig Roberts, a high ranking governmentofficial during the Reagan years,is a little strong for some, but he's a welcome dissenter from the neo-con propaganda linebleated byevery syndicated columnist other than Buchanan, Charley Reese anda precious fewothers. The neo-cons and the Christian Zionist nutjobs have utterly ruined the Republican Party.
<H1 align=left>The Mindlessness is Total </H1>
<H1 align=left>Are You Ready for Nuclear War? </H1>
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
Pervez Musharraf, the puppet installed by the US to rule Pakistan in the interest of US hegemony, resigned August 18 to avoid impeachment. Karl Rove and the Diebold electronic voting machines were unable to control the result of the last election in Pakistan, the result of which gave Pakistanis a bigger voice in their government than America's.


It was obvious to anyone with any sense -- which excludes the entire Bush Regime and almost all of the "foreign policy community -- that the illegal and gratuitous US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, and Israel's 2006 bombing of Lebanon civilians with US blessing, would result in the overthrow of America's Pakistani puppet.


The imbecilic Bush Regime ensured Musharraf's overthrow by pressuring their puppet to conduct military operations against tribesmen in Pakistani border areas, whose loyalties were to fellow Muslims and not to American hegemony. When Musharraf's military operations didn't produce the desired result, the idiotic Americans began conducting their own military operations within Pakistan with bombs and missiles. This finished off Musharraf.


When the Bush Regime began its wars in the Middle East, I predicted, correctly, that Musharraf would be one victim. The American puppets in Egypt and Jordan may be the next to go.


Back during the Nixon years, my Ph.D. dissertation chairman, Warren Nutter, was Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs. One day in his Pentagon office I asked him how the US government got foreign governments to do what the US wanted. "Money," he replied.


"You mean foreign aid?" I asked.


"No," he replied, "we just buy the leaders with money."


It wasn't a policy he had implemented. He inherited it and, although the policy rankled with him, he could do nothing about it. Nutter believed in persuasion and that if you could not persuade people, you did not have a policy.


Nutter did not mean merely third world potentates were bought. He meant the leaders of England, France, Germany, Italy, all the allies everywhere were bought and paid for.


They were allies because they were paid. Consider Tony Blair. Blair's own head of British intelligence told him that the Americans were fabricating the evidence to justify their already planned attack on Iraq. This was fine with Blair, and you can see why, with his multi-million dollar payoff once he was out of office.


The American-educated thug, Saakashkvili the War Criminal, who is president of Georgia, was installed by the US taxpayer funded National Endowment for Democracy, a neocon operation whose purpose is to ring Russia with US military bases, so that America can exert hegemony over Russia.


Every agreement that President Reagan made with Mikhail Gorbachev has been broken by Reagan's successors. Reagan's was the last American government whose foreign policy was not made by the Israeli-allied neoconservatives. During the Reagan years, the neocons made several runs at it, but each ended in disaster for Reagan, and he eventually drove them from his government.


Even the anti-Soviet Committee on the Present Danger regarded the neocons as dangerous lunatics. I remember the meeting when a member tried to bring
the neocons into the committee, and old line American establishment representatives, such as former Treasury Secretary Douglas Dillon, hit the roof.


The Committee on the Present Danger regarded the neocons as crazy people who would get America into a nuclear war with the Soviet Union. The neocons hated President Reagan, because he ended the cold war with diplomacy, when they desired
a military victory over the Soviet Union.


Deprived of this, the neocons now want victory over Russia.


Today, Reagan is gone. The Republican Establishment is gone. There are no conservative power centers, only neoconservative power centers closely allied with Israel, which uses the billions of dollars funneled into Israeli coffers by US taxpayers to influence US elections and foreign policy.


The Republican candidate for president is a warmonger. There are no checks remaining in the Republican Party on the neocons' proclivity for war. What Republican constituencies oppose war? Can anyone name one?


The Democrats are not much better, but they have some constituencies that are not enamored of war in order to establish US world hegemony. The Rapture Evangelicals, who fervently desire Armageddon, are not Democrats; nor are the brainwashed Brownshirts desperate to vent their frustrations by striking at someone, somewhere, anywhere.


I get emails from these Brownshirts and attest that their hate-filled ignorance is extraordinary. They are all Republicans, and yet they think they are conservatives. They have no idea who I am, but since I criticize the Bush Regime and America's belligerent foreign policy, they think I am a "liberal commie pinko."


The only literate sentence this legion of fools has ever managed is: "If you hate America so much, why don't you move to Cuba!"


Such is the current state of a Reagan political appointee in today's Republican Party. He is a "liberal commie pinko" who should move to Cuba.


The Republicans will get us into more wars. Indeed, they live for war. McCain is preaching war for 100 years. For these warmongers, it is like cheering for your home team. Win at all costs. They get a vicarious pleasure out of war. If the US has to tell lies in order to attack countries, what's wrong with that? "If we don't kill them over there, they will kill us over here."


The mindlessness is total.


Nothing real issues from the American press, which is about demonizing Russia and Iran, about the vice presidential choices as if it matters, about whether Obama being on vacation let McCain score too many points.


The mindlessness of the news reflects the mindlessness of the government, for which it is a spokesperson.


The American media do not serve American democracy or American interests. They serve the few people who exercise power.


When the Soviet Union collapsed, the US and Israel made a run at controlling Russia and the former constituent parts of its empire. For awhile the US and Israel succeeded, but Putin put a stop to it.


Recognizing that the US had no intention of keeping any of the agreements it had made with Gorbachev, Putin directed the Russian military budget to upgrading the Russian nuclear deterrent. Consequently, the Russian army and air force lack the smart weapons and electronics of the US military.


When the Russian army went into Georgia to rescue the Russians in South Ossetia from the destruction being inflicted upon them by the American puppet Saakashvili, the Russians made it clear that if they were opposed by American troops with smart weapons, they would deal with the threat with tactical nuclear weapons.


The Americans were the first to announce preemptive nuclear attack as their permissible war doctrine. Now the Russians have announced the tactical use of nuclear weapons as their response to American smart weapons.


It is obvious that American foreign policy, with its goal of ringing Russia with US military bases, is leading directly to nuclear war. Every American needs to realize this fact. The US government's insane hegemonic foreign policy is a direct threat to life on the planet.


Russia has made no threats against America. The post-Soviet Russian government has sought to cooperate with the US and Europe. Russia has made it clear over and over that it is prepared to obey international law and treaties. It is the Americans who have thrown international law and treaties into the trash can, not the Russians.


In order to keep the billions of dollars in profits flowing to its contributors in the US military-security complex, the Bush Regime has rekindled the cold war. As American living standards decline and the prospects for university graduates deteriorate, "our" leaders in Washington commit us to a hundred years of war.


If you desire to be poor, oppressed, and eventually vaporized in a nuclear war, vote Republican.


Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com


http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts08192008.htmlEdited by: Don Wassall
 
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Messages
1,248
Location
Illinois
As a result of this invasion, Poland has agreed to accept American missiles on their territory. (They were hesitant.) In addition, the Ukraine wants to form an alliance with the US.
The bear has his own version of blowback.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2007
Messages
404
Location
Outside North America
The leaders of the U.S.A. are mad. Simple as that. On a side note, with the press release in regards to white people becoming a minority in 2042, why should any white man really care about the future standing of the country. The posterity of the white man will not inherit the United States. Therefore, in my personal opinion, I believe that white men should not aid in the advancement of the nation any longer. Simply get what you can get from the corpse that is the U.S., help your family and kinsmen, and leave the rest to itself. Now, I am not saying to work against the interest of the country. I am only saying that any thought of putting aside personal gain for the betterment of the country should immediately be discarded if you are a white male. Take what you can get from the state, and forget about the other patriotic mumbo jumbo. Edited by: aussieaussie31
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2007
Messages
404
Location
Outside North America
Another thing, who do the elites of the United States think they are to start making demands of other nations. The country is bankrupt. Financially, culturally, morally, ethically, politically, and militarily(The opening signs are there make no mistake).

The hubris with which men like Mccainiac speak is absolutely unreal. Does the old fool not realize that China, as well as Russia can literally wipe the U.S. dollar out tomorrow morning if they so choose. If Russia ever starts selling there natural gas reserves and oil in strictly Euros guess what? Bye Bye U.S. dollar. In China's case, due to the amount of money they have borrowed to the U.S.(do to the reckless spending by the pigs in DC)they can simply just flood the international market with U.S. dollars. A pack of cigarettes would cost $120.00. Also, how in the heck are the western Europeans gonna punish the Russians? (As Mccainiac has alluded to) If Russia decides to turn the tap off on western Europe guess what? Germany freezes. LOL Anyway, my rant has went on long enough.
 

KG2422

Mentor
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
986
Location
Texas
Good points Aussie. They are crazy. I was considering the military after I finish graduate school. I am beginning this fall. I may just relocate my family to Australia or New Zealand in two years if this place doesn't go up in smoke before then. The govt. will pay up to $65,000 in student loans for three years of service in the army ,but as weak as the dollar has become it may just make more sense to consolidate the debt and pay it while working overseas. They pay better anyways. I knew these guys were crooks, but I didn't know they were this stupid. Hey, let's start a nuclear war over our business interests in Georgia. More greed
smiley7.gif
. And who really believes that the missile defenses are for Iran? They don't have short range capabilities much less long range.
 

KG2422

Mentor
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
986
Location
Texas
BART said:
Pat Buchanan hits the bulls eye.  Sean Hannity won't like this.

He does most of the time. He would have made a great president.
smiley19.gif

Edited by: KG2422
 
G

Guest

Guest
KG2422 said:
BART said:
Pat Buchanan hits the bulls eye. Sean Hannity won't like this.

He does most of the time.He would have made a great president.
smiley19.gif

I agree, KG. I was inspired by him as a young man back in 92 and I continue to be inspired by his work today.

I disagree with people who say we should abandon the Republican Party. The Republican Party is the only option. Unless we change to proportional representation, supporting a third party is a quick formula for defeat. The liberals know this, and that is why they are always hyping 3rd party bids by people on the right.

The solution is to purge the Republican Party of the Jewish-Neocon influence, which is quite possible, as they are just a minority, although a wealthy and influential one.

If we don't act now, as in the next election cycle or two, we will face permanent defeat, as the country is flooded with minorities who will support Democrats and work by Any Means Necessary to ensure their own privilege.

If you don't think permanent one-party dominance is possible, you haven't looked much at international politics, where permanent one-party dominance is the norm. Especially when people are voting on ethnic lines, there is no such thing as "cross-over votes".
 
Joined
May 5, 2005
Messages
274
Wow. With some of your "hate Bush" crap, we'll get the "Golden Negro" for a prez, and the ragheads will obliterate our only ally in the ME.
smiley32.gif


It'll be fun...you'll see.
 

KG2422

Mentor
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
986
Location
Texas
Animalmuther0 said:
Wow. With some of your "hate Bush" crap, we'll get the "Golden Negro" for a prez, and the ragheads will obliterate our only ally in the ME.
smiley32.gif


It'll be fun...you'll see.

The word "ally" suggests that the relationship is mutually beneficial. So I ask, what has Israel ever done for us? Maybe I've overlooked something.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2007
Messages
404
Location
Outside North America
KG2422 said " So I ask, what has Israel ever done for us?"

What do ya mean KG. By golly they have done alot for you guys. Let's see a)the Lavon affair, b)The U.S.S. Liberty etc. Lovely allies those little rascals.
smiley2.gif
 
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Messages
1,248
Location
Illinois
In military intelligence alone, that have helped us. After 1967 and 1973, they let us study all those wrecked tanks and aircraft made by the soviet union that were lying around. We have listening stations monitoring the soviets/russians that seemed to work better than any in arab countries. This was very important after the ayatolla takeover of Iran.
They are not perfect allies, but they have helped.
 

Kaptain

Master
Joined
Nov 25, 2004
Messages
3,358
Location
Minnesota
Screamingeagle, in military intelligence alone Israel has stolen and sold to the highest bidder more intelligence than any other nation - that's a fact. Do I need to name names? A few old soviet tanks sold to Arabs doesn't make up for it.

BTW, what's your dog in this fight? Are you Jewish? Muslim? Ossetia is mostly Christain while the rest of Georgia is mostly muslim. Ossetia has wanted independence from Georgia basically since Georgia decided to gobble it up in the post-Soviet era. Tell me why you morally support muslim Georgians owning Russian Christains against their will.
 

Kaptain

Master
Joined
Nov 25, 2004
Messages
3,358
Location
Minnesota
From honest media:

What Has Really Been Occurring in the Russian-Georgian Conflict
A first-hand report by an American in Russia

Note: This article was written by a retired Lt.-Col. in the U.S. military,
who is currently residing in Russia. His article here helps clear up much
of the misinformation people have been fed by the people trying to promote
WWIII.

In 1991 South Osetia was promised independence from the Soviet Union, and
the Georgian Republic. However, when Georgia became independent it saw an
opportunity to grab some land, and the terminals for two major oil
pipelines. Since Georgia is essentially bankrupt and an economic basket case
they saw this as a viable option.

It should also be understood that contrary to the 30 years old CIA report
that is being circulated, Georgia is now over 60% Moslem, with Moslems
controlling the government, and South Osetia--which is surrounded on
three sides by Georgia--is over 80% Orthodox Christian. This is something
else that amazes me about Bush's choice of "allies."

They essentially invaded South Osetia and installed a rather brutal
military government. The South Osetians did not want to be grabbed and they
fought back, and in the fighting some Russian cities were damaged just
across the border and there were a number of civilian casualties. Russia
essentially said "Quit damaging our cities" and sent Russian troops to see
that no more Russian cities were damaged. They became the main component in
a small international (with Azerbaizhan and Tdjikistan) peacekeeping force
in the region.

Comes last Thursday and the Georgians attack the Russians in South Osetia.
Once again they are trying to isolate and grab those two oil terminals. As a
preparatory move to this, they began shelling the Russian forces stationed
in the area as peacekeepers... and once again overshot and shelled two small
Russian towns across the border. The Russians come in to evacuate the
Russian wounded and put fresh troops in place to keep the Georgians and
South Osetians from tearing up Russian cities and killing more Russian
civilians in their own country. They also intended to stop a relentless
Katucha rocket bombardment and standard artillery bombardment of the South
Osetian capital (which has no military significance) and has already
reduced it to a pile of gravel and fine white powder -- with over 2,000
known civilian casualties, mostly the elderly and children.

The Russians tried to send in relief supplies (for all parties) and the
Georgians to sink the unarmed, civilian transport ship. A Russian Krivak
class frigate that was on a routine patrol out of Sevastopol picked up the
SOS and responded. An 120 ft. missile boat is not much of a match for a
Krivak class frigate... enough said. The result was splinters and an oil
slick but not before the freighter had been seriously damaged and sustained
numerous casualties.

The UN is sending in supplies, and no one stops them.

Because there is strong reason to believe that the US has been aiding the
Georgians in the fight (just over 1,500 "advisors" on the ground from
"Blackwater" that are demonstrable and massive shipments of US arms and
ammunition for the past 18 months) the Russians are suspicious of US aid,
especially when it comes aboard military ships and airplanes. Comes the day
the US sends aid via civilian vessels, the Russians will have no objections
and have made it clear that such aid would be welcomed by all parties.

The French president is involved in hammering out a ceasefire that seems to
be holding because the Russians and the Georgians and the South Osetians
all feel that he can be impartial because "he ain't got no dog in this
fight." Still the Georgians have not completely ceased their offensive. They
recently began shelling a Russian column that was withdrawing from South
Osetia along the only serviceable road in the region. They waited until the
column was dead in the middle of the town of Gori before opening fire.

The US is fully aware of who started this and why. They are completely aware
of who the aggressor is. It is inconceivable to me how Bush can go to Peking
and bow down to the COMMUNIST Chinese and have "most favored nation status
with both COMMUNIST CHINA and COMMUNIST VIETNAM and at the same time provoke
proxy nut-cases like the Georgians and Ukrainians to attack Russia with the
tacit support of the US.

At the moment, Bush is threatening to send a naval task force into South
Osetia under the guise of "humanitarian aid" and has "warned" Russia,
through whose territorial waters it will pass not to be "belligerent." This
is rather hollow to me. I tend to think sending a helicopter carrier and
escort vessels into someone else's waters is belligerent in its own right.
How would the US feel if Russia did this in the Gulf of Mexico and "warned"
the US not to be "belligerent." I seem to recall a similar incident in 1962
in Cuba.

There is currently a US infantry brigade set to deploy in Georgia and an
unknown number of US military personnel set to airlift in with the "aid."
The US flew Georgian troops, who took part in the wanton destruction of the
South Osetian capital into Georgia from Iraq on US transport jets! This has
all of the makings of a repeat of what happened in Vietnam in '64 when
Lyndon used two faked attacks in the Gulf of Tonkin to justify inundating
Southeast Asia with US troops. It has "Henry Kissinger" written all over it.

This situation could get dangerous. It seems like Bush is deliberately
trying to provoke a major war with Russia and it's a very bad idea. He is
obviously believing his own propaganda about how "weak" Russia is and thinks
our oil terminals and those in South Osetia are easy pickings. If the US
fires on or fires at a Russian vessel of any kind while they're delivering
"aid" there is going to be a war. Nothing can stop it. No head of state
could sit for it from any country. The same can be said if the reinforced
Georgians resume their campaign of laying waste to South Osetia and one
more shell or rocket falls on a Russian town.

The long as short of it is that Russian forces were wantonly attacked and a
defenseless city has been reduced to ashes. It's still going on and yet
Russia is being blamed in the US as "over-reacting.

There was NEVER any intent to occupy Georgia or annex any territory for
Russia as Condaleeza Rice is trying to have you believe. The entire
operation was set off to STOP aggression by Georgia against a legally
mandated peacekeeping force and against defenseless civilians, and it is a
demonstrable fact everywhere but in the US.

The US is now "pressuring" Ukraine to "limit" access by Russian naval
vessels to a legitimate Russian naval base at Sovastapol and inciting the
Ukrainians to further border raids against Russia. This is also
demonstrable. It seems that Bush is determined to start a war with the "evil
empire" (that only exists in his delusional mind).

US troops are currently landing in Georgia. Estimates are at least one
"brigade strength" infantry unit with full equipment. They are joining the
Blackwater and Israeli troops (about 4,000 total) already present. The Bush Naval
task force with yet more "aid" is supposedly in route. Whether it will be
unchallenged when it enters Russian territorial waters remains to be seen.
 
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Messages
1,248
Location
Illinois
I didn't know that the Moslems control the government and there are so many of them. The Georgian national flag has crosses on it! I presume that will change soon.
Once again the MSM fails to tell us the important facts.
 
Top