Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, August 22, 2008
Pat Buchanan :: Townhall.com Columnist
And None Dare Call It Treason
by Pat Buchanan
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Who is Randy Scheunemann?

He is the principal foreign policy adviser to John McCain and potential successor to Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski as national security adviser to the president of the United States.

But Randy Scheunemann has another identity, another role.

He is a dual loyalist, a foreign agent whose assignment is to get America committed to spilling the blood of her sons for client regimes who have made this moral mercenary a rich man.

From January 2007 to March 2008, the McCain campaign paid Scheunemann $70,000 -- pocket change compared to the $290,000 his Orion Strategies banked in those same 15 months from the Georgian regime of Mikheil Saakashvili.

What were Mikheil's marching orders to Tbilisi's man in Washington? Get Georgia a NATO war guarantee. Get America committed to fight Russia, if necessary, on behalf of Georgia.

Scheunemann came close to succeeding.

Had he done so, U.S. soldiers and Marines from Idaho and West Virginia would be killing Russians in the Caucasus, and dying to protect Scheunemann's client, who launched this idiotic war the night of Aug. 7. That people like Scheunemann hire themselves out to put American lives on the line for their clients is a classic corruption of American democracy.

U.S. backing for his campaign to retrieve his lost provinces is what Saakashvili paid Scheunemann to produce. But why should Americans fight Russians to force 70,000 South Ossetians back into the custody of a regime they detest? Why not let the South Ossetians decide their own future in free elections?

Not only is the folly of the Bush interventionist policy on display in the Caucasus, so, too, is its manifest incoherence.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates says we have sought for 45 years to stay out of a shooting war with Russia and we are not going to get into one now. President Bush assured us there will be no U.S. military response to the Russian move into Georgia.

That is a recognition of, and a bowing to, reality -- namely, that Russia's control of South Ossetia and Abkhazia and occupation of a strip of Georgia cannot be a casus belli for the United States. We may deplore it, but it cannot justify war with Russia.

If that be true, and it transparently is, what are McCain, Barack Obama, Bush, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel doing committing the United States and Germany to bringing Georgia into NATO? For that would commit us to war for a cause we have already conceded, by our paralysis, does not justify a war.

Not only did Scheunemann's two-man lobbying firm receive $730,000 since 2001 to get Georgia a NATO war guarantee, he was paid by Romania and Latvia to do the same. And he succeeded.

Latvia, a tiny Baltic republic annexed by Joseph Stalin in June 1940 during his pact with Adolf Hitler, was set free at the end of the Cold War. Yet hundreds of thousands of Russians had been moved into Latvia by Stalin, and as Riga served as a base of the Baltic Sea fleet, many Russian naval officers retired there.

The children and grandchildren of these Russians are Latvian citizens. They are a cause of constant tension with ethnic Letts and of strife with Moscow, which has assumed the role of protector of Russians left behind in the "near abroad" when the Soviet Union broke apart.

Thanks to the lobbying of Scheunemann and friends, Latvia has been brought into NATO and given a U.S. war guarantee. If Russia intervenes to halt some nasty ethnic violence in Riga, the United States is committed to come in and drive the Russians out.

This is the situation in which the interventionists have placed our country: committed to go to war for countries and causes that do not justify war, against a Russia that is re-emerging as a great power only to find NATO squatting on her doorstep.

Scheunemann's resume as a War Party apparatchik is lengthy. He signed the PNAC (Project for the New American Century) letter to President Clinton urging war on Iraq, four years before 9-11. He signed the PNAC ultimatum to Bush, nine days after 9-11, threatening him with political reprisal if he did not go to war against Iraq. He was executive director of the "Committee for the Liberation of Iraq," a propaganda front for Ahmad Chalabi and his pack of liars who deceived us into war.

Now Scheunemann is the neocon agent in place in McCain's camp.

The neocons got their war with Iraq. They are pushing for war on Iran. And they are now baiting the Russian Bear.

Is this what McCain has on offer? Endless war?

Why would McCain seek foreign policy counsel from the same discredited crowd that has all but destroyed the presidency of George Bush?

"Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence ... a free people ought to be constantly awake," Washington warned in his Farewell Address. Our Founding Father was warning against the Randy Scheunemanns among us, agents hired by foreign powers to deceive Americans into fighting their wars. And none dare call it treason.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Pat Buchanan is a founding editor of The American Conservative magazine, and the author of many books including State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America .
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Pat Buchanan's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
???
I don't really trust the opinions of people who have nothing to fight for...even if it's oil or a democracy...or just to stop a KGB thug who wants a buffer zone.

What is this stuff doing on heritage?

I am happy to see
You are staying on top of this most important story of our times because the Foreign Policy of the United States has been hi-jacked by men like Scheunemann and the PNAC.

This is a story Pravda has watched and discussed.

http://engforum.pravda.ru/search.php?searchid=145927

Pat right on target
This doesn't make it any easier to hold my nose and vote for McCain in November, that's for sure. That the neo-con bunglers of the Iraq war still have any influence over U.S. policy is astonishing.

None dare call it treason, comrade
Now Pat's fans are citing Pravda LOL. We don't want to betray the Soviet fatherland, do we?

Ah, wake up
Gary Rosen writes: - 1:05 AM EST
Subject: None dare call it treason, comrade
Now Pat's fans are citing Pravda LOL. We don't want to betray the Soviet fatherland, do we?
==

Ever hear the age old adage,"a saying that sets forth a general truth and that has gained credit through long use"

"Know they enemy"


You got a better way to know what the Russians and their supporters are talking about?

Who Wants A War with Russia?
How can anyone vote for McCain? He will start a war. He's an egomaniac and not that bright. He'll be lead around by the nose just like Bush - except I think he wants bigger fireworks. He won't protect us-he'll get many of us killed. George Will--not exactly a liberal--said some months ago that McCain would start a war with Iran. I think Pat's starting to agree. Pat--stop finding something wrong with everything Obama says - even his commas and periods.

Oh for God's sake
Yes McCain is implicated in this up to his neck, but Obama is the biggest idiot who ever ran for public office in the entire United States of America and our History.

So do not think because many of us who see McCain's faults would ever support that moron Obama.

correction
"Know thy enemy"
Not

"Know they enemy"

Correction
Just don't vote. McCain is not better than Obama.

I prefer you do not vote Kathy
I will vote
But not for McCain or the idiot Obama

Why eastern europeans admire the US
I have travelled extensively in eastern europe recently and I have met many people from places like the Ukraine, Georgia and some of the "stans".

If you ask them they will tell you they like americans. If you ask who their favorite president is, they will answer Ronald Reagan.

It would be a terrible thing for us to allow the Russians to re assert their power over these states - all of whom yearn to be free.

I think that if we all stand up to the Russians at this point in time and stand by these countries we will be doing nothing less than our duty to share the blessings of liberty with all good men.

Talent Scout
I will vote for Obama which is none of your business.

Can't be trusted
McCain can't be trusted with national security.

This country can ill-afford another ideological cowboy whose agenda is counter to America's best interests.

I suppose I'll just write in Ron Paul in November.

Ok, now do not tell me what to do
Kathy writes: - 3:02 AM EST
Talent Scout
I will vote for Obama which is none of your business.
===
Go ahead and waste your vote for just one more owned little puppet.
How do you think this moron ever gained all the backing he has with just 143 days in the US Senate?
Before that this idiot was involved with the most extreme people in America.

He is owned.
You probably will not get to vote for the man anyway.
He is not even legally entitled to run according to a law suit already filed against him.
You will probably have a chance to vote for Hilliary though, and show you are just one more kool-aide drinker anyway.



Wikipedia info about Georgean revolution
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rose_Revolution
The "Revolution of Roses" (often translated into English as the Rose Revolution was a bloodless revolution in the country of Georgia in 2003 that displaced President Eduard Shevardnadze.
A significant source of funding for the Rose Revolution was the network of foundations and NGOs associated with American billionaire financier George Soros. The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies reports the case of a former Georgian parliamentarian who alleges that in the three months prior to the Rose Revolution, "Soros spent $42 million ramping-up for the overthrow of Shevardnadze." Speaking in Tblisi in June of 2005, Soros said, "I'm very pleased and proud of the work of the foundation in preparing Georgian society for what became a Rose Revolution, but the role of the foundation and my personal has been greatly exaggerated."

Wikipedia 2-nd info: Georgean cabinet
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temur_Iakobashvili
Temur Iakobashvili (also transliterated as Temuri Yakobashvili) (born 1967) is a Georgian political scientist, diplomat and politician serving as State Minister for Reintegration since January 31, 2008.
Iakobashvili was born into a Georgian Jewish family in Tbilisi. He graduated from the Department of Physics at Tbilisi State University in 1984. He further attended Diplomatic Course at the universities of Oxford and Birmingham in the United Kingdom (1998), obtained the Yale University scholarship for the World Leaders’ Program (2002), and took international security courses at the John F. Kennedy School of Government in the United States (2003).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Kezerashvili
Davit Kezerashvili (born September 22, 1978, i.e. as of now he is 29 years old) is the Georgian Minister of Defence. Kezerashvili was born in Tbilisi. He studied in Russia and Israel before studying law and international relations at Tbilisi State University.
Kezerashvili is a former Israeli and is fluent in Hebrew. After working in the Justice Ministry he became an assistant to Mikhail Saakashvili. Saakashvili helped him become chief of the Tbilisi City Council. On November 11, 2006 he was appointed as Georgian Defense Minister, replacing Irakli Okruashvili. Shalva Natelashvili of the Georgian Labour Party criticized Kezerashvili's appointment, arguing that he "has never served in the army... doesn't even have the title of sergeant and has no clue about the armed forces."

Sailer: does NATO needs young minister ?
Steve Sailer ( http://isteve.com ) poses the question, which I reproduce here: should USA really be in a hurry to pull such a young defense minister (29 years old) into NATO ?

Buchanan's illusions
Mr. Buchanan apparently thinks of himself as both an historian and a psychic. He is neither. He began his celebrity prominence as a journalistic hack for Richard Nixon, tasked with the responsibility of DEFENDING Nixon's war . . . as Americans served as proxies for an already-defeated French imperialism . . . . against an indigenous independence movement in Vietnam . . . a country that has now, in economic terms, been virtually taken over by foreign corporations that turn a blind eye to the exploitation of labor in a "Socialist" nation . . . . in order that western yuppies may buy high-quality, but relatively inexpensive, shoes. None dare call it treason, indeed. It makes one wonder which side ACTUALLY won THAT war. Does Mr. Buchanan ever have any sleepless nights wondering about his SUPPORT for American participation in a vastly misunderstood conflict which claimed the lives of well over 50,000 Americans troops, AND his support for an administration whose indiscriminate bombing campaign in Cambodia UNQUESTIONABLY contributed to the initial rise in the recruitment strength of the Khmer Rouge?
Those of us who really do have an academic background in, and on-site empirical knowledge of, the culture, history and linguistic traditions of the Caucasus, are not impressed by Mr. Buchanan's presumptions. No one should foolishly assume that they "know" the "roots" of this conflict by reading blogs, or, by wading through the tirades of ideological zealots who cannot make the analytical distinction between subjective belief and objective verifiable facts. In the West, we have long been exposed to the notion that whichever side has been successfully PORTRAYED as having fired the "first shot" is the one who "started" whatever war is in question. It ain't necessarily so.

Really?
Does anyone in their right mind really think that they can get CONSISTENTLY accurate and unbiased information from Wikipedia?

Buchanan a detriment to Townhall
He's over the top. Do us and the conservative movement a big fsvor and send him packing.

Interesting
I had read bits and pieces of this story in the foreign press. Just shows you the blind spots of our press if you have to go overseas to get better news on our domestic political events. Receiving $1M from a foreign government, and then having your candidate saber-rattling against its opponent is at very least, an appearance of impropriety. Scheunemann should abstain from involvement in the McCain comment from judgment on the Georgian-Russian conflict.

As for those who are arguing for Pat to be removed, remember that he's served the conservative cause in significant ways for 30 years going back to the Nixon White House. He has a tremendous grasp of history and current events. Just because you don't agree with his current column or it doesn't gel with what you've heard from other sources, is not a good reason to try to silence his insight.

Can't any of you morons
Who come here to Pats article ever address the facts he give without your stupid personal attacks on the man?

You get off TH
Or
Quit reading his articles, I like them.
He is one of the best and most accurate with this sort of information and you dummies do not have a clue.

No one makes any of you read his articles.
If you did read them you would learn something

I like Pat.
He gives us readers something to think about, which is very unlike most columns on TH. Seriously, most articles here are just blah blah blah and all the same. Almost like they all get the same marching orders from one single source, promoting a single calculated propaganda slant. Could it be?
I think so.

NATO Scam ?
Like our pathetically naive State Department, NATO's bureaucracy's main priority lies in perennially justifying it's existence and thereby maintaining and increasing it's budgets and power.
NATO was founded to counter the extinct Warsaw Pact. The whole concept of NATO post Communism's demise is suspect in it's present form. From strictly a defensive phylosophy to what now is a progressively agressive mechanism.
We are poking a very pi$$ed off Bear with a very short stick indeed!
The potential problems with Georgia are Europe's problems, not ours. Europe is like a 30 year old with a good job who still lives with Mommy...It's time we started to wean Europe off the American teats.

John Quincy Adams, we need you!!!
Buchanan has written an eminently logical and rationale article, but its immediate impact will cause our wayward and lost neocon brethren to start coming apart at the seams, reducing them to personal attacks and incoherent babblings whenever anyone questions why American men and women ought to be sacrificed on foreign ventures having nothing to do with our security interests.

But HOPEFULLY it will cause those Americans who possess sound judgment, who care for our nation, to do some soul-searching about our role in this world.

A quotation:

"America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own".

John Quincy Adams.

Our Beloved Republic cries out for a leader with the wisdom of a John Quincy Adams!!!

Instead, we are likely to be burdened with a John McCain whose foreign policy mindset is exemplified by his remark that "we are all Georgians, now".

Well, John, speak for yourself.

(Don't get me wrong. I am not necessarily a fan of Obama. He has lots of faults, especially on using American tax dollars to relieve world poverty, as well as on other issues).

But I cannot vote for a John McCain who swigs this neocon swill, this toxic brew that does envision going abroad in search of monsters to destroy, that does believe America is the champion and vindicator of the globe.

Pat Buchanan is one of the few conservatives immune to the neocon virus that has infected so much of that community, hijacking its dna and compelling it to reproduce more copies of the virus.

Neocons may well destroy genuine conservatism.

Neoconservatism is a radical neo-Wilsonian philosophy.

stupid foreign policy
If you could go back to the early 90s and look into the future, the worst possible scenario for Russian-US relations would be an all out nuclear holocaust.

The second worst would be a situation where the Russians are resurgent militarily, and we are committed to defending border nations if they come under attack.

We have the second, hopeful we won't eventually get the first.

we've been busy at publically humiliating the Russians for the last 15 years or s0 - my question, what did we get for all of this to make the current situation we find ourselves in worth it?

Buchanan
I believe Pat is right on target. The problem is, how in hell could anyone vote for Obama? It is going to be very painful to vote for McCain, but what choice do we have? We are really down to one party, it is called the
"Re-elect Me Party". God Bless the world for the America it knew is gone. It is going to need God's Blessings.

Expanding NATO too far is a mistake
But using U.S. foriegn policy to discourage Russian agression in Georgia, the Ukraine, Poland, and the Baltics is not. Deft statemanship is needed so we can do this in a manner that actually works toward Russian interests.

Buchanan
It is my sincere hope that we may be able to
get Pat on the "Liberty Hour" on Republic
Broadcasting Network. We so badly need to
have his input after hearing from former
Congressman Paul (Pete) McCloskey and former
Assistant Secretary to the Treasury Paul
Craig Roberts. Pats thoughts would be very
welcome on this Saturday morning show. The
"Liberty Hour" deals with the deliberate attack
on the USS Liberty by the Israeli Defense Force
on June 8,1967.

Let the attacks begin...
http://kevinmccullough.townhall.com/blog/g/d4489888-b641-43 b9-9f53-5ad0e03900e1

Of course, when the attacks are true they are even more devestating.


You will know he is the one by the friends he hangs out with. http://marathonpundit.blogspot.com/2008/05/bill-ayers-step ping-on-us-flag-in-2001.html

Lessons Taught
Egon
Location: FL

Reply # 1
Date: Aug 22, 2008 - 7:05 AM EST Subject: Lesson Taught
Many years ago, upon walking home from a wild party during the early morning hours, I encountered a man grabbing and slapping a woman silly. I decided to be the "Good Samaritan" and positioned myself between the two, trying to stop the beating. Immediately she grabbed my forearm, digging her long nails painfully into it and breaking skin, saying :"Let him do it!"
That served as a lesson for life : "Don't meddle in other peoples affairs without knowing 100% both sides of the issue."
The same can easily be applied to our International meddling into other peoples' affairs...we simply never know 100% of both sides and even if we did, it's none of our business!
Flag as Offensive


Egon
Location: FL

Reply # 2
Date: Aug 22, 2008 - 6:57 AM EST jerabaub FL
Agree with you 100% !
We seem to have developed a potentially disastrous cultural trait of meddling in everyone elses' business. We do it locally and nationally with our myriad of "Politically Correct Police" imposing their opinions about how we should behave, what we should (or not) smoke and eat, even what we can say or not.
This translates into our disastrous foreign policy (directed by a progressively dumbed down State Department) and resulting in our meddling in places we shouldn't. Like Kosovo and now Georgia. We have been poking a progressively pi$$ed off Bear with progressively shorter sticks in the eye...this can only result in unmitigated disaster sooner or later.

NATO
Expanding Nato, hell, get rid of Nato and the United Nations.

Birds of Prey on McAmnesty's Shoulders
McAmnesty threatens "I'm gonna draft ya, ya little jerk," and guarantees "more wars, many more wars." Neo-con globalist sellouts like him thrive on such trash talk about war and sending American troops all over the world, confident they can continue to borrow TRILLIONS from the Chinese Communists to finance their efforts. Scheunemann is his foreign relations "bird of prey lobbyist".

Domestically, McAmnesty violates the clear provisions of Constitution Article IV, Section 4, which require the federal government to protect the states from invasion, allowing over 30 MILLION illegal aliens and terrorists to flow over the open borders to devastate our nation. And there on McAmnesty's shoulder deposting droppings all over our country is the Mexican eagle "bird of prey lobbyist" ex-Mexican government official Juan Hernandez, pushing McAmnesty's program to have illegal aliens break more laws by voting in our elections. The sellout exists on the domestic front, as well.

Let's face it, the neo-con globalist TRAITORS chose McAmnesty as their puppet so any time real Americans question his sellout, they can yell "he was a POW 40 years ago!" at the same time refusing to release his military records. It is high time everyone recognizes that TREASON is the word to describe McAmnesty's neo-con globalist sellout campaign. Are vultures "birds of prey"?

Pat is a traitor
I'll call it treason, Pat. You are a traitor! All your crap was born in your dirty mind, not this reality. You can't prove any of the motives you asign to these people. It's all happening in your lost over the RR rainbow mind, and you know it.

Pat is a lunatic
As for those who are arguing for Pat to be removed, remember that he's served the conservative cause in significant ways for 30 years going back to the Nixon White House>>

yeah, but now that he's an insane liar/traitor ... he's got to go!

Cluchanon
Now is also an apologist for the KGB guy, or is he suffering from Alzheimer's

Geez.


Pat, Are You Sure?
Don't we all know that McShame doesn't like lobbyists, pork, and earmarks. That is a sign of a pretty good senator. Unfortunately, only part of that dislike is correct and the remainder far over-shadows the incorrect. Bad vibes for McAmnesty, not knowing how many houses he/she owns. But that question was not put to John F'n Vietcong Kerry Catsup Heinz was it? McShame is a member of the CFR and is among other friends such as Kerry, Biden, Barone, Kudlow, Newt, ... and the list goes on. That is amnesty 101. Pat is a real warrior and that could get us into a war. Obamamama is a marxist-communist-socialist and that could turn the country completely left, without no possibility of return.

Our friend Pat LMAO
Lets remember all the good things Pat has done, like help give us Bill Clinton. Now, let's applaude this conservative credentials while he helps to give us Obamy. Apparently Pat can't see what he's doing. Maybe he should loosen his ideological burka before he buries the party forever? With friends like Pat who needs liberals?

Thomas J Gassett
>yeah, but now that he's an insane liar/traitor ... he's got to go!<

What lie? What treason? Buchanon exposes a dual loyalist in the McCain camp and that's your response?

In two posts you've made several accusations but provided only your personal rantings - nothing to substantiate anything but a very limited world view based on observations from a basement.

An Old Military Maxium Is
Any obstacle that cannot be covered by fire is not an obstacle but a waste of resources. This means if you can’t provide security; don’t waste your time constructing barriers for show. An alliance made up of nations with strong national identities, that sacrifice to build the strongest armed forces their human and material resources allow, is an alliance and a deterrent. An alliance made up of nascent national pygmies unwilling to sacrifice, or devoid of the assets needed to defend it, is not alliance, but a joke and a provocation. The former Warsaw Pact countries that maintained a separate national identity before 1938 and are willing to build strong self defense forces should be allowed in NATO. Former Soviet Republics which have not maintained a national identity separate from Russia for over a century, and are culturally and materially weak, should tragically be left to their own devices.

The Buchanian Ethnic Pretext
Pat, you are using the ethnic makeup of countries such as Latvia and Georgia to mask your true intention. You are an isolationist. If you had your way, there would be no NATO war guarantee for most if not all NATO members.

By the way, the phrase “NATO war guarantee” is redundant.

What I like about your article, is that you do state some things very clearly. For instance, you have clearly telegraphed to Putin that he may invade Latvia due to the fact that a few ethnic Russian soldiers decided to retire in a country that the Soviet Union had illegally occupied.

I recall September 1939 when Stalin justified his invasion and occupation of eastern Poland by stating that he did so to protect the Ukrainian nationals that were living there. I also recall that Hitler justified many of his demands due to ethnic German populations.

As there are American ex-pats in practically every country in the world, I will keep this article on file so that I may use the “Buchanian Ethnic Pretext” to justify the next American military intervention.

Coming from a country made up of a potpourri of races I have a question. How many generations should it take before these ethnicities transfer their loyalties to the new country where they are now residing?

I have no idea who you work for or who you receive money from and I don’t need to know. I believe that you sincerely love your country and that you are only trying to protect it. I do not for one moment question your motives.

Yet you come across as if you were a paid lobbyist for Putin and Company.

Pat is full of himself, not facts.
What lie? What treason? Buchanon exposes a dual loyalist in the McCain camp and that's your response?
>>>

What lie? Do you seriously think Pat can look into peoples minds and devine their motives? If so, you're just as insane as he is. What we have here are Pat's delusions, not facts. You lick up every word this freaks has to say ... and that's your problem. Unfortunately for the party Pat is all our problem.

The "Buchanan's Club" at Townhall
is a kind of meeting point for the Islamist sympathisers.

It does not matter what exactly he is writing about, they just love him...

If he will decide to publish a column regarding the recent Government spending to the Mars studies, they will immediately post a lot of comments concerning the neo-cons who occupied the NASA and sold all it's secrets to Israel ...

See for instance some of the above comments:

- Sugary Sweet Date: Aug 22, 2008 - 1:21 AM EST
...neocons ... go along with being Israel-firsters? Disgusting how neocon politicians will sell America out for some money...

- RealCon Aug 22, 2008 - 2:18 AM EST
How can somebody be considered a "dual loyalty" when they always side with Israel.

- Ronald Aug 22, 2008 - 7:00 AM EST
... Pats thoughts would be very welcome on this Saturday morning show [that] deals with the deliberate attack on the USS Liberty by the Israeli Defense Force...


- ... (to be continued)

In other words, all Pat's columns always contain above kind of posts. Is it the only reason why Pat writes them?

A Lone Voice
Sorry, I have to agree with Mr. Buchanan.

I have watched as we, as one poster has said, humiliated Russia since they voluntarily gave up Communism as a unifying factor.


A Lone Voice (contd.)
Instead of encouraging their new-found impulses,and make of them a potential ally and global partner, we decided to encircle them with missiles and military outposts?

What did we think they would do? Bend over?

What an opportunity missed.

I am convinced more and more that Buchanan's observations bear considering.

Mr.Gassett
I am 36 years old and I know you must be twice my age.How then sir, can you be so uninformed?President Nixon's administration was by far the worst to practice "Dual Loyalties" but not the first or last.America overthrew Allende, a great man,for ITT and Pepsi.We flew flights into Cambodia, while pilots were instructed to falsify their flight records by showing they had been dropping bombs in South Vietnam.Venezuela,Brazil Ecuador and other countries in South America, are uniting because of our terrible history towards their indigenous people.Capitalism is always at war and Americans must understand this.If the truth is not known,it cannot be told.I am afraid sir,you have been victimized by this "Old" idiom.How very Sadd...

Mr. Gassett and other critics
I compare your critiques and Mr. Buchanan's article and I find an alarming disparity in the number and quality of the details provided in support of each and come to the conclusion that Mr. Buchanan's has the more compelling argument.

Facts
>Do you seriously think Pat can look into peoples minds and devine their motives?<

Given the facts Pat provided, then yes, it is very logical to devine their motives.

Are you disputing that,

>From January 2007 to March 2008, the McCain campaign paid Scheunemann $70,000 -- pocket change compared to the $290,000 his Orion Strategies banked in those same 15 months from the Georgian regime of Mikheil Saakashvili< ?

This is a fact.Your claim that stating this fact makes Pat a liar and a traitor is what's insane.

Pat Buchanan is almost always wrong
I try to read Pat Buchanan's articles but they are always so disappointing.

As this one is...

Bucnanan now quotes
pravda? What an idiot this man is! Why doesn't TH remove his malicious anti-American anti-Semitic drivel? Is he Charles Lindbergh come back to life or is he Putin's mini me? He has called the Little KGB guy a "Russian patriot"! I could not make up this stuff. Yes, Pat - and Hitler was a German patriot in you sick view and WWII was the "unnecessary war". In his old age, Pat has become stupid and gaseous.

Treason
Treason is defined by the Constitution as making war against the United States--thus one could argue that Robert E. Lee was a traitor--or giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Even if one had divided loyalities to Georgia or Israel, how could this be considered treason? While I'd say Israel was no friend of the US, the US and Israel aren't at war nor is the US and Georgia, so how can any of this be treason?

As for being a foreign agent (what they call you when you lobby on behalf of a foreign state). You are paid to argue on behalf of your client and to say a person has divided loyalities because of that is mindless. Anyone here think Bob Dole has divided loyalities? He is a foreign agent too--for Taiwan.

azure6
Thank you for sharing your thoughts, but...

Could you detail the reason for your disappointment?

Simply saying you're disappointed let's us know your feelings but it gives us nothing with which we might make up our OWN minds.

Ali
There's something wrong with a Russian loving his own country over any others?

I suppose you would prefer if Putin was an American patriot? Problem is, he's not American.

Perhaps you confuse being a Russian nationalist with being a Communist?


the invasion of Georgia.
Russia responded to a Georgian military attack on an autonomous area that only fell within the Soviet Republic of Georgia for one reason - Josef Stalin, a Georgian.

Location - Location - Location
Lighten up everyone!! Just look where Pat is located and you'll understand. He's now with DNC TV along with former conservative Joe Scarborough. They both want to be the darlings of the media liberals, so it is imperative that they attack ideas and ideals of true democracy and, in particular, anything that comes from the Republican party. Let's face facts, Pat has never and will never recover from the fact that he was a REJECT when he tried to foist his brand of conservatism and isolationism on the conservative Republicans.

Georgia
"I think that if we all stand up to the Russians at this point in time and stand by these countries we will be doing nothing less than our duty to share the blessings of liberty with all good men."

What makes you think Russia would back down and what national interest does Georgia have for the US. If there is one, is it worth going to war with a country that has 10,000 nuclear weapons?

Pat needs to Pack it in .
Pat B. is a strange dude ? One of his OP ED articles like on the Borders is great . Then one like this returns him to only Fight our Enemy if we must on American soil . Yet he was a NIXON choke hold man Cold WAR MAN .
Pat is a old school the world is still flat and a 1920's Neutralist as is much of Europe even before WW I and after WW 2 as well now .
America was not thank God and still saved the World twice .
And sadly may have to do so yet again .

iitwybad
Many of us left the Republican Party when it decided to embrace the Rockefeller wing of the party and betrayed true conservative principles.

It's why the Republican Party will probably lose in both the House and the Senate, and possibly the Presidency as well, this time.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

None Call It Treason
Buchanan portraying the USA as the 'Evil Empire'is no longer surprising.
His continuous bellicosity of the intentions of Bush and the Iraqui conflict have seriously undermined the morale of our soldier's and encouraged the Terrorists to continue the conflict.To my mind this is at least a form of treason to our fighting Marines and Soldiers and the cause of innumerable killings of our troups and Iraqui citizens.

"Now Scheunemann is the neocon agent in place in McCain's camp."
How many foreign lobbyists(Isn't that what
Scheunemann was?)are in the Socialist Party's camp at this time.?

Semper Fi


What's Pat motive?
Mr. Gassett and other critics
I compare your critiques and Mr. Buchanan's article and I find an alarming disparity in the number and quality of the details provided in support of each and come to the conclusion that Mr. Buchanan's has the more compelling argument. >>

You decern a disparity? YOu idiot! I can pile the crap just as high as Pat can and it means nothing. You may have missed it, but I only comment on the article ... Pat wrote it. Naturally he would have more "details" "IF you can't wow them with wit ... bury them in Bull$hit" and you buy it.
That said, no matter how high he piles it, details aren't movtives. Pat asigns motives ... like all haters. You're a Pat lover because you buy his interpetations of other peoples motives. Why not ask yourself why everyone but Pat is so unpure?

Truth to cowardice....
Chucky
Location: ME

Reply # 2
Date: Aug 22, 2008 - 9:23 AM EST iitwybad
Many of us left the Republican Party when it decided to embrace the Rockefeller wing of the party and betrayed true conservative principles.

It's why the Republican Party will probably lose in both the House and the Senate, and possibly the Presidency as well, this time.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

I smell and drink the coffee - I just don't drink the kool aid! You and anyone else who left the conservative movement and Republican party for the stated reason were never truly conservative nor Republican, just opportunistic COWARDS. You are probably, even now, just a lliberal democrat in disguise, trying to make everyone believe that you WERE a conservative Republican at one time. HA!

Pat, you disgust me
You continue to describe the conflict between Russia and Georgia as if Georgia had invaded Russia. What actually happened is Georgia is trying to assert control OVER ITS OWN TERRITORY. RUSSIA HAS INVADED GEORGIA. Russia claims they need to defend Russians "wherever they are," and you support that. This would be like the Mexico invading Texas and California (and Maryland and Virginia, . . .)to defend all the Mexicans there. I suppose you'd support that? I love how you defend the Nazis and their need for some living space.

Everything is always the fault of the US, Bush, and the neocons, right Pat? I guess you don't blame Bush and the neocons for WW2, but that was still our fault. You used to make sense but you've turned into a damned old fool.

"REAL" republicans LMAO
Many of us left the Republican Party when it decided to embrace the Rockefeller wing of the party and betrayed true conservative principles.>>

We are well rid of all of you. The Rushites and the Coulterqist have done to republican, what the Leftist have done to liberal ... turn it into a diry word. YOu 'real' conservatives are hated by the majority of americans and you cost republicans more votes than you have EVER delivered. Get out! Your kind hasn't been happy with the part before or since Reagan. So where do you get off calling yourselves the base of the party. Clue: The base of the part nominated McCain, your boy couldn't get elected dogcatcher.
Oh, and just shut up about Ronald 'never speak ill of another republican' Reagan. He was a Big Tent republican that wouldn't be caught dead in your ideolgoical Burka.
When McCAin wins without you, your hold on the party will be broken forever, and republicans will once again be the majority party

It's why the Republican Party will probably lose in both the House and the Senate, and possibly the Presidency as well, this time.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

Mr. Gasset's rants.....
We are well rid of all of you. The Rushites and the Coulterqist have done to republican, what the Leftist have done to liberal ... turn it into a diry word.

Mr. Gassett, I think you need to loosen up your powdered wig a little. I think your brain is beginning to need a little more blood. The only reason McCain got the nomination is because he had another liberal, defined by Judicial Watch as one of the most dishonest politicians in the United States, Mike Huckabee, help him take votes away from Romney. It's irrational rants and name calling from so-called Republicans like you that give us a bad name.

what do we get?
I've posted previously that I think our policy regarding Russia over the last 15 years or so has been stupid.

We've gone out of our way to humiliate them, in a very public way.

My contention is that this was counterproductive, and is now bringing us to a place that we've made a pretty good effort to avoid since 1962, i.e. a direct eyeball to eyeball confrontation with them.

Obviously a lot of people here disagree with that, so I'll ask them:

Can someone tell me what we've gained that makes the current situation (and all the ones we will face in the near future with them)worth it?

"agents hired by foreign powers"...

Isn't that summed up in one word, "Obama"?

Aren't half the former Clinton team members now "Foreign Agents"?

And "War Guarantee"?

Isn't that what Iran, Hamas, and Putin have done, guarantee our demise?

Shut up
We are well rid of all of you. The Rushites and the Coulterqist have done to republican, what the Leftist have done to liberal ... turn it into a diry word.

Mr. Gassett, I think you need to loosen up your powdered wig a little. I think your brain is beginning to need a little more blood>>

You don't think ... you spew. Do you really think I read beyond the above? Then you're stupid too.

The member of "Buchanan Club"
are going to post at his columns for one - and one only - reason.

It does not matter what he is writing about. They always admire him because they know the best -- he is an Islamist sympathiser.

Aug 22, 2008 - 8:56 AM EST
RW wrote about:

"...Buchanan's remarks have what exactly to do with Israel? Oh, that's right... nothing. I suspect some posters are bringing up the number of times Pat B's been right on Israel..."

You are right, RW. Absolutely. The Islamists reasonably supposed that as long as Pat was always on their side of ME conflict, he will be right on the money in any other cases as well.

It is exactly a reason why Islamists always support Pat in any discussion.

One reason to support Georgia
It is a tiny country, but sent 1000 troops into Iraq to help the US. So it is actually a better ally to us than many Western European countries. And therefore, it would be honorable to provide them with some help.

Do I think we should send troops in? No. I think we should try diplomacy, try to get other countries to help out, etc. We don't need another war. However, if we do nothing to help Georgia, we tell the world that being a supporter and friend of the US has costs but no benefits.

Mr. Gassett
Take a deep breath and calm down.

My loyalty is not with Mr. Buchanan. I have my own reasons for taking his observations with a grain of salt, as I do with every human.

But his argument is a good one based on my own previous considerations that our foreign policy towards a Post-Soviet Russia has been a disaster of unimaginable lost opportunities and squandered possibilities for international cooperation and mutual benefit.

You can blame Bill Clinton and his goofy State Department hacks led by Madeline Albright for their misguided bungling of conditions in the Baltic as one example of those lost opportunities. Not only is Kosovo now a staging ground for Islamic recruitment, it is also a festering sore in Western/ Russian relations and gives them the evidence they need to consider our intentions towards them threatening.

Add to that the drive to encircle them with nations we are quickly moving to include in a military alliance whose chief purpose has traditionally been as a counter to Russian military interests and you have a continuation of tensions which they, not us, made the first moves to reduce.

Pure international stupidity.


Killer
The US bombed Cambodia because it was being used to harbor both members of the NVA as well as the Viet Cong.

As for Chile, while ITT had much to do with it, the reason behind it was to prevent in the US mind a pro-Soviet/Cuban regime in the Southern Cone.

Sides?
>The Islamists reasonably supposed that as long as Pat was always on their side of ME conflict, he will be right on the money in any other cases as well.<

You mean like the Islamists that now control the government in Iraq?

Pat Buchanan is starting to sound loony.
So, now Pat Buchanan sounds the equivalent of a left-wing zealot who thinks that Scheuneman is secretly plotting to drag America into war a la the neoconservatives did with Iraq. What rubbish.

I used to be respectful of Buchanan, especially with all the BS he has to put up with on MSNBC. But if he keeps going down this road, I'm going to have to dismiss like most conservatives do with Michale Savage and Jerome Corsi.

Pat
Please allow me, this opportunity to say Thank You.Once again, you have "Turned the Lights on the Roaches" that control our foreign policy.Thank You and God Bless!!!

Treason?
I think Democracy and Human Rights are worth going to war over, just like we had to do in Iraq. As far as Iran is concerned we should have taken them out when they took our hostages in the 70's. And if, allowing those small former soviet states inot NATO keeps Russia off thier backs, then I'm all for that too. I do however think, if they won't to remain as Russain states through free elections, this should be allowed.

War for Democracy
"I think Democracy and Human Rights are worth going to war over."

When does the US plan to invade the Sudan, China, and the DPRK then? Better start having more babies because you are going to need lots more troops if you are going to pursue this policy.

GatormanNorm shows his
foreign policy expertise.

"this should be allowed"

Allowed? We have such International Authority now?

Good grief, such hubris will get us all fried.

Who is Randy Scheunemann?

If he is Jewish, or supports Israel's right to exist, then we can 'see' Pat's problem.

The conclusion...

Pat uses the term "Neocon" as simply a cover for the term "Jew".

"I hate Neocons" means "I hate Jews".

Am I wrong here?




Gator Man
From the very beginning of Georgia's split from the USSR, South Ossetia has voted NOT to be included in the Republic of Georgia.

Where is the democracy for South Ossetians? Why should they have to be part of a nation just because Stalin, a Georgian, decided it to be so?

There's no sovereignty or historic territorial claim involved here.

Carlos
About every post I've ever read of yours is wrong. Why should this one be any different?

In this case, changing the subject is wrong.

David
As a former cold warrior, and someone who leans towards conservatism (I dislike polarizing categorizations, which I think interfere with constructive debate)I've got to admit that our government's diplomatic efforts with regards to Russian addressing concerns over American strategic goals in formerly east bloc countries has been unnecessarily unilateral, and yes, embarrassing for the Russians. I will also concede that, internal to Russia, this embarrassment more than likely translates into a perceived weakness in the central Russian government by the Russian people. I have been concerned that this attitude, and the resulting lack of confidence of the Russian people towards their government, could very well lead to hard-line communists regaining at least a foothold on power. Much of what Putin (I still will not trust a former KGB big-wig) is for internal consumption as well as to make an international statement. GW is trying to be Reagan, which he is not (I doubt he could hold Ronnie's pencil)nor is the situation the same (much different set of circumstances) than the old cold war days. Having said that, I still don't, and never will, trust the Russians.

America First
I think Pat is just underscoring how much we need leaders whose priorities are firmly planted in America.

A bribe is a bribe, whether it comes from a foreign country or a sleazy constituent.

This will hurt McCain -- and it should. Watch for it to be a major October theme in the debates and on the ads.

USN
The history of these culminating events, have their origin in America's poor decision to allow Russia to take Berlin(WWII).This "Gift" has proven to be one, that just keeps on giving.The word "Intelligent" should never be used by Human Beings,especially in America!!!

Chucky
Subject: Mr. Gassett
Take a deep breath and calm down.
>>

Chucky, shut up. You couldn't pay me to read your spew. Go hump someone else leg.

THE FOUNDING FATHERS AGAIN?

.....Holy Moley Batman ...when George Washington made his famous non foreign entaglement speech ...we were separated from Europe and Asia by two vast oceans that took weeks to cross ...today nuclear tipped missles can circle the Globe in minutes ...

.....Here is my plan ...scrap NATO I (Old Europe) and create NATO II (Former Russian Satelites) ...sign a mutual defense pact with NATO II and arm them with missles and military equipment ...

.....With Russia surrounded by former slave States armed to the teeth and capable of taking Russia out with USA backing ...the Russian Bear will be toothless ...

.....All this whining and simpering about how we can't afford to anger big bad Russia is making me sick .....COLOSSUS


RE: Reply 98
Exactly! He should cut down on the Fruit Loops.

The nitty-gritty.
The ultimate irony is in clueless neocon critics of Buchanan assailing him for being an "American Firster".

"Buchanan Convicted For Putting Interests Of America First", screams the headline.

Shows you where neocons are really at, or rather, where they are really NOT at.

On the Jewish association with neocons, this much is true:

It is a movement heavily represented by Jewish thinkers, but it is NOT exclusively comprised of Jews.

(Which only goes to prove that both Jews and non-Jews can make huge mistakes).

Whats up with the "Jew" hating?
Some of these comments are getting a little crazy. Judaism is a religion, the same as any other. While I disagree with foreign aid and excessive entanglements, I disagree with them because I believe they take away from my individual freedom. Throwing out a bunch of "Jews are part of a Zionist Neo-con conspiracy" comments simply shows a lack of being able to come up with reasoned opinions.

Typical Buchanan bombast
Good grief. A man worked for an emerging democracy and because he advises a presidential contender and that democracy is invaded, he's now a traitor? Just a variation on Buchanan's long term screed where anyone who thinks Israel shouldn't be annihilated by those who deny the holocaust while openly planning the next one is met with accusations of traitor.
Just to highlight how bankrupt Buchanan is, he asks why not let the South ossetians decide what nation they wish to belong to? Yeah, what's wrong with that? The Russian backed and directed insugrents/terrorists have driven many of the ethnic Georgians from the region so now that they're gone, lets have a vote.
Why anyone at Townhall thinks this bombastic blowhard is worthy of being linked is beyond me.

History
>The history of these culminating events, have their origin in America's poor decision to allow Russia to take Berlin(WWII).<

The history of this event is Georgian King George
XII begging the Czar to become part of the Russian Empire in 1800, which it did, the reason being Georgia was continually attacked by Muslims from Persia and Turkey as well as from other Muslim Caucasus regions like Chechnya and Daghestan.

At no time, until the Georgian Stalin added South Ossetia and Abkhazia to the Soviet Republic of Georgia, were Ossetians or Abkhazians in any way connected with Georgians other than as trade partners sharing a common border.

The right of secession
The Declaration of Independence specifically states that governments are instituted among men. Those men have the right to sever the ties with that government when they no longer wish to be governed by them.

If the US picks a side, from a freedom point of view shouldn't we be in favor of South Ossetia's and Abhkazia's secession?

Pancho's & Moonkeeper's 11:46
Pancho, most interesting.

Moonkeeper, too logical for little neocon brains to grasp.

Tim...

No beef.

Many of the "Jew-Haters" I have known on the Left find fault only in the idea that "Jews are blood-sucking rich people". None have noted any 'Beef' about religion or politics, just "Wealth".

Which begs the question, "Do Democrats Hate Jews for the sake of Envy"? Similar to Black Envy of Whites, even if said White is not wealthy?

This 'Big Jewish Conspiracy' seems no more than a Muslim excuse for endless War, Imperialism, and restricting individual freedoms.

"War mongering Neocons" appears to be a better description for Islamo-fascism, versus some Republicans with the express interest of American safety.

There is just a lot of unfounded bigotry against a staunch Ally who would spill blood for America without hesitation. I can't think of a better friend, can you?


Bruce - keep up
>the Russian backed and directed insugrents/terrorists have driven many of the ethnic Georgians from the region so now that they're gone, lets have a vote.<

South Ossetia began voting for complete independence from Georgia in 1992, less than a year after being forced into an unwanted union.

The most recent election was in 2006, passed by over 90%, and was verified by international, mostly western observers.

If not now, when?
Of course no one is anxious to go to war with Russia or anyone else, but Buchanan's position leaves one wondering where, when, or if he would ever draw a line in the sand. Would he also allow the Ukraine, the Czechs, Poland etc to again fall under Russian control? Didn't Buchanan also suggest that Hitler should not have been confronted?
Sure, war is a last resort, but in the case of Georgia, we should be utilizing every form of
isolation and economic pressure which can be mustered against Russia. And unless Russia curbs its appetite for the old Soviet omelet, her potential victims could covertly be given a submarine armed with 3 or 4 atomic warheads. That might give Putin second thoughts.
(Shep)

And None Dare Call It Treason
I always learn something worthwhile when reading Pat's articles. Thanks for that! It's great to get a fresh viewpoint. And I'm not talking through my hat either. Being a world history buff and having a national security background, Mr. Buchanan's delivery on most political issues are spot on, even if difficult to admit to ourselves sometimes. Please continue your very valuable service to the Nation!

Killer
The decision to let the Reds take Berlin was not unilaterally agreed upon by politicians or military professionals at the time(Gen. GS Patton notably among them). It has often been said that Gen. Eisenhower's input reflected future political ambitions, but many a WWII vet would disagree: If the Russians wanted to get into the ultimate street fight and lose hundreds of thousands of casualties, so be it. Who were they to argue when someone else wants to pick up the check?

Replace Ossetians voting themselves
out of Georgia with Mexican Americans voting themselves and the Southwest back into Mexico. They call it AZTLAN. We fought the civil war over such a rotten idea. Hmmm, could that be why Georgia is a little upset?

To segue a bit, the big difference between the US and the New-Sovs is that after we bully another country we immediately feel guilty and impoverish ourselves by building them back up. The New-Sovs feel no guilt. They just steal everybody's Ipods, good shoes and anything else they can pack home, and they don't ever give them back.
Check out East Germany after the Berlin wall fell. Looked like an abandoned movie set for "Foreign Intrigue." Grey people living desperate lives of deprivation. All the good stuff had been carted off to a bunch of warehouses in Moscow.
I know you make a good living knocking the US Pat but it does wear a little thin upon occasion. When we, the good guys, finally ride out of town, who's going to take our place?

USNbubblehead
Thanks for your comments. I don't trust the Russians either, and I'm not trying to make them out to be the good guys in this, and us the bad.

I just think that, as Chucky has said in another post, we've squandered a lot of opportunities, and I'm not sure why. In fact, it seems asinine to me.

I've heard the Russians described as having the military capability of "Mexico with Nuclear Weapons". Not too worried about the Mexico part, but the other part doesn't sound good to me.

There are times when I believe we're justified in going out of our way to publicly humiliate a country (or more specifically the leadership of a country). The first Gulf War comes to mind.

But I think that we should carefully weigh our actions, and have some idea of the likely reaction to our policies, as well as the benefits we expect to gain, before we pursue them.

Thus my question "What do we get?" I can't see any rational reason why we've done this over the years.

I think that, short of getting in a shooting war with Russia, which is unthinkable, no matter how many on this comment board seem to think that is an option, that we have put ourselves in a relatively weak position, and the Russians are going to come out ahead here. In fact I think they already have.

This could encourage other misadventures by Russia and others, with their consequent risks. Our foreign policy should be designed to avoid putting us in an inferior position.

I think with the Polish missile deal that we are doubling down on a failed policy, and I don't know that we have any other good choices now. Foreign policy should prevent us from getting in that position, not force us into it.

At least he´s not bashing the sionists
If the Russians only wanted to protect the so called "separatists" why are they controlling 1/3 of Georgia?

Pat is in love with the Iranians and the friends of his friends are his friends as well: Russia & Syria.

In his next column, Pat will attack Poland for being in our side.

David
I think the assessment of Russian military capabilities was short lived and is outdated. The Soviets pushed hard all the time to keep pace with western capabilities in terms of equipment, technology, and tactics/techniques. They also are not afraid to "throw the kitchen sink" at you, if need be. While I will tell you, without going into a lot of detail, that during the cold war they were not a match for us in terms of overall capabilities, we should be cautious in underestimating them as a potential threat. Unfortunately, I have to agree that our position here is a relatively weak one. Again, Reagan doctrine was aimed at the Soviet union and the east bloc, not our present situation. Naturally the results could be (and seem to be) much different. Condoleeza Rice, a professor of Russian studies, should know that, one would think.

Pat...
...this is unsubstantiated circumstantial evidence, mere speculation on Buchanan's part. His work has trailed off significantly I'm afraid.

What are We Saying.
Perhaps the more practical issue is to set aside Pat's article for a moment, and decide just what the post cold war world is going to look like, and how we're going to participate. Do we accept sphere's of influence? Do we give guarantees to numerous countries who may then make decisions that enables them to call on us for military support? How many? Do we allow those guarantees to engage us in direct confrontations with other nuclear powers - like Russia? Do we decide that any country that has some form of democracy is worth waging a war for? Or just some?

We can questions motives - but only if we can create a clear definition of what we believe to be our own self interest. And then,equally decided when and under what circumstances we go to war.

We survived until the collapse of the USSR and its Warsaw Pact Allies. Most of those Warsaw Pact allies have now entered NATO, and not even Putin has delusions of conquering and enslaving those people. The countries involved, Poland, Hungary, Rumania, the Czech Republic, East Germany (now Germany), Bulgaria, Lativa, Estonia and Lithuania, now outnumber the Russians.

The conflicts we now have are primarily related to those who were within the USSR, to include the Ukraine, Moldavia, Georgia, Armenia, etc. These countries border Russia, and are directly within her sphere of influence.

So, the bottom line is, will we start a nuclear war over this group of countries with Russia? And, is that what some of you, angry at Pat, are actually proposing?

Berlin
Killer:

The US didn't allow the Soviets to take Berlin. There had to be a point where the British and Americans had to stop because not to do so would have invited friendly fire either the Soviets firing on the Americans or visa versa.

While Patton wanted the Americans to take Berlin, Eisenhower correctly pointed out that it was important only politically and not militarily and that it would be difficult for the Americans to reach Berlin before the Soviets anyway and even if the Americans had taken Berlin, they would have had to give up the eastern sector to the Soviets. As it turned out, the Soviets had to give up half of Berlin to the French, Americans and British forces and they didn't lose a single person in getting their sectors in Berlin. The Soviets lost 81,000 killed and another 280,000 wounded.

Would it have made sense to dash for Berlin when you were going to have to give the Soviets