Ronnie won the cold war. What is this shit?

A doubleheader.

IMHO, I think that McCain's talk on this issue is campaign-driven, and won't lead to much beyond rhetoric. Georgia is a convenient jingo that undoes the political damage of Iraq and giving the war mongering base something to feel good about. The Bush administration's real policies in the region indicate the reality--there's not a lot to do there for any administration, except perhaps fund a proxy war between Georgian groups and Ossetians. If I'm wrong, McCain is wingnut, so God help us all, because I am getting a sinking feeling that he's going to win this disgusting race.

Also, I don't think Ciliza (sp?) is quite as bad as Alter. To his credit he reports on campaign politics and he does seem to dish fairly. Alter, however, is a chameleon and is one of the main reasons why I don't put any stock in Countdown, since he is a regular fixture there.

... what could Ronnie do other than take credit? Sure, we had to find new enemies, but there was nothing anyone could about that.

We aren't gonna get any "win". Even if we claim it. It's just a matter of how long before we find out we really didn't.

..who McCain's foreign advisors are? I do not think he is capable of making the decisions himself. We have just had about eight years of a president who was not in charge; the precedent is established for the Repubs. Who is running the operation?

From Glenn's original post: The painful absurdity of hard-core warmongers who supported the invasion of Iraq (and, in Lieberman's case, advocating we do the same to Iran and Syria) parading around as defenders of the "political order" is too self-evident, and by now too common, to merit much comment.

There's the old saying "Only fools and profiteers invite war".

Let's amend that read "Only fools, profiteers, and old men and women whose children will never serve at the Front invite war".

This is so insane as to defy description. Exactly what do these people expect a McCain Administration to do against Russia or anyone else? Launch the US nuclear arsenal at them? Admittedly the Senator from Arizona appears punchy enough he'd actually do so, but that's another discussion entirely.

Do any of these neo-conservative 'thinkers' have a practical, objective grasp of reality? I'm seriously starting to wonder.

is Salon radio on hiatus this week because of the convention coverage? As far as the column, you are spot on as usual. It was painful to watch the little bit of coverage I watched last night. It's better to watch C-Span.

If McCain wins, we'll be staring down, what, three quarters of the world's population? Russia, China, most of the Middle East, bits of SE Asia, and South and Central America. Brilliant.

Of course, we still haven't seen Russia's response to American missiles on their borders. Fortunately for world peace, it probably won't include putting missiles back into Cuba to protect the US from the chance of an attack from a rogue nation like, say, Brazil.

Sure, it sounds like Lieberman and the rest are calling for an armed conflict,

but look at what they asked for.

"("This means reinvigorating NATO as a military alliance, not just a political on . . . The credibility of Article Five of the NATO Charter -- that an attack against one really can and will be treated as an attack against all -- needs to be bolstered. . . .The Georgian military should be given the antiaircraft and antiarmor systems necessary to deter any renewed Russian aggression")."

In other words, that Europe click its heels and obey Papa McCain, and that Georgia be sold a lot of US arms.

No doubt they will want NATO to pay, but the American taxpayer will do in a pinch.

In other words, the Establishment's "keep-it-all-the-way-it-was" faction is trying to restart the Cold War, with all its juicy Pentagon budgets unchallenged by the public, and the MI Complex's gravy train chugging right along.

you realize that Bill "William the Bloody" Kristol originally endorsed McCain back in 2000, right? Which was, obviously, before 9/11. Since Kristol was already pinning for an Iraqi invasion even then, that should tell you all you need to know.

I'm willing to wager we'll hear from the local peanuts gallery on this before Comment #75. Anyone think it'll be sooner/later?

wrote: Do any of these neo-conservative 'thinkers' have a practical, objective grasp of reality? I'm seriously starting to wonder.

They do not. Why would someone assemble this bag of nuts? Who gains?

... can be summarized in one sentence: "Your shit stinks, but ours doesn't".

Let's see Russia planning to put missiles in central or south america and see how we respond.

In our arrogance, we have the Monroe doctrine which excludes "interference" literally within our hemisphere.

It is time for Putin to introduce the Putin Doctrine which allows no interference in europe or asia.

We don't have to look far to see our leaders are either mentally-ill or amoral self-serving cynics of the worse sort.

McBush will mouth any words put into his mouth in order to get HIS TURN to play act at being president. He's looking more and more like an exact clone of Bush; a man without principle or even his own thoughts. "Tell me what to say Karl"... a glory hog, so intent on "being" president, that he won't give a damn what the people who put him there do in his name. Not that he's against any of the neocon fascist agenda, mind you... it simply doesn't matter to him. The ONLY thing that matters to these very mediocre little men that the Republican party keeps propping up to front for their very real dirty work is the title.

Or has that nuance escaped you? If Germany suddenly drove Tanks into Kaliningrad to 'free' the German speaking Russians from Russian overlordship would you support that too?

wrote: that should tell you all you need to know

Not really. McCain has abandoned most of his "beliefs" in order to run for president. But he has not abandoned this foreign policy, something maybe 25% of the people support. Why collect the bag of nuts during the primaries and campaign? There is plenty of time for that after winning the election. Clearly someone is sending a message, even at the risk of handing Obama a target.