This is pulled from the full text:

As we gather here tonight, our country is less secure and more isolated than at any time in recent history. The Bush-McCain foreign policy has dug us into a very deep hole with very few friends to help us climb out. For the last seven years, this administration has failed to face the biggest forces shaping this century: the emergence of Russia, China and India as great powers; the spread of lethal weapons; the shortage of secure supplies of energy, food and water; the challenge of climate change; and the resurgence of fundamentalism in Afghanistan and Pakistan, the real central front against terrorism.
In recent days, we’ve once again seen the consequences of this neglect with Russia’s challenge to the free and democratic country of Georgia. Barack Obama and I will end this neglect. We will hold Russia accountable for its actions, and we’ll help the people of Georgia rebuild.

I’ve been on the ground in Georgia, Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan, and I can tell you in no uncertain terms: this Administration’s policy has been an abject failure. America cannot afford four more years of this.

I find that lots of politicians are talking about holding Russia accountable, but very few are able to articulate what that would mean.

read more

In this previous post, I quoted from a Washington Post article that discussed the business activities of one Randy Scheunemann. That article left readers with a big question that begged to be asked far more emphatically: Who the hell is this man? To his everlasting credit, Pat Buchanan returns to the question, and then gives the answer the emphasis it deserves. The answer is disturbing:

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.

. . . .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.

"NATO leaders agreed that Georgia would become a member of the Alliance."
- April 2008, NATO

"NATO and Azerbaijan approved an updated version of their Individual Partnership Action Plan" - 7 March 2008, NATO

"Warsaw and Washington signed a preliminary deal Thursday on basing part of a US missile shield in Poland, in the face of Moscow's vehement opposition and mounting East-West tensions over Georgia."
- August 14, 2008, AFP

Since the Thirty Years' War, no people, I think, have been more profoundly injured and diminished than the Russian people have been by the successive waves of violence brought to them by this past brutal century. There were: the Russian Japanese War of 1904-1905; the fearful manpower losses brought about by Russia's participation in the First World War; the cruelties and the fighting that were a part of the consolidation of Communist power in the immediate aftermath of that First World War; then, the immense manpower losses of World War II; and finally, extending over some seven decades and penetrating and in part dominating all these other disasters, there were the immense damages, social, spiritual, even genetic, inflicted upon the Russian people by the Communist regime itself.

To solve this ethnic problem, Georgia decided to unite the two separated parts of South and North Ossetia, but region was never part of post-Soviet Georgia.

As long as Georgia was a part of the Soviet Union, all ethnic conflicts within the Soviet zone of “interests”, were not international issues. Yet, the issue emerged à la une after the dissolution of the USSR, when first in 1995 the two regions — Abkhazia and South Ossetia — became involved in conflicts with local separatists supported by Moscow. The issue ended in a de facto independence of South Ossetia from Georgia.

Yet, with a pro-US president in office, Georgia launched an assault earlier this month with artillery and rocket attacks on the separatists. Russia immediately reacted and showed the sharp claws of a polar bear. A much larger Russian army quickly crushed the Georgian assault. It is believed that the United States knew or even encouraged the Georgian attack. With the support of the US, Georgia hoped to annex the region.

If this conflict is to be resolved, only an international institution like the UN must intervene, not the US or NATO.

The US should now stay away from a new regional conflict, which is thousands of kilometers away from Washington. Because of its bad reputation in Iraq, stirring up internal problems in other countries, and its hunger for national resources of other countries, the Bush Administration does not have any lesson to teach to this part of the world with a totally different history and socio-economic background. Furthermore, there is nothing like “weapons of mass destruction” in this area.

In actuality, it is time to solve international problems through firm and reliable UN resolutions, rather than the bogus actions of world super-powers. It is obvious that the US, being the only power today with hegemonic desires, could generate further tension. The world is not going to sit and watch those self-baptised Yankee liberators in the Bush Administration try to impose their long outdated principles of “democracy” and “freedom”.

The world has not forgotten that in 1961 the US and USSR came to the brink of nuclear war when the USSR was determined to set up atomic missiles in the US’ backyard in Cuba. The Soviet move was in retaliation against US basing nuclear missiles in Turkey. Now we have the US — via NATO — again trying to further its military alliance in the Caucasuses.

It is not unreasonable to expect that Russia, rather than allowing events to continue down that road again, would act swiftly in self defence — probably in the same way the US would react. I wonder what the Russians would do if a similar thing happened in their backyard. While they are still a major powerful and have the legacy of once being the strongest military superpower, they would say and do almost anything and get away with it.

There is no evidence that Russia intends to occupy Georgia, overthrow its government and install a puppet government. The Western media has not been reporting properly and honestly about the issue, rather they are exaggerating the conflict just like during the Cold War. Georgia is not Poland of 1939-40, divided by a German-Soviet pact, nor have we the same monsters like Hitler and Stalin in the East and West.

There is a much stronger ground for Germany and France, with their relatively better tradition of democracy and a lesser ambition of hegemony, to act as intermediaries to help bring about a ceasefire and reduce tensions until both sides with the help of the UN can achieve the best resolution. Despite failure to form a united stance on how to respond to Russia’s military action in South Ossetia, Germany and France, because of their close relations with Russia, can play an important role to impede further escalation of violence.

"The goals of the United States have been to safeguard the lives of Americans"

- George H.W. Bush, 1989

"My duty as President right from the outset was to protect our fellow citizens."

- Dmitry Medvedev, 2008

My fellow citizens, last night I ordered U.S. military forces to Panama. No President takes such action lightly. This morning I want to tell you what I did and why I did it.

For nearly two years, the United States, nations of Latin America and the Caribbean have worked together to resolve the crisis in Panama. The goals of the United States have been to safeguard the lives of Americans, to defend democracy in Panama, to combat drug trafficking, and to protect the integrity of the Panama Canal treaty. Many attempts have been made to resolve this crisis through diplomacy and negotiations. All were rejected by the dictator of Panama, General Manuel Noriega, an indicted drug trafficker.

Last Friday, Noriega declared his military dictatorship to be in a state of war with the United States and publicly threatened the lives of Americans in Panama. The very next day, forces under his command shot and killed an unarmed American serviceman; wounded another; arrested and brutally beat a third American serviceman; and then brutally interrogated his wife, threatening her with sexual abuse. That was enough.

General Noriega's reckless threats and attacks upon Americans in Panama created an imminent danger to the 35,000 American citizens in Panama. As President, I have no higher obligation than to safeguard the lives of American citizens. And that is why I directed our Armed Forces to protect the lives of American citizens in Panama and to bring General Noriega to justice in the United States. [ . . .]

I am committed to strengthening our relationship with the democratic nations in this hemisphere. I will continue to seek solutions to the problems of this region through dialog and multilateral diplomacy. I took this action only after reaching the conclusion that every other avenue was closed and the lives of American citizens were in grave danger. [ . . .]

Colleagues,

Today’s meeting with the leaders of the parliamentary factions is taking place in extraordinary circumstances and is extremely important for us all. On the night of August 7-8, Georgia committed an act of military aggression directed primarily against the people of South Ossetia and the Russian peacekeeping brigade deployed in this region. They used heavy artillery, tanks, aviation and the regular army to literally wipe Tskhinvali, its homes, hospitals and schools, from the face of the Earth. Several thousand people have become victims of the ensuing humanitarian disaster, and a large number of them are our fellow citizens.

In just a few hours all of the agreements that existed at that point were made null and void, not to mention that all the basic principles of international law have been violated: the wounded have had no chance to get treatment and refugees have not had the possibility of evacuation. This is the tragic result of the unspeakable aggressive act that Georgia, the Georgian authorities, has committed...

. . . As I have said, my duty as President right from the outset was to protect our fellow citizens and not let the crimes committed against civilians and peacekeepers go unpunished. Russia wants to end this barbarity against the Ossetian people and against our citizens as soon as possible.

I repeat now what I said several days ago, namely that Russia has historically always been the guarantor of the security of the peoples of the Caucasus. This is our mission and our duty. We have never been just passive observers in this region and never will be.

We are doing everything within our power. Russia will not leave its fellow citizens in misfortune and will strive to normalise the situation.

• land areas: 76,000 km² (Panama) Vs 70,000 km² (Georgia)
• population: 2,500,000 (Panama, 1992) Vs 4,600,000 (Georgia, 2006)
• per-capital income: $2,000 (Panama, 1992) $4,700 (Georgia, 2006)

• Panama: Americans lost 24 killed, 325 wounded
• Georgia: Russians lost 64 soldiers killed, 323 wounded

(E)xpanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-cold war era. Such a decision may be expected to inflame the nationalistic, anti-Western and militaristic tendencies in Russian opinion; to have an adverse effect on the development of Russian democracy; to restore the atmosphere of the cold war to East-West relations, and to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking.

More recently, Henry Kissinger, proponent of NATO expansion to include the states of Soviet-dominated Eastern Europe, warned against further NATO expansion:

Confrontational rhetoric notwithstanding, Russia's leaders are conscious of their strategic limitations. Indeed, I would characterize Russian policy under Putin as driven in a quest for a reliable strategic partner, with America being the preferred choice ... But the movement of the Western security system from the Elbe River to the approaches to Moscow brings home Russia's decline in a way bound to generate a Russian emotion that will inhibit the solution of all other issues. It should be kept on the table without forcing the issue to determine the possibilities of making progress on other issues.