Here's how I think Georgia played out.

[cliffordu]

I think that Rove was in that neighborhood and he and McCain's man met with the Georgian Pres, picked up the two hundred thousand and set this up:

Georgia tosses a couple of shells into the breakaway section...and the breakaway section shells back.

The Georgian President says "OMFG!!! these guys are attacking us!!!"

McCain says "I been talking to this guy and I can straighten this out" Sends Joey the traitor and the Lobbyist to Georgia.

Problem "Solved"

The Georgian pres says "McCain is the guy, he stopped the war!!!"


McCain says, "See?, I know what I'm doing on the innernational stage!!"


Except they hadn't figured on Boris the Bear upsetting the apple cart. And eating the other players.

This makes sense on a couple levels.

George and Boris sat around drinking and clowning at the Olympics like everything was juuuust fine.

Boris left immediately after the fighting really started. George was oblivious.

There seemed to be NO WARNING that the Russians were at the border, or that they started moving..

No cia, nsa, nada.

Was everyone told to ignore their lying eyes?? Was everyone told that there would be some activity, but to just ignore it???

Was this a wag the dog that got out of hand, and that Putin played perfectly??

[FrenchieCat]

1. Wag the dog, the "B" version. That's how I see it.

[cliffordu]

3. You know what amazes me? That we can actually

have serious discussions about OUR government actually starting wars, faking documents to start those wars, the suspension of the Constitution and an abuse of power that IS the Bush administration and we all aren't wearing tinfoil hats.

I cannot believe we have fallen this far.

My grandfather, WWI vet, coal miner and Union organizer, would be in Washington with his Springfield 30-06 to overthrow these cowards.

[babylonsister]

2. You aren't alone...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=6626107

[cliffordu]

4. Thanks, babylonsister!!

[DCKit]

5. I'm thinking Putin played his part perfectly and BushCo* flubbed it... again. n/t

[Dover]

6. Georgia War: A Neocon Election Ploy?

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

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

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

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

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

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9826

-----------------




War in the Caucasus: Towards a Broader Russia-US Military Confrontation?


During the night of August 7, coinciding with the opening ceremony of the Beijing Olympics, Georgia's president Saakashvili ordered an all-out military attack on Tskhinvali, the capital of South Ossetia.

The aerial bombardments and ground attacks were largely directed against civilian targets including residential areas, hospitals and the university. The provincial capital Tskhinvali was destroyed. The attacks resulted in some 1500 civilian deaths, according to both Russian and Western sources. "The air and artillery bombardment left the provincial capital without water, food, electricity and gas. Horrified civilians crawled out of the basements into the streets as fighting eased, looking for supplies." (AP, August 9, 2008). According to reports, some 34,000 people from South Ossetia have fled to Russia. (Deseret Morning News, Salt Lake City, August 10, 2008)

The importance and timing of this military operation must be carefully analyzed. It has far-reaching implications.

Georgia is an outpost of US and NATO forces, on the immediate border of the Russian Federation and within proximity of the Middle East Central Asian war theater. South Ossetia is also at the crossroads of strategic oil and gas pipeline routes.


Georgia does not act militarily without the assent of Washington. The Georgian head of State is a US proxy and Georgia is a de facto US protectorate.
Who is behind this military agenda? What interests are being served? What is the purpose of the military operation.

There is evidence that the attacks were carefully coordinated by the US military and NATO.

Cont'd

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9788

[cliffordu]

7. Precisely.

[Dover]

8. The bigger picture

Turkey, Israel committed to giant energy project

Monday, July 14, 2008

Turkey and Israel are concluding talks to commit to undertake a thorough feasibility study on a new pipeline system this week. The project aims to transport oil, natural gas, water and electricity from southern Turkey to southern Israel

http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/article.php?enewsid=109722

On The Pipeline Politics:

http://mvdg.wordpress.com/2007/11/13/pipeline-politics-israel/

--------

Israel proposes crude pipeline from Georgia to Eastern Asia

Israel may be on its way to becoming a crude oil transport bridge to the Far East. The Eilat-Ashkelon Pipeline Company (EAPC) is leading an international initiative to channel crude oil from Jihan in southeast Turkey to eastern Asia, using its infrastructure in Israel. A consortium of energy firms and international shipping companies will manage the initiative, and a memorandum of understanding is expected to be signed within three months.

The oil would be pumped in Georgia and Azerbaijan, and be brought to Turkey by pipeline. From Turkey it will be shipped by tanker to Ashkelon, whence it would be transported by pipeline to Eilat. In Eilat, the oil will be loaded onto a new set of tankers for transportation to eastern Asia.

The Ashkelon-Eilat Pipeline Company is a privately owned firm, owned jointly by Israel and the government of Iran. Tehran is currently not an active partner, and it and Israel are involved in international arbitration (Israel refuses to pay the Iran a compensation for its EAPC’s shares and other debts which are estimated to be around US$ 5 billion) ..cont'd

http://www.labournet.net/world/0801/pipeline1.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eilat-Ashkelon_Pipeline

---------

The War on Lebanon and the Battle for Oil
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHO20060726&articleId=2824

--------


Egypt, Israel: A New Pipeline and Institutionalizing Camp David

Map - http://www.stratfor.com/mmf/115751


With the May 1 opening of an undersea natural gas pipeline linking Egypt and Israel, Cairo has effectively become Israel’s only direct regular energy supplier. Economics aside, the pipeline has a strong geopolitical underpinning.

Egypt officially started natural gas shipments to Israel on May 1, according to state-owned Israel Electric Corp. This natural gas pipeline effectively makes Egypt the only direct regular energy supplier to Israel.

The new underwater pipeline runs 63 miles from the Egyptian city of El Arish on the northern Mediterranean coast to the Israeli port of Ashkelon. By going underwater and bypassing the Palestinian territories, the pipeline is largely insulated from insurgent attacks. The pipeline emerged from an agreement signed in 2005 with the East Mediterranean Gas Co. for Egypt to supply 1.7 billion cubic meters of natural gas over 20 years. Israel Electric estimates that Egyptian natural gas will supply more than 20 percent of Israel’s electricity over the next decade.

It is no surprise that Cairo has kept mum on this energy agreement. In late February when the pipeline was undergoing commercial testing, Muslim Brotherhood jumped at the opportunity to lambaste the Egyptian government for quietly making deals with Israel while Palestinians were starving in the Gaza Strip. Already on edge in dealing with soaring food prices, the last thing Cairo needs is to give more fodder to the opposition...cont'd

http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/egypt_israel_new_pipeline_and_institutionalizing_camp_david


Iraq-Israel oil pipeline 'to reopen'
By Anton La Guardia
21/06/2003

Israel's finance minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, predicted yesterday that the British-era oil pipeline from Iraq's northern oilfields through Jordan to the Israeli port city of Haifa would be reopened.

"It won't be long when you will see Iraqi oil flowing to Haifa," Mr Netanyahu told a group of British investors in London. "It is just a matter of time until the pipeline is reconstituted and Iraqi oil will flow to the Mediterranean."

The pipeline was closed during the first Arab-Israeli war in 1948 and has never been used since. Its rehabilitation would dramatically enhance regional economic co-operation after decades of war and mutual suspicion..cont'd


http://www.prisonplanet.com/iraq_israel_oil_pipeline_to_reopen.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/apr/20/israelandthepalestinians.oil


In The Pipeline: More Regime Change
Asia Times
Apr 4, 2003

An Israeli daily, Ha'aretz, has reported that Israel is seriously considering restarting a strategically important oil pipeline that once transferred oil from the Iraqi city of Mosul to Israel's northern port of Haifa. Given the Israeli claim of a positive US approach to the plan, the Israeli project provides grounds for a theory that the ongoing war against Iraq is in part a joint US, British and Israeli design for reshaping the Middle East to serve their particular interests, including their oil requirements.

According to the daily, Israeli National Infrastructure Minister Yosef Paritzky considers the pipeline project as economically justifiable as it would reduce the country's cost of oil imports. This is currently very high, as Israel imports oil from Russia. There would also be a strategic justification for the project, as importing oil from an oil supplier in Israel's close proximity would increase its fuel security and would address its major handicap, that is, its total dependence on imported fuel from far-away suppliers. While living in the oil-rich Middle East, the Israelis cannot count on regional oil exporters because of the existing Arab-Israeli conflict. Prior to the 1979 Iranian revolution, Iran, which was on friendly terms with Israel, provided its oil requirements. That arrangement ended in 1979 when the new Iranian revolutionary regime cut ties with Israel.

Paritzky has requested an assessment of the Mosul-Haifa pipeline's current state, which ceased to operate in 1948. Presumably, the pipeline will require major repair and/or upgrading, if not an overhaul, as it has not been in use for more than half a century. However, its full operation, including the required repair work, needs the consent of Iraq, the would-be oil supplier, and Syria, a country neighboring both Iraq and Israel, through which the pipeline passes.

Iraqi consent will be out of the question as long as the current regime of Saddam Hussein is in power. As acknowledged by the Israeli minister, a prerequisite for the project is, therefore, a new regime in Baghdad with friendly ties with Israel. However, such a regime, if ever it comes to power, will still require Syria's consent to operationalize the pipeline. Given the overall political environment in the Middle East and Israel's continued occupation of Syria's Golan Heights, the existing Syrian regime will never grant its consent as long as the status quo prevails. As stated by the Iranian government, during the Iran-Iraq war (1980-88) when Iraq enjoyed cordial and close relations with Israel's mentor, the United States, Israel tried, but failed, to resume the oil flow through the pipeline. Syria, a friend of Iran and an enemy of Iraq, blocked the flow of Iraqi oil.

Hence, unless the pipeline were redirected through Jordan, another country bordering Israel and Iraq with normalized relations with Israel, the pipeline project will require a different regime in Syria. In other words, regime change in both Iraq and Syria is the prerequisite for the project. As Paritzky did not mention a redirecting option, it is safe to suggest that the Israelis are also optimistic about a regime change in Syria in the near future.

..cont'd

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/ED04Ak01.html

[cliffordu]

9. Round up the usual suspects: Oil....I should have just looked for another oil

connection to this whole scummy scene....