creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Patrick Buchanan
Pat Buchanan
7 Feb 2012
Who Wants War With Iran?

Appearing alongside CIA Director David Petraeus before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence last week, … Read More.

3 Feb 2012
Ron Paul: Reactionary or Visionary

After his fourth-place showing in Florida, Ron Paul, by then in Nevada, told supporters he had been advised … Read More.

31 Jan 2012
Obama Sandbags the Archbishop

At the end of Sunday mass at the church this writer attends in Washington, D.C., the pastor asked the … Read More.

Pushing Russia Into the Cold

Share Comment

A year after taking power, in June 1934, Adolf Hitler made his first visit abroad — to his idol Benito Mussolini in Venice.

Babbling on incessantly about "Mein Kampf "and the Negroid strain in Mediterranean peoples, the Fuhrer made a dismal impression.

"What a clown this Hitler is," Mussolini told an aide.

Two weeks later, Hitler executed the Roehm purge and murdered scores of old Stormtrooper comrades. In late July, Austrian Nazis, attempting a coup, assassinated Chancellor Engelbert Dollfuss, a friend of Mussolini whose wife and child were then his guests.

Il Duce ordered four divisions to the Brenner Pass and flew to Vienna to vent his rage and disgust with Hitler. He called a summit at Stresa with Britain and France to agree on military action should Hitler make any new move in violation of Versailles.

At the time, however, Il Duce was also plotting revenge on Abyssinia for a bloody border clash with Italian Somaliland.

Mussolini thought his Allies would understand if he invaded the Ogaden to add an African colony to his new Roman Empire, just as the British and French had so often done in previous decades.

Mussolini miscalculated. Morally outraged, Britain and France went before the League of Nations and had sanctions imposed on Italy that were too weak to defeat her but punitive enough to insult her.

Friendless, isolated and condemned as an aggressor by Europe, Italy and Mussolini had nowhere to turn now but Hitler's Germany.

Thus, over the fate of an Abyssinian slave empire, Britain drove her faithful World War I ally into the arms of a Nazi dictator Mussolini loathed and had wished to confront beside Britain. And Abyssinia was overrun.

Are we making the same mistake in the Caucasus?

Mikheil Saakashvili started this war with his barrage attack and occupation of South Ossetia. Russia's war of retribution was far less violent or excessive than the U.S. bombing of Serbia for 78 days over Kosovo, or our unprovoked war on Saddam Hussein's Iraq, which has brought death to scores of thousands, or Israel's 35 days of bombing of Lebanon for a border skirmish with Hezbollah.

Yet, declared John McCain of Russia, "In the 21st century, nations don't invade other nations." Even Dick Cheney must have guffawed.

Russia must get out now, adds Bush, for South Ossetia and Abkhazia belong to a sovereign Georgia.

But when did Bush demand that Israel get off the Golan Heights or withdraw from the birthplace of Jesus, which Israelis have occupied for 41 years, as he demands that Russia get out of the birthplace of Joseph Stalin, which Russia has occupied for two weeks?

As Israel was provoked in 1967, so, too, was Russia provoked.

Russians died in Saakashvili's attack, as American died in Pancho Villa's raid on New Mexico in 1916. We sent "Black Jack" Pershing, future Gen. George Patton and a U.S. army 300 miles into Mexico to kill Villa. Was this proportionate?

If we proceed on a course of isolating Russia from the West, keeping her out of the World Trade Organization, throwing her out of the G-8 and ending cooperation with NATO, where do we think Russia will go? Where did Il Duce go, when he was excommunicated from the West?

Condi Rice compares Vladimir Putin's action in Georgia to Leonid Brezhnev's crushing of the Prague Spring in 1968. She raced to Warsaw to ink a deal to put 10 anti-missile missiles and U.S. Patriot missiles manned by Americans into Poland.

Does the Stanford provost have any idea where the end of this road lies, upon which she and Bush have started the United States?

What do we do if Russia responds to our Patriots in Poland with the Russian S-300 anti-aircraft system in Iran and Syria?

If the United States intends to bring Georgia and Ukraine into NATO and arm them to fight Russia, why should Russia not dissolve the Treaty on Conventional Forces in Europe and move her tank armies into Belarus and up to the borders of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania?

Would we send U.S. troops into the Baltic republics to signal that we will fight Russia to honor our NATO war guarantees? Which NATO allies would fight alongside us against a nuclear-armed Russia?

If we bring Ukraine into NATO, what do we do if Russified east Ukraine secedes and Russia sends troops to back the rebels? Do we send warships into Russia's bathtub, the Black Sea, and commit to fight as long as it takes to restore Ukraine's territorial integrity?

In March 1939, Britain pledged to declare war and fight Germany to the death to guarantee the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Poland. How did that one turn out for Britain and Poland?

Before we start down the road of isolating and encircling Russia with weak NATO allies, let us think through Gen. Petraeus' question in 2003 about Iraq, "Tell me, how does this thing end?"

But, then, these folks never seem to think anything through.

To find out more about Patrick Buchanan, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2008 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.


Comments

7 Comments | Post Comment
Yup, and Ho Chi Minh turned to the Soviets when the U.S. rebuffed his pleas for an ally to support his bid for an independent Viet Nam. The same themes just keep repeating themselves throughout history, and we never learn.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Masako
Tue Aug 26, 2008 8:42 AM
If it were any other topic, P. Buchanan and I would be at opposite ends of the table, but in regard to his views of Russia re: the current situation, wasted past opportunities to bring her into the Western fold and dim future prospects to Western hard-headed war mongering I agree with him 100%.
It is truly unfortunate that the Neo-Cons still basically control the "international mindset" of the Conservative Wing of the national consciousness, and Pat is still without the influence he once had.
When it comes to international relations, the pragmatic, permanent self-interest, realpolitik view of P.B. is exactly what the Republicans need to return to (the position of traditional conservatives vs. the neo-con and social conservatives.)
I do hope that he finds a way to take back his seat at that table, and figure out how to once again influence the conservative point of view which for the last 7 years is war all the time, anytime, and war as the best first solution to any problem that requires little or no planning, because war is a solution in and of itself.
Comment: #2
Posted by: jonathan seer
Tue Aug 26, 2008 10:56 AM
Mr Buchanan; I hope it is not lost on you what a toothless tiger we have made of the United Nations is just like the League of Nations was made to be. It could not stop us in Iraq; and it has never brought the Palestine Justice. Will it prevent world war? No. We have been much of the muscle behind the United Nations, and now that we are clearly out for ourselves who will stop us? I mean, the less we have of free military the sooner we will pull out the nukes. Russia is already at that stage. I think things couldn't get that much worse, so we are primed for some stupid disaster like world war. And, how can we stop our government, and how can we stop the neocons who have been much of the force behind this showdown? Our government, and our ruling class are out for themselves, and beyond our reach. It may just be a bid for power in this country by stiring up war fever, fear, and patriotism. It is possible they feel how shaky their hold on power is, and would destroy life on the planet rather than surrender anything. To me, it just looks like stupid brinksmanship, and naked adventurism. I don't care if we win. It is the danger we face by winning that makes me think twice. Did you ever hear that story of the Russian Czar, the big one just before the last one. The German ambassador was having dinner with him and told him Germany would find it necessary to park a few divisions on his frontier. The Czar tied a fork in a knot and threw it on the German's lap, and said: that is what I am going to do with your divisions. It is still their frontier, and if we go there we better be loaded for bear. Thanks... Sweeney
Comment: #3
Posted by: James A, Sweeney
Tue Aug 26, 2008 4:02 PM
All of those are very interesting questions, Pat. Do you also have any answers? It does not appear so.

Your notion that opposing Russian adventurism will corner her and make her join forces with our enemies making the situation much worse is absurd. First of all, who would they join? China? North Korea? Another abusrd is your implied suggestion that US needs to stand down and do nothing because we have done some bad things in the past.

As to WWII and Poland (judging from your recent book, another challenging topic for you) do you think that GB and France ever regretted not doing what they agreed to, i.e., defend Poland? There are many military historians that believe France and GB would have gotten half way to Berlin in six days should they decide to attack Germany from the west in September of 1939. Had they done it there would not have been a WWII. And no, Hitler did not bulit up German military machine to recapture a Gdansk corridor from the pesky Poles.

50+ million lifes lost, most European Jews wiped out, Eastern Europe handed over to Stalin. Was it worth it not keeping the promise?

The only way US and the West will be able to keep Russia at bay is through showing that we mean business. Gorbachev did not roll over until he realize that Soviet Union has no chances of surviving without economic and democratic changes and these were not possible without getting peaceful with the rest of the world.

Comment: #4
Posted by: Peter Gray
Wed Aug 27, 2008 4:06 PM
Why do you think Russia must “roll over”? Where do you think such an aggressive attitude toward Russia leads? All Russia did was to repel Georgian attack on S. Ossetia , which does not want to be part of Georgia, and had been de facto independent for 15 years, or so. How does this threaten legitimate interests of the US or the West? Russians may be lingering in Georgia longer than they should, but they are not killing anyone, and they don't seem to have any interest in “destroying democratic Georgia”, as we are being told.
In this conflict we are being led by a demagogue Saakashvili who is trying to frame the results of his misadventure as ”threat to world order” and drags the world into renewed and absolutely unnecessary confrontation with Russia.
Pat Buchanan's comments are the best and the sanest voice in this mayhem over Georgia. Do yourself a favor, research Georgia before the conflict a Russia, and post the results. You might soon discover that Georgia is no more democratic or less corrupt than Russia. This is a conflict between two idiots. We should know better than get dragged into it.
Comment: #5
Posted by: loska
Thu Aug 28, 2008 7:16 AM
Re: Peter Gray
I have an answer...
I have read a recently published in a Russian blog story about a small group of young Moscow businessmen. They were watching the news from South Osetia, and when learned that Russian army liberated Tshinval, began planning a tour around Europe and US for the Russian heroes that risking their lives saved thousands of women and children from genocide.
You know, something like Gagarin had in 1959... They thought that the idea would bring millions in advertising.
Can you imagine their surprise when all of the "free press" in unison started blaming Russia for imperialism and agression.
For many years, despite the bombing of Serbia, Iraq, despite torture and rendition of detainees, despite sales of weapons to agressors etc. Russians considered US as a friendly nation. They embraced democracy and even religion and were unhappy when saw their Government was acting in undemocratic way.
But something has been a miss. Something like NATO spreading more and more, getting closer and closer to a democratic capitalist ally Russia. Something, like Dick's statements in Latvia, strange relationships with GB. It was a bit confusing for a Russian, sometimes they did not know who to believe Putin or Kasparov, or maybe Rice (mushroom cloud?).
But now it is all clear again. And for that I thank you and other neocons and neolibs. The approval ratings of Putin-Medvedev is more that 90%. The country is not only united, but I can say motivated. Now Russians know that "the free world" values human rights and even human lives only when the suffering human is American or their puppet. They have learned that any fact that supports Russian side can not be independently confirmed, but any lie that opposes it does not require confirmation at all, and must be accepted even if it is absurd. Even people that are caught liyng time and time again, must be telling truth when accusing Russia in ethnic cleansing.
They have learned, that there is difference between people of Kosovo and Osetia. Not everybody deserves freedom and independence. As well as a right to defend citizens is only granted to Israel and Georgia. And there is no comparison between lets say Lebanon and Georgia. Lebanon can be bombed, but Russia must be "kept at bay". You see the democracy in Georgia and Israel is much more democratic then in Russia or Lebanon.
Now even I understand, what is the purpose for the new submarines and stealth jets and so-called "usable" nuclear weapons that United States keeps buying on borrowed money. Before, I could not figure out how such can be used in the war on terror.
So thank you so much, and as a token of gratitude let me offer you an advise. I see that you are versed in history. Do you know how many times Russia has been considered easy to "keep at bay" and attacked? Do you remember the outcome of each and every attempt? And how are you planning to "keep at bay" 10,000 nuclear warheads, now I am sure ready to launch? Think about it. How many lives are you willing to destroy to show that you mean business? Will it be the same business as you have shown in Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Afganistan, Somalia? If so, that will not do
Comment: #6
Posted by: Popov
Mon Sep 8, 2008 3:18 AM
Pat,
Keep writing on this subject. I have wondered if any others here in the west have an ounce of feeling for lives of Russian people! My wife is Russian, born in Kazakhstan. Her father was in Georgia in the 1980s and has written to me about the sequence of events in Georgia. It is convincing to me that Russia was not wrong, shows Georgia killed Russians and it seems no one here cares. We live "way out here" in western Kansas, but we are very in tune to the hipocrisy of nearly all media outlets on this subject. If you would like, I can send you his letter. We want to make an impact and I'll help you if possible! I think this is a very important subject for the long-term good of relations among powerful countries and the media here handle it very recklessly.
Craig (cyplainsdrifter@yahoo.com)
Comment: #7
Posted by: Craig Tuttle
Wed Sep 10, 2008 9:56 PM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Pat Buchanan
Feb. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 31 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 1 2 3
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Author’s Podcast
Austin Bay
Austin BayUpdated 8 Feb 2012
Deb Saunders
Debra J. SaundersUpdated 8 Feb 2012
Michelle Malkin
Michelle MalkinUpdated 8 Feb 2012

6 Mar 2009 Afghanistan South

5 Dec 2008 Can This Marriage Last?

25 May 2007 Why Congress Caved to Bush