Term Paper on "Critical Thinking on Included Editorial"

Term Paper 10 pages (3082 words) Sources: 3

[EXCERPT] . . . .

Buchanan Op-Ed

An Analysis of Buchanan's Op-Ed

The neo-conservative agenda has never been more apparent than it is today, and Pat Buchanan's op-ed from 23 August 2011 plainly exposes it in no uncertain terms. Buchanan quotes Lindsey Graham, the Senator from South Carolina who recently likened America to a "battlefield" in his support of the National Defense Authorization Act (Anders), as saying that "Russia's invasion of Georgian land in 2008 was an act of aggression, not only to Georgia but to all new democracies" (Buchanan). Graham's statement is a blatant misrepresentation of the facts. Like Buchanan, we of the Libertarian Lobby must conclude that Graham's assessment is pure "neocon propaganda" (Buchanan). This paper will show exactly why and how the neocons are dominating our Senate and dictating our foreign policy in an aggressive, pro-war, militaristic fashion. The solution that we propose is that the Republican National Convention remember the meaning of true conservatism. As Judge Napolitano states, "Truth is identity between intellect and reality" (xiii). What I propose, as a libertarian lobbyist, is that the RNC look at the truth in Buchanan's op-ed, recall the wisdom of our forefathers, oppose all neocon Imperialism, and implement the diplomatic Instrument of National Power in order to support America's security, values, prosperity, and to maintain international order.

Buchanan's Premise

I firmly agree with Buchanan's premise, which is that interfering in the Russia-Georgia conflict will only exacerbate U.S.-Russian relations (just like they were strained almost to the point of war during the Cuban Missile Crisis). The

Continue scrolling to

download full paper ⤓

U.S. bristled at the thought of the Soviets interfering in waters so close to home, and Russia today is right to bristle at our interference in matters so close to its home. Buchanan's point is quite clear: Russia is not the "occupier" -- on the contrary, it is the Georgians who are occupying South Ossetia: "Twice the Georgians have been expelled by force. Both times, Ossetians and Abkhazians helped throw them out. Why are we demanding that the Georgians be permitted to march back in and reimpose an alien rule that clearly is detested by these people? Is this the American spirit of '76?" (Buchanan). The answer is simple and reasonable: the answer is a resounding, "No."

The simple fact of the matter is that our country has been hijacked by a neo-conservative interest and one need only consider events since the dawn of the 21st century: an attack on 9/11, the investigation of which was completely white-washed by the same men who attempted to white-wash the Iran-Contra Affair, but which allowed the blame for the attack to be lain on a terrorist group that was only some months prior to the events of 9/11 receiving a large quantity of funds from the U.S. (Dawson); the PNAC reports and the Zionist lobby that has been pushing for American intervention in the Middle East and which will use any excuse to gain hegemony (need we recall WMDs that never existed, a terrorist leader on dialysis somehow able to elude the most "comprehensive dragnet" in the history of the world (Corbett), and now a so-called nuclear threat from Iran?); and the Patriot Act, which shows no signs of yielding to the Sunset Clause. We have become a society so easily deceived by false flag operations and psy-op warfare that to imagine that we are not in need of paternalism or that our military are not the policemen of the world are two points likely to be considered as treasonous acts.

Yet Buchanan brings us back to reality: "As a European Union investigation has confirmed, the 2008 war began with the Georgian invasion of South Ossetia" (Buchanan). Georgia is the aggressor here -- not Russia. We must not ignore the facts. We must conform our intellects to the reality. If we do not, then we will not arrive at the truth, but will be led astray by the neocon agenda, which is a militaristic, Zionistic, Imperialistic agenda. The American people need to be aware of this. The American people need to hear the voice of the only peace candidate running in the Republican primary: Ron Paul.

The Instrument of Power That Will Support U.S. National Interests

The neocons in Congress will assure us that we must resort to militaristic IOPs. But we of saner minds must ask ourselves, as Buchanan does, why? Why can we not exercise the power of diplomacy -- a power that Ron Paul advocates -- and a power that helped Kennedy avoid going to war with Khrushchev? The answer must be stated. Black ops and espionage have been viewed as far more effective in gaining for the neocons exactly what they want. Currently, Mikhail Saakashvili is the "favorite of Washington," which means that all the propaganda in the mainstream media will take the position of supporting Georgia in this conflict against the Ossetians and Abkhazians and against the Russians. Why do the neocons support Saakashvili? The answer is that Saakashvili serves the neocons' Imperialistic interests -- hegemony in the Middle East (Dawson).

Using the diplomatic Instrument of National Power would help alleviate the stress that currently permeates the Middle East, due to American occupation there. Currently, the U.S. has strong economic interests in the Middle East, interests that touch upon all countries located there including Georgia. Those interests are strongly tied to oil pipelines like the BTC line belonging to BP: "Because of politicking, logistics, and investment, pipelines can easily take a decade or more to construct, as was the case of the BTC line running from the Caspian via the capital of Azerbaijan, Baku, to the capital of Georgia, Tbilisi, on out to Ceyhan, a port in Turkey" (Dawson). As Dawson states, "the largest importers of oil from the BTC line are Italy and Israel," so it is not surprising that when the line was refitted to go through Georgia, rather than Armenia ("the more direct route"), American-Israeli interests would be compelled to support Georgia in its conflict with the Ossetians (Dawson). It should be brought to the attention of the American people that their representatives in Congress are serving an interest other than the people's: they are serving the oil men and the Israelis -- the same Israelis who have left bloody fingerprints all over 9/11.

But Ryan Dawson makes plain that "pipelines are a political weapon" and that Mikhail Saakashvili "promoted the BTC agreements and also pushed to join NATO" (Dawson). What we see in our Senators' support of Georgia and its so-called fight for "democracy" is really nothing more than a political-economic push for power. Weave into this game the ingredients of false flag operations, like the one where "Georgia president Saakashvili pulled an embarrassing stunt with Poland's Kaczynski whereby they claimed Russia shot at their car as they were driving to the South Ossetian border late at night…[before] Polish security forces [finally admitted] it was staged by Tbilisi" (Dawson), and you begin to see how all the different pieces fit together. The Taliban (America's current excuse for an enemy) was nothing more than a cell propped up by our own Central Intelligence Agents in order to subvert Middle Eastern states troublesome to certain political-economic interests. When the perpetrators behind 9/11 and the warmongers needed a fall guy, they found him in Bin Laden. He has been this century's Lee Harvey Oswald -- and the circumstances surrounding his participation in 9/11 are as dubious as Oswald's in Kennedy's assassination.

All of these elements indicate that we are lacking sorely in diplomacy. Rather than talk to nations and attempt to negotiate, we use subversion, deception, and militarism to pursue certain objectives that benefit only a select few. Yet those select few convince a great many that their objectives are equitable to our own. Supporting Georgia benefits Israel. Sending American troops to several countries in the Middle East to eradicate terrorist cells benefits…Israel. The billion dollar embassy in Baghdad is a drain on the American economy -- and men like Ron Paul know it. Ron Paul also understands the need for diplomacy and knows that diplomacy can save lives. He places a value on American life and places the lives of Americans before the objectives of a select few, namely the money men, the oil men, and the Zionists.

Security, Values, Prosperity, and International Order

Our security as a nation may well rest upon our ability to exercise diplomacy in all matters that arise with foreign nations. The militarism of the U.S. In its mission to eradicate "terrorism" has made us less secure as a people. View the TSA pat downs, the invasive reach of Big Government that puts Orwell's Big Brother to shame, the murder of American citizens by predator drones, the passing of legislation that permits the indefinite incarceration of American citizens suspected of terrorism and strips them of their Miranda rights. Our security has been destroyed by suspicion, rhetoric, and fear: diplomacy based on truth is our best option out of this mess.

Likewise, our Values are at stake. We risk becoming… READ MORE

Download Full Paper

Write a New Paper for Me

Quoted Instructions for "Critical Thinking on Included Editorial" Assignment:

“

PROJECT REQUIREMENTS: Analyze the provided OpEd from the perspective of a key player in the national decision making process. As part of this analysis, address the following:

[1] Take the role of a KEY PLAYER in the national decision making process (from the list below), and analyze the author*****'s premise in the Opinion Editorial (OpEd) from this perspective. While essay assignments are typically written in third-person, in this case, your analysis should be delivered in first-person, and all elements below should be addressed from the perspective of your chosen key player.

[2] Agree or disagree with the author*****'s premise.

[3] Assess the most important Instrument of National Power (IOP) in the context of this OpEd and provide courses of action to take along the lines of this IOP.

[4] Analyze how your courses of actions will support the specific US National Interests (listed below) as they apply to the country(ies) identified in the OpEd.

[5] Include an analysis of the entire region of the identified country(ies) and any neighboring relations in the context of the OpEd*****'s issues. (How would your courses of action affect other countries in the region? What about neighboring countries?)

Key players National Security Advisor, Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, Director of National Intelligence, Congress, think tank, interest group, lobby, or the President.

Instruments of National Power (IOPs) Diplomatic, Informational, Military, or Economic

National Interests (2010 NSS, Section III) Security, Values, Prosperity, and International Order.

Your essay should be a focused analysis using relevant concepts and specific examples from the course materials to support your thesis. Additionally, you will be graded on insightful thought, critical analysis, and an overall mastery of the course material. Specific attention will be given to your unique contributions. (Grade breakout: 45% for content/support + 45% for critical analysis + 10% for grammar/structure = 100%).

*****ƒ

Why Are We Baiting The Bear--OpEd

By Patrick J Buchanan

August 23, 2011

Is the Senate trying to reignite the Cold War?

If so, it is going about it the right way.

Before departing for a five-week vacation, the Senate voted to declare Abkhazia and South Ossetia to be provinces of Georgia illegally occupied by Russian troops who must get out and return to Russia.

The Senate voice vote was unanimous.

What is wrong with Senate Resolution 175?

Just this. Neither Abkhazia nor South Ossetia has been under Georgian control for 20 years. When Georgia seceded from Russia, these ethnic enclaves rebelled and seceded from Georgia.

Abkhazians and Ossetians both view the Tblisi regime of Mikhail Saakashvili, though a favorite of Washington, with contempt, and both have lately declared formal independence.

Who are we to demand that they return to the rule of Tblisi?

In co-sponsoring S.R. 175, Sen. Lindsey Graham contended that *****"Russia*****'s invasion of Georgian land in 2008 was an act of aggression, not only to Georgia but to all new democracies.*****"

This is neocon propaganda. Russian troops are in those enclaves because in August 2008 Georgia invaded South Ossetia to re-annex it, and killed and wounded scores of Russian peacekeepers. Tblisi*****'s invasion brought the Russian army on the run, which threw the Georgians out and occupied slices of Georgia itself.

While the Russian troops withdrew from Georgian territory, they remained in Abkhazia and South Ossetia as a deterrent to Saakashvili, whose agents have been working Capitol Hill to push the United States into a confrontation with Russia on Georgia*****'s side.

S.R. 175, the work of Graham and Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, declares it to be U.S. policy *****"to recognize Abkhazia and South Ossetia as regions of Georgia occupied by the Russian Federation.*****" But the Russians are far more welcome there than are the Georgians.

Twice the Georgians have been expelled by force. Both times, Ossetians and Abkhazians helped throw them out. Why are we demanding that the Georgians be permitted to march back in and reimpose an alien rule that clearly is detested by these people? Is this the American ***** of *****'76?

When the Senate says *****"regions of Georgia*****" are *****"occupied,*****" it implies that Russia seized the territories. But as a European Union investigation has confirmed, the 2008 war began with the Georgian invasion of South Ossetia.

And what business is all of this of the United States*****'?

Why are we provoking a Russia for whom the Caucasus--ablaze as it is with secessionism, Islamism and terrorism--is a vital national interest?

Going on across this inflamed region are ethno-national struggles for self-determination, the resolution of which, 6,000 miles from the United States, is none of our concern. How would Abraham Lincoln have reacted had Czar ***** II declared the Russian Empire was recognizing the independence of Virginia and demanding that the breakaway enclave of West Virginia be returned to Richmond?

Can we not see how hypocritical we appear?

When Kosovo, birthplace of Serbia, was being torn away by Albanian Muslims -- and Serbs were fighting to hold on -- Bill ***** ordered Serbia bombed for 78 days and sent U.S. troops to occupy the breakaway province and plant a U.S. base there, Camp Bondsteel.

When we recognized Kosovo as independent, Russia recognized Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Is there not a certain symmetry here? And do we not have enough on our plate in Libya, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, Afghanistan and Pakistan not to be telling Russians how they should behave in lands closer to them than Grenada or Cuba is to us?

The Russian city of Sochi on the Black Sea, which is to host the 2014 Winter Olympics, is as close to Abkhazia as Dulles Airport is to Washington, D.C.

East of Sochi lie Ingushetia and Dagestan, targets of terrorist attacks by Islamists seeking to create a caliphate. Moscow*****'s subways and Domodedovo Airport have been hit by terrorist bombs out of the Caucasus. In the airport attack, 35 were killed and 100 injured.

President Dmitry Medvedev, who has been friendly to the United States and gave the order to Russia*****'s army to reverse the Georgia invasion, describes the Caucasus as the greatest threat Russia faces.

Why are we siding with Georgia, a nation of 5 million, against a Russia that seems to be on the side of self-determination? And when we recall how JFK and Ronald Reagan reacted when Russians were meddling in Cuba and Central America, can we not understand their resentment?

Medvedev believes that Saakashvili launched his 2008 attack after a visit by Condoleezza Rice, during which he may have been flashed a green light. Russia*****'s foreign minister believes that the Senate resolution backing Georgia has created a *****"revanchist mood*****" in Tblisi.

If there is another invasion of Georgia and a new war, the U.S. Senate will not be without major moral responsibility. Is there to be no end to this country*****'s meddling in other nations*****' quarrels and wars?

How to Reference "Critical Thinking on Included Editorial" Term Paper in a Bibliography

“Critical Thinking on Included Editorial.” A1-TermPaper.com, 2012, https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/buchanan-op-ed-analysis/474243. Accessed 6 Jul 2024.

Critical Thinking on Included Editorial (2012). Retrieved from https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/buchanan-op-ed-analysis/474243

A1-TermPaper.com. (2012). Critical Thinking on Included Editorial. [online] Available at: https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/buchanan-op-ed-analysis/474243 [Accessed 6 Jul, 2024].

”Critical Thinking on Included Editorial” 2012. A1-TermPaper.com. https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/buchanan-op-ed-analysis/474243.

”Critical Thinking on Included Editorial” A1-TermPaper.com, Last modified 2024. https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/buchanan-op-ed-analysis/474243.

[1] ”Critical Thinking on Included Editorial”, A1-TermPaper.com, 2012. [Online]. Available: https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/buchanan-op-ed-analysis/474243. [Accessed: 6-Jul-2024].

1. Critical Thinking on Included Editorial [Internet]. A1-TermPaper.com. 2012 [cited 6 July 2024]. Available from: https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/buchanan-op-ed-analysis/474243

1. Critical Thinking on Included Editorial. A1-TermPaper.com. https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/buchanan-op-ed-analysis/474243. Published 2012. Accessed July 6, 2024.

Related Term Papers: