Did The US Encourage Georgia's Surprise Offensive - Israel Iran Attack Preview?

The US has been training Georgia troops:

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jjCNfv_hN7dzfcaXwielvnLpfRrA

The question is whether the US knew about Georgia's surprise offensive, which led to the current conflict? Of course, given the close military relationship between Georgia and the US, how could the U.S. not know that Georgia was going to attack the province?

Also, how did Georgia and the US not know that Russia would counter-attack? In this 2006 article, the BBC explained:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5393106.stm

/snip

Are Georgia and Russia heading for war?

Belligerent rhetoric has come from both sides and a local flare-up is always possible, but full-scale war seems unlikely.

Georgia does not want to spoil its chances of joining Nato, and conflict would certainly undermine that bid. Nato members do not want to get sucked into a Caucasus conflict.

Russia has key energy interests in the Caspian region and wants to avoid another costly round of fighting in Chechnya - so fighting in Georgia could impact on those ambitions too.

But Russia has warned it will retaliate if Georgia uses force against its breakaway regions. It has accused Georgia of preparing to invade Abkhazia, and says it is boosting Russian forces there and in the South Ossetia region.

/snip

Yet, despite all this fore knowledge, and the U.S. tight relationship with Georgia's military, Georgia decided to launch a surprise attack:

http://www.suntimes.com/lifestyles/horoscopes/1099490,CST-NWS-Georgia10.article

/snip

South Ossetia is claimed by Georgia, the former Soviet republic that cast its lot with the United States and the West to the eternal irritation of Moscow. The breakaway province has been under Russia's sway for years.

On Friday Russia dispatched an armored column into the breakaway enclave after Georgia, launched a surprise offensive to crush separatists.

Georgia sits in a tough neighborhood, shoulder to shoulder with huge Russia, not far from Iran, and astride one of the most important crossroads for the emerging wealth of the rich Caspian Sea region. A U.S.-backed oil pipeline runs through Georgia, allowing the West to reduce its reliance on Middle Eastern oil while bypassing Russia and Iran.

/snip

Finally, remember Charlie Black, McCain's Chief Strategist, saying that McCain would benefit from a terrorist attack:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/23/AR2008062301979.html

/snip

A top adviser to Sen. John McCain said that a terrorist attack in the United States would be a political benefit to the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, a comment that was immediately disputed by the candidate and denounced by his Democratic rival.

Charles R. Black Jr., one of McCain's most senior political advisers, said in an interview with Fortune magazine that a fresh terrorist attack "certainly would be a big advantage to him." He also said that the December assassination of former Pakistani prime minister Benazir Bhutto, while "unfortunate," helped McCain win the Republican primary by focusing attention on national security.

/snip

Well, it turns out that one of McCain's close advisors is a lobbyist for Georgia:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/08/10/mccain_aides_georgian_ties_bec.html?hpid=topnews

/snip

The presidential campaign veered Sunday into a discussion about the escalating conflict between Georgia and Russia, with a supporter of Sen. Barack Obama suggesting that Sen. John McCain's criticism of Russia stems from his campaign's connections to Georgian political leadership.

"His campaign is run by lobbyists that represent Georgia and other countries," New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson (D) said on ABC's "This Week," a clear reference to Randy Scheunemann, McCain's foreign policy adviser, who has been a registered lobbyist in Washington for the Tbilisi government.

/snip

Of course, the McCain campaign is arguing that his proposal to isolate Russia is correct! Yup, the U.S.'s past practice of isolating Iraq, North Korea, and Iran have proven so successful in the past, why not isolate a former superpower, and give an ally a green light to start a war that the U.S. gets dragged into. Indeed, is this a preview of a possible US encouraged Israeli attack on Iran with the U.S. looking the other way? Could this be why Israel agreed to Russia's demand to stop supplying arms to Georgia, because Russia threatened to support Iran in such an attack?

You think nations and wars are interchangeable and identical?

You are so desperate to blame the Jews.

I have to confess. My take is based on the analysis provided by the Israeli press. So, if you want to blame them for being anti-Jew, be my guest:

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1218104259913&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

/snip

Israel wants to support Georgia, wants to help Georgia, but also has to maintain a very special relationship with Russia. The reason is simple: Moscow is a major supplier of arms to Syria and Iran, and Israel would like to keep Russia from selling arms to those two countries that could tilt the region's strategic balance.

"How dare the Russians tell Israel it can't sell arms to Georgia, when it is selling arms to Damascus and Teheran," is the reflexive Israeli response to reports that Moscow is pressuring Jerusalem to end arms sales to Tbilisi. "If they sell arms to our enemies, we can sell arms to theirs."

True, but the Russians could be selling our enemies a lot worse weapons. The Russians maintain that they only sell defensive weapons to Syria and Iran, a point that may be debatable. But what everyone admits is that if Moscow took the gloves off, they could sell much more dangerous weapons systems to our neighbors, such as land-to-land missiles. It should be noted that the much-discussed sale of the S-300 multi-target anti-aircraft-missile systems, one of the most advanced in the world, has not yet gone through.

By the same token, Israel can argue that it is only selling defensive weapons to Georgia, and that the unmanned aerial vehicles and rocket systems that have been sold to Georgia do not significantly alter the balance. The Russians also realize that Israel could provide the Georgians with much more significant weaponry (there were reports over the weekend of a billion-dollar tank deal to Georgia that Israel did not sign).

"Israel has taken into consideration Russian interests," said Zvi Magen, a former Israeli envoy to Ukraine and Russia who is currently chairman of the Institute for Eurasian Studies at the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya.

"Israel could have sold a lot more, and didn't," he said. "We lowered our profile , and the Russians have also taken us into consideration and did not sell everything they could have to our neighbors."

Israel wants to help Georgia - up to a point. And that point is where that help begins to hurt Israel's own strategic interests with the Russians.

/snip

are being cooked up in the halls of power to grasp control of Central Asia and the Middle East. The issue, IMHO, boils down to controlling the world's last remaining large reserves of oil and natural gas, and that makes it a very high stakes game indeed as the looming spectre of Peak Oil appears on the horizon. The US with 5% of the world's population uses approximate 25% to 30% of the world's resources (including oil), and without oil modern society just does not function. In the upcoming age of scarcity coinciding with Peak Oil that just can not go on without implementing the PNAC agenda (which the Bush regime appears committed to) of creating a de facto a worldwide US military and economic hegemony. Even then, it is doubtful that they will ultimately succeed without at some point a nuclear confrontation that will probably leave the world devastated.

Another factor which would come into play and cause the US to actively work to curtail Russian power or even to attempt to break up and splinter Russia itself into smaller, separate and less powerful regions is that the West European countries are becoming ever more reliant on Russian oil and gas to meet their energy needs as their own North Sea oil and gas fields are now past peak production and depleting. Just the thought of that must drive the Pentagon's planners and generals nuts.

Given Georgia's close relationship to Washington and reliance on the US military for support and training, to me it's unlikely in the extreme that Saakashvili would have undertaken military action to reclaim Ossetia without getting a nod of approval from Washington first.

Georgia has long had tensions with Russia. Yet, Georgia saw fit to commit 2000 troops to Iraq, which is the third largest contingent behind the US and Britain. Why?

Is it possible that Georgia is seeking a commitment of support for its bid to join NATO, and the US promised to support Georgia against Russia in return for a commitment of troops. Also, what assurances did the US give to Georgia before it tried to shell its breakaway Republic?

Again, given the tight degree of military cooperation between Georgia and the US, it is strains belief that Georgia's initial attack caught the U.S. by surprise, since the US had over a 100 military advisors in Georgia at the time of the attack and 2000 Georgian troops in Iraq.

It is impossible to get news without spin, but I see either a complete failure of intelligence on the part of the US in not knowing there was going to be an offensive by Georgia or, worse, that the US supported Georgia's initial offensive, and promised to support Georgia against any possible Russian response.

Is there any other explanation?

Now that ^^ I can believe.

REBUILDING AMERICA'S DEFENSES



http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/pdf/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf