> Let’s call this the Corrupt Conspiracy Model of how Washington functions (or dysfunctions). It is a model that can be powerfully convincing, because it taps into the truth that people really are naturally flawed and self-interested creatures, demonstrably prone to corruption. From this viewpoint, Washington politics is all basically a con game led by a pack of greedy psychopaths.<p>Assuming the above is true, in this formulation <i>every</i> country will be full of self-serving psychopaths who invade other countries. So we're back to the simple question: Shouldn't you evaluate polities based on whether they demonstrated goodwill and inclusion toward their own citizenry, and toward the people whose lands they were occupying? Based on those (granted, medieval) criteria, which world powers are currently oppressing and murdering foreign citizens? Also, which of those countries retain a functional democratic system that might allow people to <i>stop</i> an unjust war undertaken by their regime? For even if Russians wanted to stop the war, they could not; nor could they even protest without fear of arrest. As an American I can get out and protest as much as I like, and in some cases, effect (yes, <i>effect) change, such as pushing and voting for my government to withdraw troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. (granted; could've been handled better). Russians can't </i>vote* against war, nor can "citizens" or what we would call slaves of the Chinese communist regime; so to what are they comparing America when judging our war footing? If we're not ready to go to war, the world is finished; there is no nice or safe place to go if America falls.