Did anyone even know there was such a thing as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization?  I certainly didn’t.  It seems the Organization is yet another multi-national pacts, though this one is less like the EU and more like NATO.

Well, it turns out that this group includes China (duh), Russia, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan.  Nations looking to join this group include our buddies Iran and Pakistan.  The admission or denial of these states is at least one item on the agenda for their current meeting, happening right now.  There are concerns, as one might expect, about the United States’ response to adding those members in what is at least on paper an alliance of military proportions.

It might be illuminating, when viewing world affairs, to keep this coalition in mind.  For a start, it’s worth considering the fact that neither Iran nor Pakistan feels compelled to join in any similar coaltions with Middle Eastern nations. . .  because of course, they are ethnically and historically separate regions.

Just to clear up a few facts, of which John McCain is rarely in command, these days:

FactCheck.org: Soft on Iran

McCain implies that Obama doesn’t think Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is a terrorist organization. That’s wrong. Before the Kyl-Lieberman amendment was introduced, Obama cosponsored a bill that called for the IRGC to be designated as “a Foreign Terrorist Operation.” Obama was one of 72 cosponsors of the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act, . . .The McCain campaign notes that the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act has yet to come to the floor for a vote. But that doesn’t change the fact that Obama’s sponsorship put him on record in favor of labeling the IRGC a terrorist organization, contrary to McCain’s insinuation.

There are some who believe that Iran’s Noo-Q-Lar program is a problem:

I like Keith Olbermann, but I confess I find his “Special Comments” to be insufferably self-righteous and overly floral most of the time. And this comes from a guy who admittedly is guilty of all of the above. This Special Comment is really no different in that regard. But what makes it good is that it walks us through Bush’s obvious change of language on Iran that proves he or someone in the speech writing pool knew he was full of shit. Dan Froomkin actually did this reporting, but its cool to see it laid out like this.

Or maybe not so much.  Maybe I’m just giving more credit to the White House than it deserves for setting intelligent policy.  Nevertheless, does it strike anyone else as remotely possible that the White House insists on stepping up pressure on Iran specifically because it spikes oil prices?  Higher oil prices are good news for their efforts in Iraq. Just a thought.

Rice seeks Russian backing on Iran - Yahoo! News

BRUSSELS, Belgium - Armed with support from NATO allies, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will try to convince a skeptical Russia that it should back U.S. plans to step up pressure on Iran to suspend its nuclear activities.

. . . or at least tries to. But no one is buying this particular brand of horseshit any longer:

Bush: Iran Intelligence Report is Warning Signal - washingtonpost.com

In a White House news conference, Bush argued that Iran continues to develop the capability to enrich uranium and that this know-how ultimately could be transferred to a new clandestine weapons program.

So, now we’re simply in a crusade to eliminate knowledge of nuclear weaponry, not necessarily nuclear weapons, per se. Does this sound at all familiar?