Zbigniew Brzezinski: Been there, done that

[TomClash]

Been there, done that
Talk of a U.S. strike on Iran is eerily reminiscent of the run-up to the Iraq war.

By Zbigniew Brzezinski, Zbigniew Brzezinski was national security advisor to President Carter from 1977 to 1981.
April 23, 2006

IRAN'S ANNOUNCEMENT that it has enriched a minute amount of uranium has unleashed urgent calls for a preventive U.S. airstrike from the same sources that earlier urged war on Iraq. If there is another terrorist attack in the United States, you can bet your bottom dollar that there also will be immediate charges that Iran was responsible in order to generate public hysteria in favor of military action.

<snip>

In short, an attack on Iran would be an act of political folly, setting in motion a progressive upheaval in world affairs. With the U.S. increasingly the object of widespread hostility, the era of American preponderance could even come to a premature end. Although the United States is clearly dominant in the world at the moment, it has neither the power nor the domestic inclination to impose and then to sustain its will in the face of protracted and costly resistance. That certainly is the lesson taught by its experiences in Vietnam and Iraq.

Even if the United States is not planning an imminent military strike on Iran, persistent hints by official spokesmen that "the military option is on the table" impede the kind of negotiations that could make that option unnecessary. Such threats are likely to unite Iranian nationalists and Shiite fundamentalists because most Iranians are proud of their nuclear program.

Military threats also reinforce growing international suspicions that the U.S. might be deliberately encouraging greater Iranian intransigence. Sadly, one has to wonder whether, in fact, such suspicions may not be partly justified. How else to explain the current U.S. "negotiating" stance: refusing to participate in the ongoing negotiations with Iran and insisting on dealing only through proxies. (That stands in sharp contrast with the simultaneous U.S. negotiations with North Korea.)

more . . .

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-op-brzezinski23apr23,0,3700317.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

[Douglas Carpenter]

1. excellent article - a must read -- recommended

snip:"But there are four compelling reasons against a preventive air attack on Iranian nuclear facilities:

First, in the absence of an imminent threat (and the Iranians are at least several years away from having a nuclear arsenal), the attack would be a unilateral act of war. If undertaken without a formal congressional declaration of war, an attack would be unconstitutional and merit the impeachment of the president. Similarly, if undertaken without the sanction of the United Nations Security Council, either alone by the United States or in complicity with Israel, it would stamp the perpetrator(s) as an international outlaw(s).

Second, likely Iranian reactions would significantly compound ongoing U.S. difficulties in Iraq and Afghanistan, perhaps precipitate new violence by Hezbollah in Lebanon and possibly elsewhere, and in all probability bog down the United States in regional violence for a decade or more. Iran is a country of about 70 million people, and a conflict with it would make the misadventure in Iraq look trivial.

Third, oil prices would climb steeply, especially if the Iranians were to cut their production or seek to disrupt the flow of oil from the nearby Saudi oil fields. The world economy would be severely affected, and the United States would be blamed for it. Note that oil prices have already shot above $70 per barrel, in part because of fears of a U.S.-Iran clash.

Finally, the United States, in the wake of the attack, would become an even more likely target of terrorism while reinforcing global suspicions that U.S. support for Israel is in itself a major cause of the rise of Islamic terrorism. The United States would become more isolated and thus more vulnerable while prospects for an eventual regional accommodation between Israel and its neighbors would be ever more remote."

read full article:

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-op-brzezinski23apr23,0,3700317.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions



http://www.dontattackiran.org

[TomClash]

8. God forbid anyone listens

Hard to find anyone smarter than Zbig.

[tomp]

2. if i'm not mistaken, the calls to attack iran...

...preceded the announcement of successful enrichment by iran by quite some time.

[izzie]

4. They are hunting for a reason to run with, what will gel with base.

Odd we watched the Fr. not see what was going on in Vietnam and we saw the US not see what was going on in Vietnam and I think we just are doing the same thing all over. I think we really need some new thinkers running the place. I swear it is like none of these people see the world as it seems to be. The scary part to me is that Bush will do as he likes as he seem to be sure he is right. It is like he has no morals to get to the place he wants to be at.

[Mojorabbit]

3. Excellent article

Doesn't it seem as if everyone and their brother are pulling out all the stops to keep * from starting this new war? I wish they had done the same before Iraq but I will take what I can get.

[walkon]

5. The Grand Chessboard

Anyone ever hear of or read this book? By Zbigniew Brzezinski. Also Z. was one of the architects of Al Qaeda - to fight the Russians in Afghanistan. His belief in the use of the military is well documented. Even though the article sounds reasonable I believe it is a ploy - experts from the same camp taking different positions to help silence true critics and block any disruption of NWO plans. Plans which, ultimately, have us and most of the world living under military control.

[400Years]

6. yep

and your right.

I would like to ad the he wrote the introduction to a book called "The Crisis of Democracy" in which the contributers are basically saying the world has too much democracy, especially the west. Zbig is a pig.

[TomClash]

7. An interesting book

But it is quite a stretch to accuse Zbig of a conspiring to invade Arab nations.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

9. zbig was ridiculed when he stated that the USSR was on its last legs

and was ready to collapse. He was scoffed at by reaganauts when he said that Ford was not far off the mark about Poland of the upcoming future. He was insulted publicly when he called for close economic and political ties with China. In each case, he was right, and in each case, the CIA, the Current Bushistas and others were wrong.

I suspect he is absolutely on point here again.