Saturday, January 5, 2013

Zbigniew Brzezinski : Iran should be key topic at hearings

Found this an interesting read.  Zbigniew Brzezinski. Very influential.
I find some of the language very interesting.. 
"Stalinist Russia"  Why not Communist Russia or the USSR? Why use Stalinist Russia?
Did he use language as a reminder?

" our Middle Eastern and European friends who advocate U.S. military action against Iran are usually quite reticent regarding their readiness to shed their own blood in a new Middle East conflict"

What 'friends' is ZB referring to? The Zionist lobby? The 'friends' that push the hardest for an attack on Iran are none other then the followers of Judaism.

Is he concerned that the US will start WW3 and the World will condemn the country? Or something else?
Share some thoughts. Please.

It is to be hoped that the forthcoming Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Armed Services Committee hearings regarding the president’s nominations for secretary of state and secretary of defense produce a wide-ranging debate regarding this country’s role in today’s very unsettled world. The hearings almost certainly will provoke searching questions regarding the strategic wisdom of potential U.S. military action against Iran. Recent Israeli media reports have cited a former member of President Obama’s National Security Council staff predicting a U.S. attack by about midyear.

It is essential that the issue of war or peace with Iran be fully vented, especially with the U.S. national interest in mind. Although the president has skillfully avoided a specific commitment to military action by a certain date, the absence of a negotiated agreement with Iran regarding its compliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty will inevitably intensify some foreign and extremist domestic clamor for U.S. military action, alone or in coordination with Israel.

 Accordingly, five potential implications for the United States of an additional and self-generated war deserve close scrutiny:
●How effective are U.S. military strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities likely to be, with consequences of what endurance and at what human cost to the Iranian people? 

●What might be Iran’s retaliatory responses against U.S. interests, and with what consequences for regional stability? How damaging could resulting instability be to European and Asian economies?

●Could a U.S. attack be justified as in keeping with international standards, and would the U.N. Security Council — particularly China and Russia, given their veto power — be likely to endorse it ? 

Since Israel is considered to have more than 100 nuclear weapons, how credible is the argument that Iran might attack Israel without first itself acquiring a significant nuclear arsenal, including a survivable second-strike capability, a prospect that is at least some years away? 

 ●Could some alternative U.S. strategic commitment provide a more enduring and less reckless arrangement for neutralizing the potential Iranian nuclear threat than a unilateral initiation of war in a combustible regional setting?

Best available estimates suggest that a limited U.S. strike would have only a temporary effect. Repetitive attacks would be more effective, but civilian fatalities would rise accordingly, and there would be ghastly risks of released radiation. Iranian nationalism would be galvanized into prolonged hatred of the United States, to the political benefit of the ruling regime.

Iran, in retaliating, could make life more difficult for U.S. forces in western Afghanistan by activating a new guerrilla front. Tehran could also precipitate explosive violence in Iraq, which in turn could set the entire region on fire, with conflicts spreading through Syria to Lebanon and even Jordan. Although the U.S. Navy should be able to keep the Strait of Hormuz open, escalating insurance costs for the flow of oil would adversely affect the economies of Europe and Asia. The United States would be widely blamed.

 Given the recently woeful U.S. performance in the United Nations — where the United States and Israel gained the support of only seven states out of 188 in opposing U.N. membership for Palestine — it is also safe to predict that an unsanctioned U.S. attack on Iran would precipitate worldwide outrage. Might the U.N. General Assembly then condemn the United States? The result would be unprecedented international isolation for an America already deeply embroiled in the region’s protracted turmoil.

Congress should also take note that our Middle Eastern and European friends who advocate U.S. military action against Iran are usually quite reticent regarding their readiness to shed their own blood in a new Middle East conflict. To make matters worse, the most immediate beneficiary of ill-considered recourse to war would be Vladimir Putin’s Russia, which would be able to charge Europe almost at will for its oil while gaining a free hand to threaten Georgia and Azerbaijan.

 It follows that a failure to reach a satisfactory negotiated solution with Iran should not be viewed as the trigger for a new U.S.-initiated war that is not likely to be confined just to Iran. A more prudent and productive course for the United States would be to continue the painful sanctions against Iran while formally adopting for the Middle East the same policy that for decades successfully protected America’s European and Asian allies against the much more dangerous threats emanating from Stalinist Russia and lately from nuclear-armed North Korea. An Iranian military threat aimed at Israel or any other U.S. friend in the Middle East would be treated as if directed at the United States itself and would precipitate a commensurate U.S. response.

 A serious discussion of these issues by the Foreign Relations Committee may help generate a firmer national consensus that a reckless shortcut to war — which is favored now by neither the American people nor the Israeli public — is not the wisest response to a potentially grave crisis. Indeed, could Meir Dagan, the former head of Israel’s Mossad, have been right when he bluntly said that an attack on Iran is “the stupidest thing I have ever heard”? Fortunately, there is a better, even if not a perfect, option. 

Much to ponder

Freethinker left this Thanks Kindly.  Seems appropriate...

 Zbigniew Brzezinski: A Conspirator talks Conspiracy Theories
39 minutes- take the time

 

While were on the subject of Iran...

Kaspi left this comment :kaspiDecember 30, 2012 6:06 PM

http://www.iranreview.org/content/Documents/Secret-Documents-American-Media-Will-Never-Disclose.htm

Freethinker linked the same article just days later with this commentary

Secret Documents American Media Will Never Disclose
...the United States has had furtive plans and an intricate agenda for dominating the Caucasus region by compelling Georgia to become a NATO member and establishing a huge military base in the country, which will then become a potential threat to Iran and may be used as a leverage for containing and pressuring Iran over its nuclear program.

 

14 comments:

  1. Zbig Brzezynski (of the Trilateral Commission) is hardly trustworthy. IMHO, what we are seeing though is a struggle between the traditional WASP elite of the US and the newer AIPAC/Likud elite. The latter seemed to have extinguished the former after the Clinton period and Zbig is none too happy about it. I guess he sees a chance to claw back into power. Obama, I suspect is trying to reorient US policy away from the Bush years and back to the Clinton years. Hence the Hagel nomination.

    Should we be happy about this? Hardly. Obama and Zbig may want to put a velvet glove over the iron fist, but that's about it. We can however, enjoy any division/bickering amongst the NWO types.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey Lysander:
      Not trustworthy, but influential and interesting undoubtedly

      Hagel nomination? Haven't paid attention to it but it didn't seem to be going very well. To much Israeli opposition.

      I get the velvet glove part, it crossed my mind when I was reading the advocating of tough sanctions which is, of course, just another form of warfare.

      " We can however, enjoy any division/bickering amongst the NWO types."

      I would agree with that, wholeheartedly and with a chuckle to boot!

      Delete
  2. A Japanese adventurer toured #Aleppo & took photos with terrorists while wearing his country's uniform... #Japan #Syria pic.twitter.com/Ti77uSIk

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why was that scum allowed to leave Syria similar to Jeremy Bowen of the BBC. I think sometimes the SAA are too polite they should fight with American/NATO rules. I think the writers of the article give too little credence to Iranian fighting ability. Iran is not into dash and splash war, they are in for a long haul. They will fight asymmetrically and win.

      We are seeing something today where the German, British controlled rats against the Syrian,Iranian(who provide the intelligence and counter attack models) guess who is winning.

      Delete
  3. http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2013/01/06/258835.html

    As rumors of talabani deather circulate. What are the Saudis afraid of in view of all the heated rhetoric about the Iranian snake.

    Also,

    Brez was quoted a year ago as saying that if the idf overflew Iraq the us should send up raptors a kind of "liberty in reverse"

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2009/09/zbig-brzezinski-obama-administration-should-tell-israel-us-will-attack-israeli-jets-if-they-try-to-a/

    Brez has always been more concerned with the Russians and eurasia.

    The turk pipelines to china and the Russian developments on in the east must be on his mind.

    Did you see the protests in Georgia and story about moving the capital back to tiblisi

    http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/146283/protesters-in-georgia-demand-saakashvili-resignation.html


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Went and read the news they want Saakashavilli out
      There is a Georgian fellow who comments here, perhaps he can shed some light on the situation for us

      Delete
    2. Brez has always been more concerned with the Russians and eurasia.

      Yes, rather like the troll and this blog
      obsessive!

      Delete
  4. Is there a reason that mier couldn't find one single western country to perform a liver transplant? He had to go to belarus? One would think with his credentials he would fly off to NY presbeterian or the like. ????

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Perhaps Belarus had the only available 'black market' liver for his "emergency" liver transplant, because it looks as if he went back to Israel to recuperate right afterwards.
      And from reading below, it appears that would be the case..

      http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=6930

      "A tired but optimistic Meir Dagan, currently recuperating from emergency liver transplant surgery, hails relationship with Rabbi Avraham Elimelech Firer • "The rabbi is a man who helps everybody, from those who hold the loftiest positions to the simplest commoners."


      Tired but smiling, former Mossad chief Meir Dagan spoke with Channel 2 News on Tuesday a few days following his release from Ichilov hospital in Tel Aviv. Just two and a half months after undergoing urgent liver transplant surgery in Belarus,

      Dagan, 67, was forced to undergo the risky surgery in Belarus because he didn't meet the criteria for such a procedure in Israel, which requires the patient to be 65 or younger..

      Two weeks after the surgery, Dagan was flown back to Israel for continued recovery and rehabilitation."


      I do not believe for one moment that Israel would not provide their former Mossad man with this surgery

      Delete
    2. There is no exception for head of mossad? Or was it he basically is considered a trader for being outspoken on Iran? Like the other security official who blasted netanyahi yesterday? Black market notwithstanding this is odd. Sharon?

      Delete
    3. Hey anonymous:
      I guess anything is possible?
      Still I have my doubts? I just think that Israel doesn't want to associate itself with the black market organ trade..
      Not overtly anyway.

      So Dagan flew to the locale of his freshly harvested black market organ and then flew back to Israel.
      Clearly the Israeli healthcare was provided to him immediately afterwards (that is in country)
      He was recovering for months in an Israeli hospital
      For all you and I know, it could have been provided to him the whole time

      By that I mean an Israeli doctor flew to Belarus with him, performed the transplant and then flew back

      Speculative of course, but, entirely plausible

      Delete
  5. Coincidentally Corbett has just released this fairly interesting vid on Ziggy.
    Meet Zbigniew Brzezinski, Conspiracy Theorist
    There is a hilarious spat between Ziggy and Bernstein at 15:30. As Lysander and Anon have already said he seems to be of the WASP old-school and is fiercely anti-Russian.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yah, I enjoyed the video so much I put it in the post

      Delete
  6. As to the black market organ transplants in Belarus....
    a quick search brings up lots of news
    So, as I suspected Meir took advantage of the black market misery inflicted on the poor of eastern europe

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-01/organ-gangs-force-poor-to-sell-kidneys-for-desperate-israelis.html

    Organ gangs force poor to sell kidneys for desperate Israeli's

    Wanna bet some poor slob gave up a liver without consent


    Doctors removed Yafimau’s left kidney in July 2010 and transplanted it into an Israeli woman, according to the Kiev police investigation. On the plane back to Belarus, on the western border of Russia, Shimshilashvili told Yafimau that if he wanted to live, he shouldn’t talk to police.

    Yafimau is one of the faceless and neglected victims in a sprawling global black market in organs -- where brokers use deception, violence and coercion to buy kidneys from impoverished people, mainly in underdeveloped countries, and then sell them to critically ill patients in more-affluent nations.

    The middlemen form alliances with doctors in leading hospitals who do these transplants for a fee, no questions asked.

    Organ trafficking is on the rise, as desperate people seek transplants in a world that doesn’t have enough donors. About 5,000 people sell organs on the black market each year, according to Francis Delmonico, an adviser on transplants to the World Health Organization.

    “I am afraid for my life,” says Yafimau, standing outside his mother’s Babrujsk apartment building, a nine-story, Soviet- era edifice that’s surrounded by weeds and trash. The traffickers paid Yafimau $10,000. He says it wasn’t worth the fear that haunts him today.

    ReplyDelete

TROLLS & SPAM WILL BE DELETED WITHOUT HESITATION
KEEP IT RELEVANT. NO PERSONAL ATTACKS