| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Brzezinski has Iraq departure plan |
| 2007-04-13 |
| Thanks for sharing, Zbiggy. NEW YORK, April 13 The man who served as national security adviser under President Jimmy Carter says he has a two-point plan for ending United States involvement in Iraq. 1. Run 2. Hide Zbigniew Brzezinski has told the Christian Science Monitor he believes whoever succeeds President Bush should sit down with Iraqi leaders and come up with a jointly defined date for departure. ..and then let Congress know so they can broadcast in on the CBS Evening News the same day. As the next step, Brzezinski says he would set in motion a process of "really consulting" all of Iraq's neighbors about arrangements for security in the country after United States military forces depart. ...and you can trust them. They're not like the others. Brzezinski has just published a book called "Second Chance: Three Presidents and the Crisis of American Superpower." In it, the former Carter administration official, grades the three most recent presidents on their foreign policy performance. Makes a great Christmas gift for the suicidal... He gives the first President Bush a "B," President Clinton is given a "C," and the current President Bush is awarded an "F." Convienietly ignore your ex boss, Zbiggy? Cause there ain't a grade low enough... |
| Posted by:tu3031 |
| #19 I suppose it is all sour grapes since the American people presented him with our departure plan for him and his pals back in 1980. Jimmy Carter carried exactly 4 states. In that election to Ronald Reagan's 46 states. I think that was a pretty clear "departure plan" and the only one Zbiggy needs to concern himself with. |
| Posted by: crosspatch 2007-04-13 21:17 |
| #18 What is it with all these washed up has-been democrat weasles suddenly thinking their worthless policies have taken on new luster? No matter how hard you try, you just can't shine a turd. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-04-13 20:36 |
| #17 :-) *blushing* |
| Posted by: Frank G 2007-04-13 20:31 |
| #16 #13 But he speaks with such gravitas, and has such a nice accent, he must be right. jeeze..being Polish you'd think this bastid would never forget and be bit more concerned about proven butchers of the innocent. #14 he was cute, when the Soviets used his head as an ashtray.... nobody puts it better or sooo compact.. LMAO! |
| Posted by: RD 2007-04-13 20:01 |
| #15 in spite of the real facts, since forever I've heard/read the same "Islam is the chiefest factoid" from the nomenklatura at my father's University and the force fed poly si tracts during my edumacation.. anyone else recall this.. |
| Posted by: RD 2007-04-13 19:51 |
| #14 he was cute, when the Soviets used his head as an ashtray.... |
| Posted by: Frank G 2007-04-13 19:50 |
| #13 But he speaks with such gravitas, and has such a nice accent, he must be right. |
| Posted by: john 2007-04-13 19:41 |
| #12 John Frum quoting Zibg: " [sic Islam]....It is the leading religion of the world with 1.5 billion followers. But what is there in common among Saudi Arabian fundamentalism, moderate Morocco, Pakistan militarism, Egyptian pro-Western or Central Asian secularism? Nothing more than what unites the Christian countries. " curious side bar, How is it that Libs use the 'Lib Constant' that Islam makes up the largest religion @ 1.5 billion [World Wide], when I read from several sources that Catholics alone have over 1 billion adherents. Are Libs entitled to their own facts as well as their own opinions? Major Religions of the World Ranked by Number of Adherents |
| Posted by: RD 2007-04-13 19:32 |
| #11 An excellant example of someone who is totaly irrelevant but wishes he was. Bugwit. |
| Posted by: Deacon Blues 2007-04-13 18:29 |
| #10 An idiot. And a member of the Carter administration. But I repeat myself... |
| Posted by: Sgt. Mom 2007-04-13 18:14 |
| #9 Interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski Le Nouvel Observateur, Paris, 15-21 January 1998 Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists? B: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war? Q: Some stirred-up Moslems? But it has been said and repeated Islamic fundamentalism represents a world menace today. B: Nonsense! It is said that the West had a global policy in regard to Islam. That is stupid. There isn't a global Islam. Look at Islam in a rational manner and without demagoguery or emotion. It is the leading religion of the world with 1.5 billion followers. But what is there in common among Saudi Arabian fundamentalism, moderate Morocco, Pakistan militarism, Egyptian pro-Western or Central Asian secularism? Nothing more than what unites the Christian countries. |
| Posted by: John Frum 2007-04-13 17:32 |
| #8 Well, Earthnews took it from the Christian Science Monitor so I wouldn't exactly say the guy's "in the news". Kinda like saying Ramsey Clark's "in the law"... |
| Posted by: tu3031 2007-04-13 17:10 |
| #7 "Why is this guy even in the news?" Because the news is on his side. "Who cares what he thinks?" Liberals. Dimwitted, drooling, flatheaded liberals... |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2007-04-13 17:06 |
| #6 "served under Carter" is all you need to know to rationally say: "STFU" |
| Posted by: Frank G 2007-04-13 16:57 |
| #5 Deep cover Russian spy. Specialty in advocating Democrat ineptitude. |
| Posted by: danking_70 2007-04-13 16:51 |
| #4 Who cares what he thinks? Unfortunately, way too many Dems and MSMers than is healthy for this country. |
| Posted by: xbalanke 2007-04-13 16:44 |
| #3 Two weeks after the landing at Normandy this asshole would have had us leaving France after "really consulting" Germany & Italy about the security of the country. People like this are despicable at best. |
| Posted by: AlanC 2007-04-13 16:24 |
| #2 Wasn't it Brzezinski's idea to abandon the Shah and allow the Ayatollahs to take over in the first place? Isn't that the same strategy he offered to Carter for Nicaragua as well? Isn't he the guy that argued we do NOTHING in response to the Russian invasion of Afghanistan? The last person on Earth I am going to listen to in defense matters is anyone from the Carter Administration. That administration is the REASON all of this is going on. If we had not abandoned the Shah and instead pushed for a more gradual democratization, there would have been no Iran/Iraq war, no Russian invasion of Afghanistan, no al Qaeda, no Hezbollah in Lebanon ... we can pretty much lay all of our problems and the problem if Islamist militancy right in the lap of Jimmy Carter and his little buddy Zbiggy. Why is this guy even in the news? Who cares what he thinks? |
| Posted by: crosspatch 2007-04-13 16:24 |
| #1 That guy has always been an arrogant internationalist. He believes the very worst arguments from the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderberg Group, and any other assortment of billionaires who think that having money confers on them intellectual brilliance and the elite status to rule over others as unelected hereditary lords. Whereas the sad reality is that most of them are the intellectual peers of Paris Hilton and are dependent on others to even maintain their basic hygiene. They tend to cluster together to scheme, because no one else seriously considers such people as anything other than "rich and useless". |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2007-04-13 16:14 |