Brzezenski's Devastating Critique of Bush & Dems

[kpete]

Brzezenski's Devastating Critique
by Armando
Thu Dec 01, 2005 at 04:56:55 PM PDT
American Prospect publishes an interview with Zbigniew Brzezenski where he provides a blunt critique of the Bush Administration . . . and Dems.

On the training of Iraqi soldiers:
Q: Do you think the Iraqi army is going to be ready soon?

I think our course with the Iraqi forces verges on the absurd: It is all about us training them. The question arises: Training them to do what? If it is a matter of knowing how to use a Kalishnikov in order to kill other people, I think most military-aged Iraqis don't need our training. If it is a question of training Iraqis so they behave and act like American soldiers, that's well and good. Except that is not what is needed in the circumstances we will be bequeathing them. What is needed is motivation based on loyalty to the powers that be. That will mean loyalty to various Shiite militias with a clerical connotation and loyalty to the two major Kurdish formations. Plus, perhaps eventually, loyalty to some Sunni militias based on a tribal allegiance. The motivation is not going to be created by American sergeants who are -- quote, unquote -- "training" them how to behave like American soldiers.

On Dems' and the Iraq War Resolution:
Q: Some Democrats, such as Senator Joseph Biden, say they regret their decision to support the Iraq war. What do you think Democrats overall should be saying and doing?

The Democrats have a responsibility vis à vis the American people: to act as an alternative and to provide a vision of a strategy that avoids the pitfalls of what the Bush administration has created. The fact of the matter is that Democrats failed to do that during the grand debate over whether or not to go to war in Iraq. To be sure, some Democrats can rationalize their decisions by saying they gave the president contingent authority, and he pushed much further and acted unilaterally. Nonetheless, the fact is Democrats, tacitly at the very least, and explicitly in some cases, went along with a presidential decision based on a case that was dubious at best and mendacious at worst. Some leading Democrats have even acted as if they wanted to be part of the Bush cabinet, helping him prosecute the war in Iraq. L'outrance, as the French would say.

Ouch! Read the whole thing. He is unsparing.
http://www.dailykos.com/
http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=10672

[Nikki Stone 1]

1. Ah...TPTB want the war to succeed, not to stop

They are pissed at Junior for being a failure and at the Dems for not coming up with a winning game plan.

And you think we run our government?

[formercia]

5. Right, he's just pissed that Fearless Leader screwed the pooch

not that he started the grand crusade.

[Nikki Stone 1]

6. We can date Junior's real legal and political troubles to his failure in

Iraq. As long as things looked good, the press was muzzled and nothing could be said against him. The 2004 election had no Dem front runners with acceptable battle plans, so Junior was not seriously challenged on Iraq. But things went from bad to worse this year, and I think every serious look at the war indicates a horrific, blundered loss.

TPTB want a better thug, but they have to work with what they got elected. Watch the appointed positions, though.

[bridgit]

2. Brzezenski has been very vocal & in an eloquent way of late...

as to the ways in which bush & his crony packed admin are destroying america and i'm glad someone of his stature has the guts to do so

[madrchsod]

3. it has always been a balancing act in iraq.

saddam made it work through terror,rewards,and murder. iraq will splinter into factions and then another strong man will unite the seperate tribes into another saddam like state.western democracy in iraq-don`t bet the farm on it. i never really cared for zbigniew but he`s does know what he is talking about . to bad there are only a hand full in the government that understands what he is talking about and yes the democrats are clueless about what needs to be said and done. many more will die before it ends

[xchrom]

4. very much in line with

retired general odom.

except for the dem response thingy.

[KoKo]

7. Senators Robert Byrd and Teddy Kennedy and a few others were on the

Senate Floor speaking their hearts out trying to stop us from invading Iraq. And, they get NO CREDIT! Nor do the almost majority of Democrats in the House who voted AGAINST THE INVASION get any credit.

Blame the WHORE MEDIA YOU SOB. It's not our fault. You and your Think Tank Buddies are to Blame for this totall FUCK UP! :nuke:

[kenny blankenship]

8. "...once you begin to draw down your troops, it’s probably better to...

to remove them rapidly. If you scale down your presence gradually, the reduced numbers are going to be in jeopardy."

At last a little sanity!

That was said in the larger context of alternative (Congressional/Democratic) policy proposals to compete with Bushler's absolutist imperialism:

"Our congressional leaders are still inclined to dance around the issue or to find salvation in a formula that calls for American disengagement -- but gradually and without indicating what that means in terms of levels or dates. I’m not sure that’s a wise policy."

[400Years]

9. Zbig wanted this war too, he's not someone to trust

[melting the beehive]

10. What Zbig says is an indicator of what the Bilderberg group

wants, the big media push to get us out of Iraq is the goal. Chaos and civil war with the breakup of Iraq into small controlled tribal regions the desired result (and plan all along). A strong unified competitive Iraq is destroyed,Israel and global oil interests protected. Another step forward in their new world order.