Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: "... in the end we fcuked it up"
Political Topics And Discussion > All Things Political > Iraq, Afghanistan & War On Terror
Razin
this phrase is mentioned as the last part of Charlie Wilson's own quote, in the end of movie.

or more precisely:

“These things happened. They were glorious and they changed the world …
… and then we ######ed up the end game”

- Charles Nesbitt “Charlie” Wilson

whatever it means?

QUOTE
Despite the victory, Avrakotos warns that unless there is a serious effort to help Afghanistan rebuild back into a stable society, there could be dire and unpredictable repercussions for both that nation and the U.S...

The film ends with Wilson receiving a major commendation for the support of the U.S. clandestine services, but his pride is tempered by his fears of what unintended consequences his secret efforts could yield in the future and the implications of U.S. disengagement from Afghanistan.



mujahideen were supported by US and nourished:

The mujahideen were significantly financed and armed (and are alleged to have been trained) by the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) during the Carter and Reagan administrations and the governments of Saudi Arabia, the People's Republic of China, several European countries, Iran, and Zia-ul-Haq's military regime in Pakistan. The Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) was the interagent used in the majority of these activities to disguise the sources of support for the resistance.

Ronald Reagan praised them as "freedom fighters", and three mainstream films, 1987 The Living Daylights, 1988 Rambo III and 2007 Charlie Wilson's War, portrayed them as heroic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahideen


and some even say - Taliban:

Though there is no evidence that the CIA directly supported the Taliban or Al Qaeda, some basis for military support of the Taliban was provided when, in the early 1980s, the CIA and the ISI (Pakistan's Interservices Intelligence Agency) provided arms to Afghans resisting the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and the ISI assisted the process of gathering radical Muslims from around the world to fight against the Soviets. Osama Bin Laden was one of the key players in organizing training camps for the foreign Muslim volunteers. The U.S. poured funds and arms into Afghanistan and "by 1987, 65,000 tons of U.S.-made weapons and ammunition a year were entering the war"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban#Origin


American funding started with 20-30 million dollars per year in 1980 and rose to $630 million a year in 1987

The U.S. says all of its funds went to native Afghan rebels and denies that any of its funds were used to supply Osama bin Laden or foreign Arab mujahideen. It is estimated that 35,000 foreign Muslims from 43 Islamic countries participated in the war.

Sale of non-US arms to Pakistan for destination to Afghanistan was facilitated by Israel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Cyclone
(see all the related references in the end of article !)


interesting read is here also:

http://www.theseminal.com/2007/12/30/sunda...ie-wilsons-war/
American interventionism in Afghanistan, as the film suggests at the end, did not liberate Afghanistan - rather, the chronic violence which resulted from superpower adventuring has continued to the present time, and fueled the growth of movements like the Taliban.

but for me it is interesting another side(s) of the story: that US triumphed in victory over "evil Soviet Emptire", and the atrocities by Soviets shown in movie towards Afgani people.

however now, merely 10 years later, USA are facing no less mess, even though this time there is no Cold War and enemy superpower doing covert-up interventionist support for Talibans or whoever US are still fighting in there. and US is not alone there - there are its NATO allies. and yet - Afgans resist them as fiercely as Soviets.

also, a lot of civilians die :

at least 3,700 and probably closer to 5,000 civilians were killed as a result of U.S. bombing.
Civilian casualties in Afgan war


so, I think what Charlie Wilson said - is rather coming true NOW, comparing to those times because already 7 years (since 2001) USA can't achieve success in this war. and this "endgame ######-up" continues big time !
ustrader
QUOTE (Razin @ Feb 25 2008, 07:11 AM) *
this phrase is mentioned as the last part of Charlie Wilson's own quote, in the end of movie.

or more precisely:

“These things happened. They were glorious and they changed the world …
… and then we ######ed up the end game”

- Charles Nesbitt “Charlie” Wilson

whatever it means?
mujahideen were supported by US and nourished:

The mujahideen were significantly financed and armed (and are alleged to have been trained) by the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) during the Carter and Reagan administrations and the governments of Saudi Arabia, the People's Republic of China, several European countries, Iran, and Zia-ul-Haq's military regime in Pakistan. The Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) was the interagent used in the majority of these activities to disguise the sources of support for the resistance.

Ronald Reagan praised them as "freedom fighters", and three mainstream films, 1987 The Living Daylights, 1988 Rambo III and 2007 Charlie Wilson's War, portrayed them as heroic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahideen
and some even say - Taliban:

Though there is no evidence that the CIA directly supported the Taliban or Al Qaeda, some basis for military support of the Taliban was provided when, in the early 1980s, the CIA and the ISI (Pakistan's Interservices Intelligence Agency) provided arms to Afghans resisting the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and the ISI assisted the process of gathering radical Muslims from around the world to fight against the Soviets. Osama Bin Laden was one of the key players in organizing training camps for the foreign Muslim volunteers. The U.S. poured funds and arms into Afghanistan and "by 1987, 65,000 tons of U.S.-made weapons and ammunition a year were entering the war"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban#Origin
American funding started with 20-30 million dollars per year in 1980 and rose to $630 million a year in 1987

The U.S. says all of its funds went to native Afghan rebels and denies that any of its funds were used to supply Osama bin Laden or foreign Arab mujahideen. It is estimated that 35,000 foreign Muslims from 43 Islamic countries participated in the war.

Sale of non-US arms to Pakistan for destination to Afghanistan was facilitated by Israel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Cyclone
(see all the related references in the end of article !)
interesting read is here also:

http://www.theseminal.com/2007/12/30/sunda...ie-wilsons-war/
American interventionism in Afghanistan, as the film suggests at the end, did not liberate Afghanistan - rather, the chronic violence which resulted from superpower adventuring has continued to the present time, and fueled the growth of movements like the Taliban.

but for me it is interesting another side(s) of the story: that US triumphed in victory over "evil Soviet Emptire", and the atrocities by Soviets shown in movie towards Afgani people.

however now, merely 10 years later, USA are facing no less mess, even though this time there is no Cold War and enemy superpower doing covert-up interventionist support for Talibans or whoever US are still fighting in there. and US is not alone there - there are its NATO allies. and yet - Afgans resist them as fiercely as Soviets.

also, a lot of civilians die :

at least 3,700 and probably closer to 5,000 civilians were killed as a result of U.S. bombing.
Civilian casualties in Afgan war
so, I think what Charlie Wilson said - is rather coming true NOW, comparing to those times because already 7 years (since 2001) USA can't achieve success in this war. and this "endgame ######-up" continues big time !


My o my, yet another sermonized Putin-neantherthal butchery of Chechyna and Afghnanistan, Black Kettle calling the pot black.

Razin, Let me heartly agree, in comparison, when it comes to barberous butchery and death, no one does it better than Soviet putin-ized Slavo-Russians like in Kosvo and Bosnia, Afghanistan and Chechyna. So you win again.

After the Russian Revolution, as early as 1919, the Soviet government gave Afghanistan aid in the form of a million gold rubles, small arms, ammunition, and a few aircraft to support the Afghan resistance to the British. In 1924, the USSR again gave military aid to Afghanistan. It received small arms, aircraft and Red Army military training in the Soviet Union for Afghan Army officers. Soviet-Afghan military cooperation began on a regular basis in 1956, when both countries signed another agreement. The Soviet Minister of Defense was now responsible for training all Afghan military officers.

In 1972, up to 100 Soviet military consultants and technical specialists were sent on detached duty to Afghanistan to train the Afghan armed forces. In May 1978, the governments signed another international agreement, sending up to 400 Soviet military advisors to Afghanistan. In December 1978, Moscow and Kabul signed a bilateral treaty of friendship and cooperation that permitted Soviet deployment in case of an Afghan request. Soviet military assistance increased and the PDPA regime became increasingly dependent on Soviet military equipment and advisors.

Under Soviet excellence in training and winning hearts and minds Soviet instituted puppets in Afghanistan were as super at the effort of hearts and minds exploxed as future Sovirt efforts would be.

In June of 1975, an estimated 20,000 prisoners were trucked into Pul-e-Charkhi prison outside of Kabul and from there to a 'firing range' for summary execution. Between April 1978 and the Soviet invasion of December 1979, an estimated 27,000 political prisoners were executed, including many village mullahs and headmen. Other members of the traditional elite, the religious establishment and intelligentsia fled the country.

By the spring of 1979, 24 of the 28 provinces had suffered outbreaks of violence.

The rebellion began to take hold in the cities: in March 1979 in Herat Afghan soldiers led by Ismail Khan mutinied and massacred approximately 100 Soviet advisors. The PDPA and Soviet Union retaliated by a bombing campaign that killed 24,000 inhabitants of the city.[16] Despite these drastic measures, by the end of 1980, out of the 90,000 soldiers strong Afghan Army, more than half had either deserted or joined the rebels.

Truth is, the US tricked the soviets who were always prone to reacting in counter wieghted response to US efforts anywhere in the world into invading Afghanistan.

Carter advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski stated "According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise." Brzezinski himself played a fundamental role in crafting U.S. policy, which, unbeknownst even to the Mujahideen, was part of a larger strategy "to induce a Soviet military intervention." In a 1998 interview with Le Nouvel Observateur, Brzezinski recalled:

We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would...That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Soviets into the Afghan trap...The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the Soviet Union its Vietnam War. Boy was that true and it was not 12,000 miles from the homeland to boot.



The Soviet invasion force rose with the arrival of the two later divisions to over 100,000.

As usual in half the truth, we are propgandized as if the US was the sole interolper assistjng against Soviet Invasion and agression. The truth is far more comprehensive.

The United States, the United Kingdom and Saudi Arabia became major financial contributors, the United States donating "$600 million in aid per year, with a matching amount coming from the Gulf states."

The People's Republic of China also sold Type 56 (AKM) assault rifles and Type 69 RPGs to Mujahideen in co-operation with the CIA, as did Egypt with assault rifles. Of particular significance was the donation of American-made FIM-92 Stinger anti-aircraft missile systems, which increased aircraft losses of the Soviet Air Force.

Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and Special Service Group (SSG) were actively involved in the conflict, and in cooperation with the CIA and the United States Army Special Forces, as well as the British Special Air Service, supported the Mujahideen against the Soviets.

However no US or British personnel were ever deployed inside Afghanistan itself, there being "a cardinal rule of Pakistan's policy that no Americans ever become involved with the distribution of funds or arms once they arrived in the country.

No Americans ever trained or had direct contact with the mujahideen, and no authorized American official ever went inside Afghanistan," according to Brigadier Mohammad Yousaf, who ran ISI's Afghan operation between 1983 and 1987.

Between December 25, 1979 and February 15, 1989 a total of 620,000 soldiers served with the forces in Afghanistan (though there were only 80,000-104,000 force at one time ), 525,000 in the Army, 90,000 with border troops and other KGB sub-units, 5,000 in independent formations of MVD Internal Troops and police.

Over 1 million Afghans were killed.[50] 5 million Afghans fled to Pakistan and Iran, 1/3 of the prewar population of the country. Another 2 million Afghans were displaced within the country. In the 1980s, one out of two refugees in the world was an Afghan.

Along with fatalities were 1.2 million Afghans disabled—both Mujahideen and noncombatants—and 3 million maimed or wounded—primarily noncombatants.


Now that compares well hey Razin?


How abouit Cechnya,

First Chechen War

The war was disastrous for both sides. Conservative casualty estimates give figures of 7,500 Russian military dead, 4,000 Chechen combatants dead, and no fewer than 35,000 civilian deaths—a minimum total of 46,500 dead. Others have cited figures in the range 80,000 to 100,000.[4]

Second Chechen War

Military losses

Casualties of the Second Chechen War

Military casualty figures from both sides are impossible to verify and are generally believed to be higher. In September 2000, the Prague Watchdog website compiled the list of casualties officially announced in the first year of the conflict; although incomplete and with little factual value, the numbers there provide a minimum insight in the information war. According to the figures released by the Russian Ministry of Defence on in August 2005, at least 3,450 Russian Armed Forces soldiers have been killed in action 1999-2005.[58] This death toll did not include losses of the Internal Troops, Federal Security Service, Militsiya and a local paramilitaries, all of whom at least 4,720 were killed by October 2003.[59] The independent Russian and Western estimates are much higher; the Union of the Committees of Soldiers' Mothers of Russia for instance estimated about 11,000 Russian Army servicemen have been killed between 1999 and 2003.


Civilian losses

Casualties of the Second Chechen War

Civilian casualty estimates also vary widely. According to Taus Dzhabrailov, top official in the local government, 160,000 combatants and non-combatants died or have gone missing in the two wars, including 30,000–40,000 Chechens and about 100,000 Russians;[60][61] while killed rebel leader Aslan Maskhadov repeatedly claimed about 200,000 ethnic Chechens died in the two conflicts.[62] As in the case of military losses, these claims can not be independently verified - furthermore, independent estimates are often much lower. According to the count by the Russian human rights group Memorial between 15,000 to 25,000 civilians died or disappeared 1999-2006.[citation needed] According to Amnesty International in 2007, the second war has killed up to 25,000 civilians since 1999, with up to another 5,000 people missing.[63]

However, the Russian-Chechen Friendship Society set their estimate of the total death toll in two wars at about 150,000 to 200,000 civilians.

So you win again Razin, the Russians/Soviets are mcuh better at this barberous butchery by leaps and bounds in comparsion to the Americans.

That is all!!
Razin
UStrader

read history (even Wikipedia at least)

in Afganistan that time there was their own government which has "invited" Soviets to come and help.

in South Vietnam though, for example, there was Dictatorship under Diem
Diem has tried to crash all opposition with US help and support, and it has become a civil war in there, which later lead to ACTUAL US invasion.

from other hand, "Soviet invasion" of Afgan has been provoked and even well planned by US - "to bleed Soviets by giving them their own Vietnam war".

and Vietnam is just one single example.

there are many other across the planet: supporting Contra in Latin America, supporting Pakistan in mass-slaughtering Bengalis in Bangladesh (former East Pakistan), supporting Saddam in his war with Iran, supporting Kurds in their struggle with Saddam, supporting Osama and his mujaheedins in their "Jihad" against Soviets, supporting Albanian mafia "independent state" (Kosovo) against "oh so demoniac evil serbs"...

list can go on and on...

so, it is very arguable - who is better at "barberous butchery and death" wink.gif

and now US is getting the same thing it gave Soviets 20 years ago, only this time perhaps arabs are playing role of Charlie Wilson, and US and NATO - of Soviets. laugh.gif
Razin
speaking about suppporting...

one more thing to add to above mentioned list is - supporting Nazis, even though in state of war with them:

Nazi collaboration controversy
QUOTE
was the main Wall Street connection for several German companies and the varied U.S. financial interests of Fritz Thyssen. Thyssen had been an early financial backer of the Nazi party until 1938, but by 1939 had fled Germany and was bitterly denouncing Hitler.

Roosevelt's Alien Property Custodian, Leo T. Crowley, signed Vesting Order Number 248 seizing Bush's property under the Trading with the Enemy Act. The order cited only the Union Banking Corporation (UBC), of which Bush was a director and held one share, which had connections with a Dutch bank owned by Thyssen.

The New York Herald-Tribune referred to Thyssen as "Hitler's Angel" and mentioned Bush as an employee of the investment banking firm Thyssen used in the United States. Some records in the National Archives, including the Harriman papers, document the continued relationship of Brown Brothers Harriman with Thyssen and some of his German investments up until his 1951 death.

Investigator John Loftus has said, "As a former federal prosecutor, I would make a case for Prescott Bush, his father-in-law (George Walker) and Averell Harriman [to be prosecuted] for giving aid and comfort to the enemy. They remained on the boards of these companies knowing that they were of financial benefit to the nation of Germany." Two former slave laborers from Poland have filed suit in London against the government of the United States and the heirs of Prescott Bush in the amount of $40 billion. A class-action lawsuit filed in the U.S. in 2001 was dismissed based on the principle of state sovereignty.



also that Bush-grandpa was involved in White House Putsch (The Business Plot / the Plot Against FDR) or attempt to create a Fascist state in US, by overthrowing government of F.D. Roosevelt

QUOTE
political conspiracy involving several wealthy businessmen to overthrow the presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1933...

Congressional committee supported Butler's allegations on the existence of the plot, but no prosecutions or further investigations followed, and the matter was mostly forgotten...

The BBC documentary "The Whitehouse Coup" alleges that Prescott Bush, father and grandfather to the 41st and 43rd US Presidents respectively, was also connected...

The Congressional committee report confirmed Butler's testimony:

In the last few weeks of the committee's official life it received evidence showing that certain persons had made an attempt to establish a fascist government in this country. No evidence was presented and this committee had none to show a connection between this effort and any fascist activity of any European country. There is no question that these attempts were discussed, were planned, and might have been placed in execution when and if the financial backers deemed it expedient...

Even though the Senate committee did take the threat seriously and did verify that a fascist coup was indeed well past the planning stage, the Senate committee expired...


the similar story was 50+ years later, when US was selling weapons to enemy (again - supporting) - to Iran. this time Bush-dad was Vice-President, and denied his involvement or knowledge of affair, as Reagan did.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_H._W._Bush and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Contra_Affair)


now, about supporting Saddam :

QUOTE
Almost a dozen former U.S. diplomats, British scholars and former U.S. intelligence officials have confirmed that Saddam was strongly linked with the CIA, and that the US intelligence helped Saddam seize power for the first time in 1963.

The United States also sent arms to the new regime, weapons later used against the same Kurdish insurgents the United States had backed against Kassem and then abandoned.

In 1968, after yet another coup, the Baathist general Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr seized control, bringing to the threshold of power his kinsman, Saddam Hussein. Again, this coup, amid more factional violence, came with CIA backing...

The Reagan administration gave Saddam roughly $40 billion in aid in the 1980s to fight Iran, nearly all of it on credit. The U.S. also sent billions of dollars to Saddam to keep him from forming a strong alliance with the Soviets. Saddam's Iraq became " the third-largest recipient of US assistance."
ustrader
QUOTE (Razin @ Mar 3 2008, 05:10 AM) *
speaking about suppporting...

Indoctrinating U,
Looney Left, losing again!


one more thing to add to above mentioned list is - supporting Nazis, even though in state of war with them:

Nazi collaboration controversy
also that Bush-grandpa was involved in White House Putsch (The Business Plot / the Plot Against FDR) or attempt to create a Fascist state in US, by overthrowing government of F.D. Roosevelt
the similar story was 50+ years later, when US was selling weapons to enemy (again - supporting) - to Iran. this time Bush-dad was Vice-President, and denied his involvement or knowledge of affair, as Reagan did.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_H._W._Bush and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Contra_Affair)
now, about supporting Saddam :
Razin
well, once again - the best you can do is to stick labels and call names, trying to discredit opponent you do not agree with

keep up the good work !

no wonder almost everybody has left here - only you and very few others remain
ustrader
QUOTE (Razin @ Mar 9 2008, 09:00 PM) *
well, once again - the best you can do is to stick labels and call names, trying to discredit opponent you do not agree with

keep up the good work !

no wonder almost everybody has left here - only you and very few others remain

"tum dii dai dii", l "tum chua, dai chua", yang, Farang (ไม่เป็นไร)


That is all!!
Razin
Zbigniew Brzezinski was the man behind Operation Cyclone as Carter's NSA advisor

he has developed the whole strategy of giving Soviets "their Vietnam" - engaging them in Afgan, entangling and bleeding out their economic resources and supplying and training mujaheedins and promoting Islamic extremism for countering Soviets in Afgan.

interestingly enough, he admitted that supplying Mujahadeens has started min 6 months before Soviets even came to Afgan

Interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski
U.S. President Carter's National Security Adviser
By 'Le Nouvel Observateur' (France), Jan 15-21, 1998

QUOTE
Question: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs ["From the Shadows"], that American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct?

Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise: Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.

Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?

B: It isn't quite that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.

Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don't regret anything today?

B: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter: We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.

Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentlaism, 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.


very straightforward guy ! laugh.gif

cuts the crap blatantly
Razin




so, he definitely knows what it means to be sucked into the mess with Afgans and in general with muslims

and last year 2007, 6 years since US invasion of Afgan and 18 years after the end of Soviet war in there, here is what he was telling about Bush's current affair :

A political bombshell from Zbigniew Brzezinski
QUOTE
Ex-national security adviser warns that Bush is seeking a pretext to attack Iran

Brzezinski, who opposed the March 2003 invasion and has publicly denounced the war as a colossal foreign policy blunder, began his remarks on what he called the “war of choice” in Iraq by characterizing it as “a historic, strategic and moral calamity.”

“Undertaken under false assumptions,” he continued, “it is undermining America’s global legitimacy. Its collateral civilian casualties as well as some abuses are tarnishing America’s moral credentials. Driven by Manichean principles and imperial hubris, it is intensifying regional instability.”

That a man such as Brzezinski, with decades of experience in the top echelons of the US foreign policy establishment, a man who has the closest links to the military and to intelligence agencies, should issue such a warning at an open hearing of the US Senate has immense and grave significance.

He called the senators’ attention to a March 27, 2006 report in the New York Times on “a private meeting between the president and Prime Minister Blair...

In the article, Brzezinski said, “the president is cited as saying he is concerned that there may not be weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq, and that there must be some consideration given to finding a different basis for undertaking the action.”

He continued: “I’ll just read you what this memo allegedly says, according to the New York Times: ‘The memo states that the president and the prime minister acknowledged that no unconventional weapons had been found inside Iraq. Faced with the possibility of not finding any before the planned invasion, Mr. Bush talked about several ways to provoke a confrontation.

Q: Are you suggesting there is a possibility it could originate within the US government itself?

A: I’m saying the whole situation can get out of hand and
all sorts of calculations can produce a circumstance that would be very difficult to trace.



Brzezinski Suggests False Flag Event Could Kick-Start Iran War
Top globalist warns Congress of provocation or terrorist attack inside U.S.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/febru...07falseflag.htm
QUOTE
Brzezinski alluded to the potential for the Bush administration to manufacture a false flag Gulf of Tonkin type incident in describing a "plausible scenario for a military collision with Iran," which would revolve around "some provocation in Iraq or a terrorist act in the US blamed on Iran, culminating in a ‘defensive’ US military action against Iran that plunges a lonely America into a spreading and deepening quagmire eventually ranging across Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan.”

Should an attack occur within the U.S. as Brzezinski forecasted could happen, Dick Cheney's USSTRATCOM contingency plan calls for attacking Iran in the immediate aftermath of a 'second 9/11' - no matter who is behind it
blink.gif

sweet plan, huh ?






also:
Brzezinski: U.S. in danger of 'stampeding' to war with Iran
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/09/23/iran.us/index.html

QUOTE
Brzezinski, who is advising the Democratic presidential campaign of Illinois
Sen. Barack Obama, urged American officials to be patient, whatever Tehran's intentions may be.

it would be the United States which would be at war.
We will be at war simultaneously in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan.
And we would be stuck for the next 20 years...



so, this man entirely opposes US present affair in Iraq and Afgan,
and strongly warns against very probable similar scenario in Iran.

yet it continues - the hysterical war mongering and shameless blunt bias

and this is despite the facts that are well publicized even in the latest news reports:

U.S. military expert says Afghanistan situation worsening
QUOTE
The tide of the war in Afghanistan is running against the United States and its allies, in contrast to an improving trend in Iraq, a U.S. military official and counter-insurgency expert [Lieutenant Colonel John Nagl] said on Wednesday.

More than 50,000 foreign troops are stationed in Afghanistan, but the United States alone has
more than three times that number in Iraq.


well that perhaps explains why according to him situation in Iraq is improving - the number of troops surely makes difference. however it hardly looks like improvement - today it is reported another 3 US soldiers killed in there, totaling 12 in last 3 days.

3 US soldiers die in Iraq rocket attack


and another report suggesting that Bush has "helped" or "inspired" Fallon to resign


Fallon falls: Iran should worry
By Gareth Porter
Mar 13, 2008
QUOTE
Admiral William Fallon's resignation as the United States' top commander in the Middle East removes one of the most outspoken opponents of the George W Bush administration's hard line on Iran. Defense Secretary Robert Gates immediately dismissed as "ridiculous" suggestions that Fallon's departure signaled that the US planned to go to war with Iran, but certainly now "all options" are back on the table.

Fallon's greatest concern appears to have been preventing war with Iran. He was one a group of senior military officers, apparently including most of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who were alarmed in late 2006 and early 2007 by indications that Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney were contemplating a possible attack on Iran.

Fallon also antagonized administration officials by pushing for a faster exit from Iraq
than the White House and Petraeus wanted.

Fallon made his distaste for a long war in Iraq very clear from the beginning. He ordered subordinates to stop using the term "long war", which had been favored by the Bush administration.

Razin
and therefore what Wilson said (we fcuked up the endgame) - goes on and on

now there is high probability that as Brzezinski said of US being
"at war simultaneously in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan"

but who will listen?

Kessinger for example, another old war mongerer (who has enticed Vietnam war and influenced events in SEA), argues with Brzezinski - no problems, it is unlikely that war with Iran won't happen
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2010 Invision Power Services, Inc.