• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Zbigniew Brzezinski, Security Adviser to Carter, Dies at 89

S

sanman

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 22, 2015
Messages
11,936
Reaction score
4,594
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Zbigniew Brzezinski, the Democrat answer to Kissinger, has died at 89:

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/...ezinski-security-adviser-to-carter-dies-at-89


Zbigniew Brzezinski, who as national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter advocated a hard line toward the Soviet Union and helped develop the unsuccessful military mission to rescue American hostages in Iran, has died. He was 89.

His death was announced in a tweet on Friday by his daughter, Mika Brzezinski, a co-host of the MSNBC program “Morning Joe.”

Brzezinski was a respected voice on international affairs within the Democratic Party for more than three decades. One of his core beliefs was that the memory of the Vietnam War had made his party overly reluctant to flex U.S. military might. His world view was often compared with that of Henry Kissinger, whose work under Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford gave him similar statesman stature within the Republican Party.

The German-born Kissinger and Polish-born Brzezinski were considered foreign-policy realists with innate distrust of the Soviet Union. Unlike Kissinger, Brzezinski tried to shift the central focus of U.S. policy away from what he called a “preoccupation” with the USSR and toward what he called trilateral cooperation among North America, Western Europe and Japan. He helped David Rockefeller, chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank and of the Council on Foreign Relations, create the Trilateral Commission and led it from 1973 to 1976.
Click to expand...


He was also the architect of Trilateralism
 
Brzenzinski was a Democrat, but he was also a Neocon, and was a Neocon before the Neocon movement really began in earnest. It was his advice that got Carter to send the arms to Indonesia that they ended up using in the Dili Massacre.
 
My ears always perked up when he was talking, and I have and enjoyed at least one of his books.

RIP
 
I'll never forgive him for what he did to Afghanistan under Carter, it more than anything led to 9-11.....and the black hole that sucked in the Soviet Union is still pulling in our blood and treasure.
 
Last edited:
Gimmesometruth said:
I'll never forgive him for what he did to Afghanistan under Carter, it more than anything led to 9-11.....and the black hole that sucked in the Soviet Union is still pulling in our blood and treasure.
Click to expand...

Well...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.
Click to expand...
https://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/BRZ110A.html

He might have been wrong, but he was forthright.
 
Last edited:
Hawkeye10 said:
Well...1998:

https://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/BRZ110A.html

I might have been wrong, but he was forthright.
Click to expand...
"Forthright"? Good grief, he had no qualms about using Afghanistan as a trap for the Soviets, which destroyed a nascent democracy AND has continued on, nonstop, to be an absolute hell on Earth. As your link shows, and you did not include, he was in on supplying of the Mujahadeen:

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?



I mean....why should we worry about a bunch of radical Islamists on the other side of the world....? There are no consequences!

Forthright? Try "shortsighted".
 
Gimmesometruth said:
I'll never forgive him for what he did to Afghanistan under Carter, it more than anything led to 9-11.....and the black hole that sucked in the Soviet Union is still pulling in our blood and treasure.
Click to expand...





 
2008
ZB: I think you’re putting your finger on a major weakness of contemporary America. The weakness is that we’re more democratic than we’ve ever been before, in the sense that popular pressures translate into policy pressures very quickly. And we’re probably as ignorant as ever about the rest of the world, because everybody now lives in a kind of simplistic, trivialized virtual reality in which fact and fiction, impressions and impulses, are mixed up in an incoherent fashion. The public really has no grasp of complexities, no sense of intellectual refinement in judging them, and our political leaders have become increasingly demagogic. The way George W. Bush campaigned for the war in Iraq, with reference to fictitious WMDs, and with sweeping, simplistic, black-and-white generalizations about freedom and tyranny, is a case in point. But he was responding to our increasingly imbecilized societal condition. This is very troublesome. I think the degeneration of the newspapers as a primary source of information, the collapse of serious television news programs, and the emergence of this kind of instant communion between reality and virtual reality creates a collective state of mind that is not derived from rational analysis.
Click to expand...
https://www.the-american-interest.com/2008/05/01/id-do-it-again/

Brilliant....simply BRILLIANT!...he understood about a decade ago what so few can understand even now.

He also talks at length about the charge that he and Carter made a mistake in Afghanistan....he was not having it.
 
Last edited:
Gimmesometruth said:
"Forthright"? Good grief, he had no qualms about using Afghanistan as a trap for the Soviets, which destroyed a nascent democracy AND has continued on, nonstop, to be an absolute hell on Earth. As your link shows, and you did not include, he was in on supplying of the Mujahadeen:

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?



I mean....why should we worry about a bunch of radical Islamists on the other side of the world....? There are no consequences!

Forthright? Try "shortsighted".
Click to expand...

You seem to have a vocabulary problem.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
2008

https://www.the-american-interest.com/2008/05/01/id-do-it-again/

Brilliant....simply BRILLIANT!...he understood about a decade ago what so few can understand even now.

He also talks at length about the charge that he and Carter made a mistake in Afghanistan....he was not having it.
Click to expand...

Carter was a wimp.

Arming the afghan wackos was a two-fer

With American weapons they would kill more communst russians and the russians would respond by killing more afghans

Unike his airhead daughter the father was a smart man

but he was wrong about so many things.
 
Contrary to its promise, the twentieth century became mankind's most blood and hateful century, a century of hallucinatory politics and monstrous killings. Cruielty was institutionalized to an unprecedented degree, lethality was organized on a mass production basis. The contrast between the scientific potential for good and the political evil that was actually unleashed is shocking. Never before in history was killing so globally pervasive, never before did it consume so many lives, never before was human annihilation pursued with such concentration of sustained effort on behalf of arrogantly irrational goals.
Click to expand...

Out of control Zbigniew Brzezinski 1993 pgs 4/5

Progressives really do need to put this in their pipe and smoke it.
 
danarhea said:
Brzenzinski was a Democrat, but he was also a Neocon, and was a Neocon before the Neocon movement really began in earnest. It was his advice that got Carter to send the arms to Indonesia that they ended up using in the Dili Massacre.
Click to expand...

One of his famous books was "The Grand Chessboard." In it he argues divide and conquer must be played out in the regions around Russia and that for the benefit of American political and economic interests Ukraine must be taken away from Russia.

Basically his book is about taking on all the worst attributes of a serial killer, of Pablo Escobars Cartel, of Mexican Cartels, of Chicago street gangs battling to be number one. It is void of any morals Jesus Christ would find redeeming. Although I'm sure Satan loved reading the book and scored it high. It's probably sitting on some book shelf in hell right now with lesser devils marveling at how they brilliantly got out smarted by a mere human.


Part 1 of several parts of the audio book on youtube:



Part 2 of the several part series audio book:

 
FastPace said:
One of his famous books was "The Grand Chessboard." In it he argues divide and conquer must be played out in the regions around Russia and that for the benefit of American political and economic interests Ukraine must be taken away from Russia.

Basically his book is about taking on all the worst attributes of a serial killer, of Pablo Escobars Cartel, of Mexican Cartels, of Chicago street gangs battling to be number one. It is void of any morals Jesus Christ would find redeeming. Although I'm sure Satan loved reading the book and scored it high. It's probably sitting on some book shelf in hell right now with lesser devils marveling at how they brilliantly got out smarted by a mere human.


Part 1 of several parts of the audio book on youtube:



Part 2 of the several part series audio book:

Click to expand...


It is the way international politics are played and has been for thousandsof years.

His branch in the US viewed Russia as the focus and wored on weakening it. The Neo cons viewed the mix east as the focus. With Soros his side had the highest degree of success.
 
Jack Hays said:
RIP. Just as the Rolling Stones could never be the Beatles, no matter how hard they tried, Brzezinski could never be Kissinger, no matter how hard he tried. Nonetheless an estimable man.

Foreign Policy Giant Zbigniew Brzezinski Dies at 89
Daniel Lewis, New York Times
Click to expand...

Hello Jack,
I think that The Rolling Stones gave up very early trying to emulate The Beatles. Depending upon the scale used, the "Stones" have equaled and even passed the "Fab Four." Always seemed out of place, to me, that two high level government advisors spoke such heavily accented English. Ironic that ZB served the President you found to be the least effective.
 
Rexedgar said:
Hello Jack,
I think that The Rolling Stones gave up very early trying to emulate The Beatles. Depending upon the scale used, the "Stones" have equaled and even passed the "Fab Four." Always seemed out of place, to me, that two high level government advisors spoke such heavily accented English. Ironic that ZB served the President you found to be the least effective.
Click to expand...

Stones weren't really trying to emulate the Beatles as surpass them as the principal musical symbol of the era. That wasn't going to happen. ZB & Carter never achieved the intellectual synergy that HK & Nixon had in spades.
 
Jack Hays said:
Stones weren't really trying to emulate the Beatles as surpass them as the principal musical symbol of the era. That wasn't going to happen. ZB & Carter never achieved the intellectual synergy that HK & Nixon had in spades.
Click to expand...

Carter was clearly the problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom