Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: FaultLine who wrote (42763)	9/9/2002 5:47:35 AM
From: SirRealist	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I guess the answer might be different if you were a newly emigrated Soviet Jew or had a loved one in the WTC. To Zbig, as cold a warrior as any, the answer was easy. That's assuming that Afghanistan alone caused the USSR to crumble. I'd say it was one big piece in the puzzle but not the only piece.

To: FaultLine who wrote (42763)	9/9/2002 8:45:50 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Remember, he fully admitted we lured the USSR in it's own Vietnam in Afghanistan specifically to weaken the Soviet Empire. Not precisely accurate. What he said was: >>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.<< globalresearch.ca I admire Reagan for assisting the Afghanis after the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, because my understanding is that the goal was the liberation of Afghanistan. If Reagan told me that his real goal was destabilizing Afghanistan because that would cause difficulties for the Soviets, I would not admire him any more. So it's not just that it's Carter that makes me feel horror. Deliberately destabilizing a country without the goal of liberation and future stability is horrifying. Brzezinski is, in my opinion, a whacko. Here's how the interview ends: >>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.<< I disagree with Brzezinski. The way things are done does matter. If there is nothing else to learn from history, it is that actions have consequences that cannot be foreseen, so it is imperative to always adhere to the highest standards. Parenthetically, it's funny to be reading now, for the first time (for me) the claim that Carter is responsible for the breakup of the Soviet Union. The reason it's so funny is that when Republicans claim that Reagan is responsible for the breakup of the Soviet Union, Democrats always say that it was inevitable. Oh, well. I guess it wasn't inevitable, we should thank Brzezinski (and Carter).;^) Back to Brzezinski. I think what he claims to have done is one of the most immoral things I have ever read. Not only immoral but terribly short-sighted. I hope he was just exaggerating for effect.

To: FaultLine who wrote (42763)	9/9/2002 8:51:20 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 281500

seattlepi.nwsource.com

To: FaultLine who wrote (42763)	9/9/2002 10:54:19 AM
From: FaultLine	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 281500

Thank you CB for your thoughtful remarks. Thanks also to LB for his interesting out-of-the box take on this -- I too would like to know the veracity of the interview (sorry about the goofed-up first quote, my memory failed me and the d$@% search engine wasn't working last night). Anyone else want to weigh in? I thought posting those remarks by ZB would stimulate some discussion. Do I regret it? Certainly not (the man said). :o) And btw, my post only expressed that, if true, it was a particularly unique Q&A session. My suspicion? LB is probably correct but... --FB@ZBCBLB,where'sTBwhenyouneedhim?.com