Carter and Brzezinski, together again at last

[davkakach]

(Written by Hugh Fitzgerald, Vice President of JiihadWatch and contributor to Andrew Bostom's The Legacy of Jihad.  As you read this, keep in mind that Brzezinski  was one of several Kissinger clones, today called "neo-cons", such as Bush Sr., Al Haig, Morton Halperin, William Hyland, Brent Scowcroft, and Lawrence Eagleburger, who continue to have disastrous influence over U.S. foreign policy.)

Should Carter alone be blamed for the triumph of the Khomeini regime in Iran? Why not the other great architects of the Abandonment of the Shah, and of the Resistible but Hardly Resisted (by America) Rise of Ayatollah Khomeini? Why not bring along Zbigniew Brzezinski, he who loves that word "strategic"? And of course there is the "Iran expert" Gary Sick, author of that absurd book that cost taxpayers millions for Congress to investigate and find completely without merit. Or even Robert Hunter, and don't forget Shirin, now resident "expert" on something -- "terrorism"? "Islam"? "the Clash of Civilizations?" at some think-tankery.

Let’s take Brzezinski for now. The shallow machiavellanism of Brzezinski led him to the notion that Islam was not to be worried about because it was a "bulwark against Communism" and Muslims could help destroy the Soviet Union. As it turned out, the Soviet Union did not disintegrate because of such efforts as these, pace Helene Carrere d'Encausse or Alexandre Bennigsen, or especially Zbigniew Brezinski, but because of the disaffection that extended beyond the highest classes of the intelligentsia to those who were in the nomenklatura. Their children often attended school with the children of dissidents in such prestigious places of higher education as the Institut Vostochnykh Yazykov (Institute of Eastern Languages). Disaffection with Communism extended even to family members of those high in the Party.

And of course there was Reagan's refusal to permanently contemplate mere "co-existence." The attitude of his administration had a galvanizing effect on many in Russia. As for Brzezinski's notion that the "Muslim peoples" would rise up against Soviet power -- there was no hint of it, even if some Muslim soldiers did betray their non-Muslim fellow soldiers in the army in Afghanistan. Brzezinski was not slightly wrong about Islam and about Iran -- he was totally, completely wrong. His mind was incapable of managing to think clearly about Islam; he was a child of the Cold War and possessed a fixation on Russia that went beyond any hostility to or fear of Communism.

Carter was, and remains, a sappy-sentimentalist. He has shown his spots repeatedly, as in his offer to advise Arafat on public-relations, and in his ill-concealed antipathy to Begin, and in his utter inability to empathize with, or even to understand, what the Israelis face, and what worries them. And part of his sappy sentimentalism was his belief -- far more advanced a case than anything that Bush has presented -- that people "of faith" are necessarily good people. As Taheri notes above, "[w]ritten in longhand, it was an appeal from 'one believer to a man of God.'" Yes, that was Khomeini through and through, for Jimmy Carter: a "man of God."

Andrew Young's description of Khomeini as a "20th-century saint" needs no comment.
These were the people in charge of the government of the United States from January of 1977 to January 1981, the period when the Shah fell and Khomeini rose and consolidated his power, and had his Judge Khalkhali start the judicial executions (beginning with prominent Jews and Bahais). He also forced through the legislation that mattered to him most – and what came first was the reduction in the age at which girls could be married (or forced to marry) to nine years, on the model of little Aisha.

That was the man Carter revered as a man of faith. That was how he and Brzezinski saw Iran. And neither one has ever shown the slightest embarrassment, expressed the slightest regret, over their colossal series of errors. Nothing Bush has done, stupid and obstinate as he has been in refusing to recognize the ethnic and sectarian fissures within Iraq as useful, as something to be encouraged, has approached what they did in their four awful years. The sum total of their accomplishments was to force Israel to turn over, in three tranches, the entire Sinai to Egypt (and to confuse Saint Sadat, or the presumed Saint Sadat, with Egypt), and to let Khomeini come to power in Iran. Khomeini had long before set down all his views in writing, but who – Gary Sick? – in the Administration was capable of reading Farsi, or even thinking of getting someone to find out what this Ayatollah was all about? No one did. Yes, and there was one more thing: the oil price rise of 1979, when a leader might have roused the public, might have insisted on a Manhattan Project to find new energy sources and free us from dependence on oil from the Middle East. Carter put on a sweater and gave a fireside chat. His conduct of foreign policy was a series of one disaster after another.

Yet he continues with his holier-than-thou performances, including that visit to North Korea where he cleared up everything for us, didn’t he? Posterity will not be kind to him, or to the egregious Brzezinski, who deserved him, and whom he deserved.

[MassuhDGoodName]

BOTH ARE TRAITORS.

BOTH ARE ON THE TAKE.

THOSE ARE THE NICEST THINGS I CAN SAY ABOUT THEM.

I'LL NEVER FORGET THE ABSOLUTELY "STUNNED AND ASTONISHED" LOOK OF LEONID BREZHNEV,  PREMIER OF USSR, WHEN CARTER LEANED OVER AND LITERALLY KISSED HIM; ALL TELEVISED LIVE AT A PUBLIC "PEACE TREAT" (ARMS TREATY) SIGNING.  CARTER WAS DEMONSTRATING HIS "CHRISTIAN LOVE FOR HIS ENEMIES".  24 HRS. LATER THE USSR INVADED AFGHANISTAN, OVERTHREW THE GOVERNMENT, ESTABLISHED A COMMUNIST PUPPET GOVERNMENT.

I CALL THE OTHER JERK "PIGMEAT" BRZENZINSKI...SUGGEST EVERYONE TAKE UP THE HABIT.  HE'S THE BIG WHEEL OF THE TRILATERAL COMMISSION.

[cjd]

Great article davkakach. For me Carter and his administration are the gold standard for a worst presidency. Some of the worse deals imaginable came out of that administration because Carter wanted America to behave like a third world country. He always minimised Americas power and potential he ran the country like an old country store in the sticks somewhere just getting by. The situation he created in Iran , The poisons deal he fostered for Israel, the way he would tell the American people that they would just have to compromise on things because America was not in a position to change anything. All go to his discredit

Granted this country was going through a rough time however President Carter was a defeatest who preached defeatism. What we needed was Reagan 4 years earlier. All presidents have issues that they excel in and ones that mire them in controversy. As I sit here now I cant remember one single thing that came out of Carters administration that would make me say he improved a situation. Brzezinski was right at home in Carters administration of the inept.

Many people would like to compare our current president to Carter. President Bush has not delivered the Conservative agenda that he was sent to office to produce but his administration has at least kept the economy moving, America safe, eliminated Libya as a nuclear player, and has never told the American people that America best days were behind it as Carter did.

Brzezinski was 20 years to late with his tactics and Carter was to dumb to see the disastrous path that his policy would have in time to come. Now Carter who has the ability to look back on his administrations debacles in the year 06 has the audacity to criticise a sitting president and to give advise on what should be done. For me I like Carter best when he was building some habitat houses I had actually started looking on him favorably in later years however his reemergence on the world stage has poisend any good will he may have engendered.

[davkakach]

LATER THE USSR INVADED AFGHANISTAN, OVERTHREW THE GOVERNMENT, ESTABLISHED A COMMUNIST PUPPET GOVERNMENT.

This is actually a good thing.  Too bad the Russians withdrew, it would have kept the Afghan muzzies busy.  Now that there's a peaceful "democracy," Afghanistan is a terrorist haven.

I CALL THE OTHER JERK "PIGMEAT" BRZENZINSKI...SUGGEST EVERYONE TAKE UP THE HABIT.  HE'S THE BIG WHEEL OF THE TRILATERAL COMMISSION.

The Trilateral Commission...  now that is one evil organization.

Brzezinski was 20 years to late with his tactics and Carter was to dumb to see the disastrous path that his policy would have in time to come.

Right, because he was, and still is, a Kissinger clone.  And Jorge Bush is 40 years too late with his invade-the-world-invite-the-world tactics, because he, too, is a Kissinger clone, or at least a puppet controlled by Kissinger clones.  Some Machiavellianism it is.  What exactly is these corrupt elites' end, which justifies the means of sacrificing tens of thousands of American G.I.s lives and limbs?  The U.S. imports only 15% of its oil from Saudi Arabia.  Why aren't we switching to buying oil from the Russians?  Putin is not the nicest guy in the world, but he's no muzzie.  Let Russia finally start to recover economically, and let the Arabs choke on their sand and oil.