Tuesday, September 22, 2009


Zbigniew Brzezinski, the former national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter, has suggested the United States should engage any Israeli fighter en route to Iran should they pass through U.S.-controlled airspace in Iraq.
"We are not exactly impotent little babies. They have to fly over our airspace in Iraq. Are we just going to sit there and watch? ... We have to be serious about denying them that right. That means a denial where you aren't just saying it. If they fly over, you go up and confront them. They have the choice of turning back or not. No one wishes for this but it could be a 'Liberty' in reverse."

It is very disturbing that Mr. Brzezinski is suggesting we strike an IAF jet, period. And notice his last sentence where he says, "a 'Liberty' in reverse." The USS Liberty was a Navy ship hit by an Israeli jet during the Six-Day War in 1967. An investigation ensued and they came to the conclusion it was a misidentified target. Regardless, simply by saying "in reverse" Mr. Brzezinski is obviously suggesting that the U.S. would fire on an Israeli jet.

We should be thankful that Mr. Brzezinski does not hold a prominent position in the Obama Administration. I hope people don't look at the Carter administration as an example of sound foreign policy; I'd be willing to bet those held for 444 days in Iran don't.


  1. Hmmm... Dumbest thing I have heard all week. I think he may need some medication.

  2. Let me play devil's advocate here, but why not? When shooting down this plane means preventing an all out war between Iran (and perhaps more ME countries) and Israel, wouldn't this be the impossible choice to make?

    BTW, I have (after quite some time) finally posted on my blog again, hope you like it and hope you're willing to publish one of your articles on my blog in the future. All the best,


    Globalookout - International Relations blog

  3. The fact that Jimmy Carter is still present on the international stage is a complete embarrassment to the people of the United States. Aside from that comment, I cannot accept any Devil's advocate scenario here as a conventional war involving some ME countries is a far better scenario to the regime in Iran possessing nuclear capabilities. Imagine if Saddam's reactor was never bombed. Secondly, potential expansion of the war is unlikely outside of Syria & Hezbollah given the blatant distrust of Shia Iran by most of its Sunni neighbors. In fact, I would bet a large number of Arab Sunni nations are secretly hoping for Israel to eliminate this regime. Remember, when Saddam was taken out, the counter to Iran was removed and an imbalance was created. This needs to be fixed.

    I really like your blog and totally share your passion, keep on going!

    World Affairs Guy

  4. This guy is an old geezer who has yet to see the light in the world. He is self-centered and not very balanced, a bicycle on cinder blocks, a lot of thought but no connection. This guy is seven steps behind modern times. We don't feel the need for useless war anymore, but our officials seem to think so.

    Great post keep it up.