Enter your keyword

Wednesday, May 28, 2008

Obama's Real Plan for Iran

On the same day that close foreign policy advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski accused Jews who criticize Obama of McCarthyism, an op-ed penned by Brzezinski along with his former number two, former NSA Director William Odom, appeared in the Washington Post laying out what is likely to be Obama's real plan for Iran.

As a preview of what the "Nephew/Grandson" of the Liberator of Auschwitz's policy would be, it's both disturbing and ominous. Negotiate with Iran without pre-conditions. Play along with the charade of a civilian Iranian nuclear industry. Turn a blind eye to violations. Remove sanctions. Prevent any Israeli pre-emptive strike against the reactor. Deride anyone who disagrees as paranoid.

It's Munich all over again.

Between the two of them Brzezinski and Odom represent a fair measure of the things have gone wrong in American foreign policy and are the two most vocal advocates for not merely appeasing Iran, but allying with the Mullahs.

As Brzezinski's former number two, Odom is an advocate for immediate troop pullout and for turning Iraq over to Iran. In an op ed titled, What's Wrong With Cutting and Running?, Odom stated that US credibility doesn't matter and we need to just get out. In a more recent article titled, Exit From Iraq Should Be Through Iran, William Odom overtly argues for an alliance with an Iran, writing;

"As a planner on the National Security Council (NSC) staff at the time, I soon realized that restoring ties with Iran, whether in a year or two, or a decade, or much longer, had to be the US goal...

Can it be reached? Yes, if the US is willing to pay the price of dropping its "all sticks" policy for stopping Iran’s nuclear-weapons program. Put plainly, the US has two choices: It can have an Iran with nuclear weapons that refuses to cooperate on many shared interests. Or it can have an Iran with nuclear weapons that is willing to cooperate."

The roadmap that Odom lays out is one in which Iran will make the US exit from Iraq "smooth" in exchange for the US turning a blind eye to Iran's nuclear weapons program. Odom concludes this train of thought on an even more ominous note.

Iran might settle for a security guarantee against an Israeli nuclear strike

It's unclear what such a guarantee would involve precisely, as it is unclear with North Korea, but it is likely to involve disarming Israel. It might involve US forces actively defending Iran in the event of a 1967 style scenario in which Israel had intel about an Iranian impending first strike and had a limited time frame for preventing a covert Iranian launch.

While General Odom is not officially an Obama advisor because of his radical views on immediate withdrawal, which would discredit Obama, but Odom would be part of a package deal with Brzezinski and Brzezinski is one of the chief architects of Obama's foreign policy. The same role he served for Jimmy Carter. And in early April, during his questioning of Ambassador Crocker and General Petraeus, Obama attempted to lead them toward the same conclusion as Odom, that withdrawal had to be accelerated by making a deal with Iran.

Brzezinski as National Security Advisor to Jimmy Carter, helped insure the fall of the Shah and the rise to power of Ayatollah Khomeni. As I wrote back in August of last year;

Zbigniew Brzezinski's plan was to counter the rise of pro-Soviet left wing regimes with a string of Islamic regimes, countering Marxism with Islamism finally culminating in an Islamic overthrow of the USSR (replacing one monstrous regime with another monstrous regime)... In Iran, Zbigniew Brzezinski backed a policy that would support the Ayatollah Khomeni as America's new ally. And when the hostages were taken the United States waited instead of acting because Zbigniew Brzezinski's Green Belt strategy required an Islamic victory in Iran.

To show its affinity for the Mullahs, the Carter Administration lifted a 1978 ban on arms sales to Tehran. The exiled Shah was barred from entering the United States to seek medical treatment. The United States even promised to defend Iran against the Soviet Union. Zbigniew Brzezinski met with the Ayatollah Khomeni's Prime Minister Mehdi Bazargan and offered the new regime a strategic relationship with the United States. It took five months before a rescue attempt was made and when Zbigniew Brzezinski planned out the disastrous Operation Eagle Claw it was sabotaged from the start by the chains placed on the operation from the Carter White House.

Today Zbigniew Brzezinski is singing the same song again and delivering the same worn out old Carter Administration policies for a new Obama Administration. Brzezinski and Odom's op ed in the Washington Times reflects the same tired again, a pipe dream that completely ignores Ahmadinejad's radicalism and pretends that any problems we have with Iran are purely the product of our own actions.

The Op Ed implicitly calls for negotiating without preconditions with Iran, a policy Obama has also laid out, before trying to retract it. A North Korea style approach to providing incentives and legitimizing a civilian nuclear power program, a boondoggle that has repeatedly led to North Korea maintaining its nuclear weapons program while benefiting from US aid.

It also calls for preventing even an Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear reactor.

Neither a U.S. air attack on Iranian nuclear facilities nor a less effective Israeli one could do more than merely set back Iran's nuclear program. In either case, the United States would be held accountable and would have to pay the price resulting from likely Iranian reactions.

It's safe to say then that the window for an Israeli air strike to take out Iran's nuclear capabilities will close hard should Obama take office and put the Tehran loving Brzezinski into place. Meanwhile, completely ignoring the Iranian Revolution and the ideology of revolutionary Islamic Iran, Brzezinski and Odom insist that US cooperation with Iran will lead it to become a moderate and friendly nation while arguing that the idea that Iran would use its nuclear weapons against Israel is, "the product of paranoia or demagogy".

What we have then is Obama's real plan for Iran. US diplomats will negotiate with Iran for a cessation of Shiite violence in exchange for a quiet withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, likely to be replaced by Iranian ones.

Israel will be prevented from any strike against Iran's nuclear weapons. Part of the negotiations will be to lift US sanctions on Iran and aid Iran's nuclear program in exchange for useless promises that Iran will not pursue a nuclear weapons program. The US may even provide Iran with a Security Guarantee against any Israeli attack.

What will actually happen is that Iran will use its Shiite proxies to seize power in Iraq, leading to an intensified bloody civil war between Shia and Sunni. An American blank check for Iran's nuclear weapons program will lead force an acceleration of nuclear programs by Sunni states such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia which are already seeking one in order to counter Iran.

Iran will be emboldened to seize control in Lebanon and generate Shiite terrorist proxies across the Middle East. The result will be a quantum increase in terrorism, regional war, nuclear armed states rising all across the Middle East and the possible nuclear annihilation of Israel and Iran or both.

In other words the endgame of Brzezinski's plan for the Obama Administration would be a disaster, much as his plan for the Carter Administration proved to be, enabling the rise of Al Queda and Iran in the first place and putting into place the first stage of the terrorist problem we face today.

Now Obama is set to recycle the worst foreign policy disasters of the Carter Administration in the 21st century and in doing so destabilize the Middle East, drive nuclear proliferation and a possible nuclear exchange in the region.

All this makes it clear that the Obama Administration is a mistake the US cannot afford.


  1. We have seen Brzezinski's plans for Iran in action with Carter(May his senility clear up , Inshallah)when they lost our people there to the Ayatollah. What a joke they are.
    But again, this is more proof that a foreigner should never be in government.

    If Jews in America beleive Obama then they need psychiatric help in a major way.

  2. My suggestion is patriots should gather up all the weapons and ammo you can while there's still a chance. We're in for a long haul if the muzlim gets in.

    (says the parnoid Jew who loves being paranoid, if for no other reason than the sheer entertainment value)

  3. Curious isn't it that Obama hauls out his uncle not as a person who fought in the war (honorable enough withour embellishments) but liberated a death camp?

    It serves a two-fold purpose: to try to convince people his family members are good Americans and also that he comes from a line of saviors.

    That man has a real G-d/Messiah complex.

    Not only that, this whole Auschwitz story is also another disturbing ploy on the part of politicians to counter claims of anti-Semitism by giving a false impression that they were in the Holocaust.

    A family member fought in WWII is twisted to mean the person was in a concentration camp. Or a family member "lived through" the Hitler regime gives the same impression.

    It's a "hands off" ploy because few decent people would want to mess around with something as grave as the Holocaust.

    How low can Obama get?

  4. I feel stupid writing this because it implies that Obama was born with the knowledge that terrorism is okay, lying is okay, deceiving is okay because he was born Muslim.

    Not an excuse but even though Obama claims he's a Christian at an early age he learned about Islam, went to schools in largely Muslim countries and his family celebrated the major Muslim holidays.

    What you learn about the core of religion happens as a child. Part of why I feel the need to apologize so much is because of my former religious background--guilt guilt guitl, confess, confess, confess.

    What's to say it's not the same with Obama and Islam? He's taught it's okay to lie and deceive for the greater good of Islam? To pretend to be kind to non-Muslims only as a way of gaining their trust?

    Just some things on my mind.

  5. Anonymous5/10/13

    The threatened betrayal of America by the Carter-Brzezinski-Obama policy toward Iran was preceded by the policy of betrayal of Rhodesia by Carter-Brzezinski in the 70's.

    "Under President Jimmy Carter, in 1977 the CIA launched a massive sting operation bent on destroying tiny, anti-communist Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) so that Carter’s choice—Marxist Robert Mugabe—could be installed by any means. And they did it “in the clear” inside Rhodesia in one of the slickest spy operations ever."


    The betrayal of Rhodesia is an outrage that needs to be shouted from the rooftops, it's an ongoing obscenity because the genocide against the former citizens of Rhodesia is still going on even today, it's an outrage that demands to be avenged, it's still a mystery because of being covered up and buried by the co-conspirators in the MSM, it's essential that the betrayal of Rhodesia be brought to the attention of the American public because it's one of the first falling snowflakes that set off what has become the avalanche of treason that threatens to bury our country today, and it's a crime for which those responsible can still be brought to account.

    Don't let this betrayal happen again in Iran.



Blog Archive