Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Забелешка: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Brzezinski: 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, essentially: "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 that was unsustainable for the regime, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.
In September 2014, Brzezinski revisited the topic in an MSNBC interview:If Ukraine has to be supported so that it does resist, the Ukrainians have to know the West is prepared to help them resist. And there’s no reason to be secretive about it. It would be much better to be open about it and to say to the Ukrainians and to those who may threaten Ukraine that if Ukrainians resist, they will have weapons. And we’ll provide some of those weapons in advance of the very act of invasion. Because in the absence of that, the temptation to invade and to preempt may become overwhelming. But what kind of weapons is important. And in my view, they should be weapons designed particularly to permit the Ukrainians to engage in effective urban warfare of resistance.
Despite Brzezinski’s defensive framing in Ukraine, Washington’s support for the Ukrainian military bears many similarities to its support of the Mujahideen.Brzezinski: For the moment, the NATO alliance—as well as Europe and America jointly—have not been giving military aid to Ukraine. But I would not exclude the possibility of some defensive weaponry being given to the Ukrainians before too long, simply if the Russians, and particularly Putin, continue to try to intimidate Ukraine. That’s not the same thing as defending them; it’s helping them defend themselves.
MSNBC: Is that the middle path you think the United States is going to take—something more than economic sanctions, but less than proxy war?
Brzezinski: I think so. It seems to me that if we really are serious about Ukraine having the right to be an independent state with a friendly relationship with Europe, but not necessarily a member of NATO, and if Ukraine is not only threatened but actually victimized by Russia using force, then some defensive arms — publicly given — but only defensive weaponry, handed over to the Ukrainians makes eminent sense. It contributes to greater stability and it’s more likely to deter Mr. Putin than if he’s in effect given the green light to use as much force as he feels like.
We know of their deep belief in God and we are confident that their struggle will succeed. That land over there is yours. You’ll go back to it one day because your fight will prevail. And you’ll have your homes and your mosques back again, because your cause is right and God is on your side.
Although some of the cited intelligence officials denied the training aimed to "create an insurgency," much of the training is dually applicable. The semantic squirming that Brzezinski and other intelligence officials employ in their attempts to distinguish defensive support from prepping an insurgency is literally in-credible. This is especially true considering the type of weapons that complimented this training: "sniper rifles, armed boats, RPGs, and Javelin anti-tank missiles[.]"The multiweek, U.S.-based CIA program has included training in firearms, camouflage techniques, land navigation, tactics like "cover and move," intelligence and other areas, according to former officials.
…The program has involved "very specific training on skills that would enhance" the Ukrainians' "ability to push back against the Russians," said the former senior intelligence official.
The training, which has included "tactical stuff," is "going to start looking pretty offensive if Russians invade Ukraine," said the former official.
One person familiar with the program put it more bluntly. "The United States is training an insurgency," said a former CIA official, adding that the program has taught the Ukrainians how "to kill Russians."
In the 1980s, Brzezinski’s covert "bleeder" strategy was calculated to give the USSR "its own Vietnam," which Brzezinski later claimed caused the end of the Soviet Union.Graham: "I admire the fact that you will fight for your homeland. Your fight is our fight. 2017 will be the year of offense. All of us will go back to Washington and we will push the case against Russia. Enough of the Russian aggression. It is time for them to pay a heavier price…Our promise to you is to take your cause to Washington, inform the American People of your bravery, and make the case against Putin to the World."
McCain: "I believe you will win. I am convinced you will win and we will do everything we can to provide you with what you need to win. We have succeeded not because of equipment but because of your courage. So I thank you and the world is watching because we [] cannot allow Vladimir Putin to succeed here, because if he succeeds here, he will succeed in other countries."
Brzezinski’s influence on the foreign policy establishment is immense. Brzezinski was among the first to call for the end of Putin’s government. He was also among the first to compare Putin to Hitler. Brzezinski’s protégés include such figures as Barack Obama, Madeline Albright, Victoria Nuland, Jake Sullivan, and Antony Blinken.Any further expansion of the North Atlantic alliance’s infrastructure or the ongoing efforts to gain a military foothold of the Ukrainian territory are unacceptable for us. Of course, the question is not about NATO itself. It merely serves as a tool of US foreign policy. The problem is that in territories adjacent to Russia, which I have to note is our historical land, a hostile "anti-Russia" is taking shape. Fully controlled from the outside, it is doing everything to attract NATO armed forces and obtain cutting-edge weapons.
Па нешто се пософистицирани од смречовите, како Руската следна генерација на Ураган/Смреч, Торнадо С. Не е нешто страшно ниту е некаков гејм чејнџер. Само по себе во незначителен број е сосема бескорисно оружје и не е нешто што Украина го немала претходно. И да, се уништува исто лесно, како што им се и веќе уништените ракетни системи.Добро, нели би биле овие Химарсиве лесна мета за авионски напад или пак Искандер?
Немаат Украина ПВО систем за да ги заштити, освен 2 батерии С300 во Одеса областа.
70км имаат домет и сигурно лесно може локацијата да им се одреди.
Или има некоја разлика од Смерчовите, Точка-У системите кои русите им ги уништуваа со леснотија?
Добро, нели би биле овие Химарсиве лесна мета за авионски напад или пак Искандер?
Немаат Украина ПВО систем за да ги заштити, освен 2 батерии С300 во Одеса областа.
70км имаат домет и сигурно лесно може локацијата да им се одреди.
Или има некоја разлика од Смерчовите, Точка-У системите кои русите им ги уништуваа со леснотија?
намената на смерч и ураган е различна.Па нешто се пософистицирани од смречовите, како Руската следна генерација на Ураган/Смреч, Торнадо С. Не е нешто страшно ниту е некаков гејм чејнџер. Само по себе во незначителен број е сосема бескорисно оружје и не е нешто што Украина го немала претходно. И да, се уништува исто лесно, како што им се и веќе уништените ракетни системи.