http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...011101572.html
In another interview with German newspaper Die Welt, Brzezinski also said, that a military solution would be possible ,maybe, if having 500000 troops in Iraq and letting them brutally brake lose and wage war like it was done in the past. What reminds me of the destruction of a Vietnamese city, "in order to save it". The president's plan he called pointless, a lost cause, and expressing nothing, and he said that in the long view america has to accept that it's mere presence in Iraq alone is what enflames the conflict more and more - which makes it a logical conclusion that the 26000 additional troops will not ease but increase the violance. The declared goal of taking on the militias of Al Sadr he put into relation by referring to their numbers (60000) and the unifying effect such a direct confrontation would have, and that it escapes one's understanding how a growing of one'S enemy's numbers and cooperation standards should be a road to victory. Next he said that all neighbours in the region have a legitimate interest in what happens in Iraq, and that this is a valid demand for being taken into account - even if the US interests is different. US interests therefore do not rule out Iran's interests, for example. One must not like it, but you can't come around Iran. He cautiously expressed his fear that Bush may try to escape the mess he has brought the US into by trying to widen the conflict and get Syria and Iran involved in fighting, so that the war will widen. He compared the atmosphere of rejecting and/or fleeing reality to the level the WH has seen during Watergate. Here, like in the WP interview and in other comments before he expressed that you cannot gain anything anymore if you behave like a colonial power. These ages are gone.
One must not like his conclusions, but I can't see how one can avoid their content
eternally. Take them as an illustration of how stupid and self-hurting this invasion has been.
http://www.welt.de/data/2007/01/23/1186054.html