BRZEZINSKI: "A PLAUSIBLE SCENARIO" FOR STARTING WAR WITH IRAN

The most important part of this video starts at 54 seconds in (partial transcript below):



Transcript:

If the United States continues to be bogged down in a protracted bloody involvement in Iraq, the final destination on this downhill track is likely to be a head-on conflict with Iran and with much of the world of Islam at large. A plausible scenario for a military collision with Iran involves Iraqi failure to meet the benchmarks; followed by accusations of Iranian responsibility for the failure; then by some provocation in Iraq or a terrorist act in the U.S. blamed on Iran; culminating in a "defensive" U.S. military action against Iran that plunges a lonely America into a spreading and deepening quagmire eventually ranging across Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.

He's talking about something like the Gulf of Tonkin incident, Operation Northwoods, or even 9/11--flimsy pretexts at best and false-flag operations at worst--but this time we "do" Iran. And Republicans and even a lot of Democrats will come out to tell us exactly what happened even though it won't be quite clear just what went down. The official story/conventional wisdom about evil, aggressive Iran attacking the poor, well-meaning United States will harden into stone and be pumped 24 hours a day through every possible medium, making anyone questioning what happened seem disloyal, unpatriotic, treasonous, insane, or all of those.

However, it will then come out in 20 or 30 years, just like in the Gulf of Tonkin incident, that, well, what do you know--they played the public for suckers and got a lot of people killed and it turns out that the pretext the whole thing was based on didn't even happen or didn't happen at all like they said it did. When will we learn?

RICE DOTH PROTEST TOO MUCH

Rice says "We're not planning to attack Iran." That can mean one (or all) of five things:

1. "We" are planning to attack Iran. Remember the Bush administration's tendency toward "oppositism."
2. We are have already planned to attack Iran, but not currently doing so at the time of this response of hers
3. We are provoking Iran, just not planning to attack them.
4. We are planning on going to full-scale war with them, not simply "attack" them.
5. We are orchestrating a false-flag attack that we can use an excuse to go to war with Iran.

With this statement of Rice's and the "we're not planning a war with Iran" statement a few days ago of Robert Gates, the Bushies are protesting too much, methinks. But the question Rice responded to fulfills one of my wishes from a while back. I just wish this question had been asked way back then...

She denies seeing the 2003 fax from the Iranians about wanting to open a dialogue with the US about everything from their nuclear program to recognition of Israel. Of course, she also couldn't imagine that anyone would use planes as weapons, even though that had been raised by the government over and over again as a distinct possibility.