Maybe Brzezinski is Half Right?

Former Carter National Security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski made news in an interview implying that the US should be prepared to militarily confront any Israeli planes headed for a preemptive strike on Iranian nuclear facilities they suspect to be developing nuclear weapons.

"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?... They have the choice of turning back or not. No one wishes for this but it could be a Liberty in reverse."

But the real danger is not that it "could be a Liberty in reverse," but an incident just like the Liberty. Both ABC's Jake Tapper and The Jerusalem Post have helpfully reminded us, in Tapper's words: "The USS Liberty was a U.S. Navy technical research ship that the Israeli Air Force mistakenly attacked during the Six Day War in 1967."

The USS Liberty was an American spy ship well out in international waters north of the Sinai peninsula listening in on the military traffic as the Six Day War progressed. It was overflown thirteen times in the previous two days by Israeli Air Force planes and eight times just prior to the Israeli attack by various IAF aircraft, some passing so close their engine vibration rattled the Liberty's deck plates and some of their pilots even waved to crew members on board.

It was 2PM on a bright sunny afternoon and with its huge antennae and clunky Liberty ship transport vessel lines lumbering at less than 10 knots it certainly was in no danger of being thought a warship. But as a precaution the Liberty also flew three American flags.

It also had the clear and very large numerical markings of an American naval vessel easily identified in any number of reference works in every defense establishment in the world. Admiral Thomas Moorer later called it the most identifiable naval vessels in the US Navy. One of the flags was shot down during the attack and replaced with a huge one 13 feet long, but the attack went on. The Israelis claimed they saw no flags.

Between 2PM and 4PM the Liberty was repeatedly attacked by Israeli IAF aircraft and torpedo boats, had 34 crewmembers killed and 171 wounded and almost sunk. Many of those knowledgeable about the attack, including then Secretary of State Dean Rusk and Admiral Isaac Kidd, saw it as an intentional act by Israel.

But let's go along with Jake Tapper and the Jerusalem Post. Let's assume it was a misidentification.

If the Israeli Air Force can fly 21 times over a clunky freighter with US Navy markings moving at five knots flying three American flags in broad daylight and then spend two hours killing Americans trying to sink it in repeated attacks, our equally clearly marked bases in Iraq are vulnerable to a "mistaken attack" as well.

Forget all the arguments over the preemptive strike itself. The real danger may be what happens if the IAF thinks it is bombing Iranian nuclear weapons facilities when it is attacking our troops in Iraq?

Comments

[Sleuthy]

A repeat "mistake" is implausible as long as there are those who remember the Liberty incident.

[Mark4124]

I am stunned by the anti-Israeli nature of the comments posted here. Israel has the right to defend herself. The United States should strike Iran to ensure that the task of denying Iran's fantatical regime nuclear capibility is done in the most effectatious way. However the Obama administration is not willing to face the threat head-on but continue with a sanctions regime that will not result in Iranian capitulation. The Israelis view Iran as an existential threat will strike militarily. If the US is not supportive, Israel can overfly Saudi Arabia rather than Iraq. Saudi officials have "off the record" indicated to international media that they have given Israel overflight permission for such a mission. Relative to comments related to AIPAC, please tell me why it is that Israel should not have the right to lobby the US government in accordance with her interests, yet other groups should? Maybe we should do away with the Sierra Club or whatever lobby interest you happen to appreciate. And as far as Brzezinski is concerned, I would urge you to read William Sullivan's account of the fall of Shahist Iran and Brzezinski's repeated unwillingless to reach out to moderate forces in the revolution resulting in the most radical elements coming to the fore after the fall of the Shah. Brzezinski should be given no credence where Iran is concerned considering his mishandling of the Iranian revolution.

[citizen of the universe]

Israel is capable of protecting herself yes or no? If I'm not mistaken they have missles and nukes correct? Why does the US have to be involved and/or repsonsible for Israel's actions?

[S1m0n]

Because Israel can't use its weapons against Iran without crossing airspace controlled by the US, which means that any attack must be have been made with US consent.

[Melangell]

How about this??? Let's just leave Israel to fight it's own battles and throw all of Aipac out of our country. They've never really been our friends and they cause us nothing but trouble. We have plenty more important things to worry about.

Just a thought.

[RevBookburn]

Forget politics, ideology or nations. If they are crazy enough to attack Iran's nuclear facilities, they deserve to be stopped.

[S1m0n]

Zbig's telling it the way Iran will see it. If Israel crosses US-controlled airspace to attack Iran, the Iranians will assume - reasonably - American complicity in the attack. As there are a number of that Iran can do which will make things more unpleasant for US forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, provoking Iranian anger is a poor idea.

[Johnny2Bad]

Israel and her facist supporters once again miss the point Zbigniew Brzezinski was trying to make. Mr. Brzezinski is not advocating the willful strafing of Israel aircraft. He is making a case for not allowing Israel carte blanc to bomb Iran without consequences, one being that if Israel were to fly into American control airspace they would be viewed as a hostile entity. This is no different than what Israel has done for decades. They certainly engaged in this type of response with the USS Liberty.

Israel has violated international law for decades. They refuse to join the IAEA, sign a nuclear non-proliferation treaty and allow inspections of their nuclear facilities. Iran has done this. The U.N.'s Goldstone report has found Israel guilty of war crimes. Netanyahu has casually dismissed these serious charges. Slobodan Milosevic and Saddam Hussein were not granted such a priviledge. Israel refuses to stop construction on the settlements in occupied Palestinian territory. Israel has a decades long history of practicing apartheid. These are all acts of a rogue country. What Mr. Brzezinski was advocating much to the chagrin of Israel and her goose-stepping supporters is that such behavior has reached its limit and that there must be serious consequences for a country that sets itself above all others.

[altohone]

Anybody claiming to know for certain what Iran will do in the future should be forced to do a public demonstration with their crystal ball.

Anybody justifying war based on their crystal ball should be committed.

Paranoia is not a sound basis for policy.


Proof of an actual WMD threat seems like the MINIMUM those horny for war with Iran should produce.

[Laws456]

This is very ironic, after watching Andrea Mitchell earlier today, I thought of this same thing. She and guest were speaking of Israel's supposed idea to attack Iran. Although Iran's rhetoric has been strong, I haven't seen any hard core evidence that are willing to strike Iran first. Maybe I'm wrong on that last point and if I am, please someone educate me. But Israel attacking Iran would be bad news for us in every sense. And the fighting in Afghan/Pakistan would probably become even more intense.