Both seek the total enslavement of the world's poopulation.
"...Bush is implicitly elevating Osama bin Laden's stature and historic significance to the level of figures such as Lenin, Stalin or Mao..."
Hitler was regarded as an insignificant kook by many, but managed to cause the death of millions and untold misery.
Bush is right. Brzezinski is wrong.
I think the Communism comparison works, especially because anti-American leftists (aka Communists) are siding with the Islamicists.
"What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Muslims or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?"
Some "stirred up Muslims" indeed! ZB's jealous of losing his place in history, whatever that is...
Brezinski, was he the architect of the first Afghan jihad with Jimmy Carter?
Still fighting the Cold War...
ZB talks as though Lenin, Stalin and Mao did something good and admirable.
You can't be elevated to the level of Lenin, Stalin or Mao. You can only be compared to their same low station in the history of humanity.
Yes, they have something in common: Brzezinski supports both of them.
He is old and senile and needs to be put out to pasture and should have been long ago.
Here's where he's wrong. There are far more Muslims in the world than were ever under Soviet Influence. And virtually all of these muslims will not speak up against Islamic jihad, and by their very silence express their acceptance.
Communism never made an inroad where Democracy had a strong foot hold other than by force. However the Jihaddists are everywhere Muslims have anything close to a majority.
No matter how much you whistle past the graveyard, you can not dismiss the similarity.
I copied a post on another forum long ago. The author is unknown, but had good insight:
There are 2 kinds of Socialists:
1 National Socialists.
These guys like to take over and tell you what to do.
They control industry and supply by co-opting the business owners, so giving the impression of independent ownership.
They hate anyone who doesn't share their beliefs, especially the Jews who they like to exterminate.
They are strongly nationalistic and wish to take over the world to make everyone like them.
Examples: Nazis and Islamists
2 International Socialists
These guys like to take over and tell you what to do.
They control industry and supply by killing the business owners, so destroying any impression of independent ownership.
They hate anyone who doesn't share their beliefs, especially the Jews who they like to exterminate.
They are strongly international and wish to take over the world to link up with everyone like them in other countries.
Examples: Communists and ..er... Socialists
The bottom line is as people have said, the result is the same: you are screwed.
Quote: Communists are Socialists in a hurry.
What do Brzezinski and Stansfield Turner have in common?
Jimmy Carter!
Says it all! National Security Advisor and CIA Slub.
Both Islam and Communism elevate the group over the individual. In both, the individual's purpose is to advance the goals of the group (State, Ummah, whatever) rather than the group existing to create a safe environment for the individual to work on his own goals
Well, Brzezinski,I can't seem to remember Lenin, Stalin or Mao ever being so bold as to murder 3,000 Americans, right here at home. Perhaps you, Sir, and all those others of your ilk are just too stupid to recognize the magnatude of the threat represented by the terrorist Islamites.
The threat, Zbig, sir, is even greater. The Soviets had never colonized the West as the Islam has, even if they succeeded in infiltrating all of our institutions. The threat is not as much from the bombings in Western Europe and elsewhere, or other military actions, it is from the cultural change, sir, that is happening right before your rose colored glasses. Dude!.
They are both left-wing and opposed to freedom:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/1533980/posts?page=32
Liberals think "Islam" means "peace." Actually it means "submission." Muslims believe "peace" will be achieved when the world submits to their false idol. Likewise the leftist peaceniks believe peace will be achieved by crushing resistance to international socialism.
It's like he sees the truth, but then it's just too much for him to comprehend and he just decides he must discount the truth because it's too much for him to accept. Communism is totalitarian, Islam is totalitarian. They both DO dominate minds and hearts of hundreds of millions across national boundaries. He doesn't explain why Islamofacism must appeal across religious boundaries...isn't 1.3 Billion muslims a large enough base to draw from?! And even then, the Left in the US are quickly getting into bed with the Islamofacists, probably because they don't see the danger anymore than ZB does, as well as the fact that they hate Christians more than they fear the terrorists. Their icons such as Michael Moore say there is no terrorist threat.