Another example of zionist audacity:
Kissinger Discourages Exiting Iraq "Early"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By CONSTANT BRAND
BRUSSELS, Belgium (AP) - Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger warned against an early withdrawal of U.S.-led coalition forces from Iraq, saying such a move would bolster insurgents and terrorists worldwide, causing instability across the Middle East.
He also warned that European Union nations and Washington needed to find another way to get Iran to stop the development of its nuclear program, which the EU and US fear is being used to make nuclear weapons. Iran insists its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes.
Kissinger, in a speech Friday to top NATO officers and officials, said Iran's nuclear program and terrorism continued to pose a tough challenge for trans-Atlantic ties, and warned also that Iran could use nuclear weapons as a way to protect itself while continuing to promote terrorist groups.
"They (weapons) can become a shield by which to step up terrorist actions," said Kissinger, who was secretary of state and national security adviser under U.S. presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. He retains substantial influence in foreign affairs, and continues to have close links to the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush.
Saying an early pullout of U.S. forces from Iraq would have disastrous consequences for regional stability, Kissinger made clear Friday that he supported Bush's Iraq policy.
"To argue that a collapse of the United States in Iraq would not have consequences ... is simply living in a dream world," the former top U.S. diplomat said. "Shockwaves would ripple throughout the Islamic world."
Terrorists and opponents of governments across the Arab world - such as in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, which support Washington - would be encouraged by an early withdrawal of the American military from Iraq, he said. A U.S. military withdrawal would "embolden their attacks on existing governments."
He said he hoped that, when a new government is elected in Iraq next month, "a combination of legitimacy and training of troops of the Iraqi army will improve (the) security situation."
Nevertheless, the 82-year-old Kissinger said upcoming U.S. congressional elections would have an effect on the debate of how long U.S. troops would remain in Iraq.
U.S. politicians opposed to Bush's Iraq troop commitments have called on him to clarify a timeline for reducing troop levels, saying the losses U.S. troops are suffering there are untenable due to the continued violent attacks against them.
"The challenge we now have is to generate enough patience," he said.
Kissinger did not touch on the sensitive issue of whether Washington's European allies should contribute more troops to rebuilding Iraq, nor did he suggest NATO take a larger role in Iraq. NATO members, notably France and Germany, were opposed to the alliance playing a key role in providing peacekeepers to Iraq, and also opposed the U.S.-led war there.
NATO opened a long-awaited training academy for the Iraqi military last month, which aims to train 1,000 officers a year, as part of the alliance's limited role there. The 26-nation alliance will also supply equipment, such as used tanks, said U.S. Gen. James L. Jones, NATO's supreme commander in Europe.
"Currently we have 77 Hungarian T-72 tanks en route to be delivered to the Iraqi army, which is obviously is going to make an important difference in their capabilities," Jones told reporters.
In his speech, Kissinger also touched on other challenges ahead, saying European nations had to accept that their continent was no longer Washington's top concern. Instead, he said, the rise of China and India and other Asian powers was now the key focus.
Both European countries and the United States, however, had to work closer together to coordinate new policies for Asia and for other top issues such as terrorism and nuclear proliferation, he said.
"There is not the commitment to the Atlantic alliance that there was before," he said. The question would be whether nations bordering the Atlantic would "be able to develop cohesion and coordination to address so vast an agenda."
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20051105/D8DM7QP02.html
