Article

2007-02-24 Home Front: Politix

(up to 5) US generals 'will quit' if Bush orders Iran attack

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Anonymoose 2007-02-24 20:32|| || Front Page|| [7 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Dunno, but this smells like bullshit to me. With a faint whiff of wishful thinking, too...

Posted by Dave D.">Dave D. 2007-02-24 20:57|| 2007-02-24 20:57|| Front Page Top

#2 Any 'source' the Times quotes is probably from Pinch Salzbergers office.

Posted by Phineter Thraviger 2007-02-24 20:58|| 2007-02-24 20:58|| Front Page Top

#3 If they do, those are the ones who should be retired, so that's all right with this little civilian housewife.... whose opinion doesn't matter to those who make such decisions.

Posted by trailing wife 2007-02-24 21:07|| 2007-02-24 21:07|| Front Page Top

#4 Do they have names , because it would be nice to know which G's won't follow orders if given.

Posted by Flolumble Elmuling1667 2007-02-24 21:18|| 2007-02-24 21:18|| Front Page Top

#5 Anonymous sourcing, allegedly from a foreign intelligence-defense establishment. Add a dash of Murdochian tabloi-faire and you have a story like this.

But Rupert would reply: "Hey, you read it, didn't you?"

Posted by mrp 2007-02-24 21:21|| 2007-02-24 21:21|| Front Page Top

#6 It's BS.

Posted by anymouse">anymouse 2007-02-24 21:28|| 2007-02-24 21:28|| Front Page Top

The alleged objection, that our forces are stretched too thin for this and therefore not capable of carrying it out, is nonsense.
An operation to eliminate Iranian nuclear capability would involve forces that have not been heavily engaged in either Iraq or Afghanistan: long-range bombers and various missile forces, possibly including SLBMs with kinetic energy warheads.

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2007-02-24 21:34|| 2007-02-24 21:34|| Front Page Top

#8 I don't think that the crews are timed out at Diego Garcia. We could use a couple of resignations in the Clintonion Clique of generals.

Posted by Alaska Paul">Alaska Paul 2007-02-24 21:37|| 2007-02-24 21:37|| Front Page Top

#9 Good riddance. We do not need political generals.

Posted by SR-71 2007-02-24 22:40|| 2007-02-24 22:40|| Front Page Top

#10 There are four or five generals and admirals we know of who would resign if Bush ordered an attack on Iran, a source with close ties to British intelligence said. There is simply no stomach for it in the Pentagon, and a lot of people question whether such an attack would be effective or even possible.

lets see "Journalists re-"rote" the war in Vietnam, slandered every Soldier, Marine, Navy and Airman who ever served since then and we're supposed to believe anything they say. Lol!

Brit "Journalist" are even worse.

Posted by RD 2007-02-24 22:51|| 2007-02-24 22:51|| Front Page Top

#11 When a yournalist says that the number is "unprecedented" should they not consider the Civil War copperheads?

Posted by Captain America 2007-02-24 23:04|| 2007-02-24 23:04|| Front Page Top

#12 Just plain old bullshit. Another skum sucking Time anti-military and Bush article.

Posted by 49 Pan 2007-02-24 23:08|| 2007-02-24 23:08|| Front Page Top

#13 I am sceptical of this story's main contention but it does contain a grain of truth - the stakes involved in stabilizing Iraq are very high as it would free some of our forces for implied action against Iran, as well as possibly permitting us a regional base on Iran's doorstep.

At this time our ability to project force by land there lags our sea and air capabilities, but we may need a conventional deterrent a couple of years in the future when the "critical mass" point of Iran's nuclear weapons development program is reached, or even beyond if Iran does succeed in its nuclear ambitions and a containment strategy is called for.

Posted by Sic_Semper_Tyrannus 2007-02-24 23:52|| 2007-02-24 23:52|| Front Page Top

#14 I believe that Iran is not Iraq and that we have to take more things into consideration if we decide to go after them militarily. Iraq when we invaded was a toothless tiger. Most of it's capabilities were diminished from....
1. The war with Iran
2. The first Gulf War
3. Approx. 10 years of economic sanctions
4. Ethnic and political divisions from withen

Iran is the complete opposite of what Iraq is before we finally invaded and finished them off in March 20'th 2003.First point is that Iran consists mainly of Shia population that are extremely nationalistic and ideologically driven. An attack on them would more than likely unite them with the mad mullahs and it will probably strengthen their theocracy. Iran has never invaded a country or declared war on another nation other than Iraq and even in this case it was in self defence. For the last 25 years they have been producing sophisticated weaponry that can in no way stand up to American fire power but can be used to take on America in assymetric warefare. Iran's geograpy gives it that capability where it can use it's mountainous terrain along the coast of the Persian Gulf to launch attacks on oil tankers and America's 5'th fleet using its land based anti ship missles that can pretty much reach any target in the Persian Gulf and all of the Straight of Hormuz. If Iran even succeeded in stopping the shipping in the straight for lets say a week it would have economic reverberations around the world. It also has the means to unite all the Shia in Iraq and than America will find its self in an all out war over there. They also have Hizbollah rearming itself and an attack on Iran would probably result in another Lebanon-Israel war. As a result of this, it will create so much tension and hatred in the rest of the Arab world that possible coups or revolutions may occur and America may lose more of it's allies in the region such ass Egypt, Jordan, and it's main ally Saudi Arabia.
All in all, their are just too many variables to take into account when dealing with Iran militarily. As a result of this it may be concievable that some american generals would resign over this because they may not want to be responsible for yet another quagmire in the region.

Posted by Darkydark 2007-02-24 23:56|| 2007-02-24 23:56|| Front Page Top

23:56 Darkydark
23:52 Sic_Semper_Tyrannus
23:46 Mike N.
23:21 RD
23:21 Thrump Snairong6534
23:18 RD
23:08 49 Pan
23:08 RD
23:04 Captain America
22:52 3dc
22:52 IG-88
22:51 RD
22:49 SR-71
22:44 Chiper Threreger8956
22:40 SR-71
22:32 Thrump Snairong6534
22:30 Chiper Threreger8956
22:26 Chiper Threreger8956
22:18 Redneck Jim
22:18 Sic_Semper_Tyrannus
22:16 Procopius2k
22:11 JohnQC
22:06 Procopius2k
22:02 Sic_Semper_Tyrannus