It would be libel because it was a public statement in the media. Mrs. Suhks is the attorney in the house so I'm kinda a buff. On her advice and as I stated before, it depends on whether Wilson is a public or governmental figure...I think he meets the burden for both.
In that case intentional malice needs to be proven and all we have is Wilson's word against the Generals'. Very hard to prove.
Anyone can sue about anything. The charge would be "Libel", but I am saying to win that suit, you would have to prove that a lie was told, not just that someone said something about you that you didn't like even though factually correct. With Wilson, he has a pattern of telling lies, and then when someone calls him on any of it, he shouts from the rooftops like a stuck pig. He was not a public figure or a govt. official until he wrote the NY Times op-ed piece blasting the Bush Administration and accusing Bush of lying to America. That is when all gloves needed to come off to show Wilson for lying bastard that he is. I hope that happens very soon. I will celebrate when it does.