US generals ‘will quit’ if Bush orders Iran attack

The Sunday Times (U.K.) ^ | 02/25/07 | Michael Smith and Sarah Baxter

[gondramB]

>>The stupidity on this thread saddens me.

Is their anyone lucid enough to understand that Generals made these statements.....probably on direct orders from CinC?<<


I don't see how you could know that - this is a liberal British paper claiming that an unidentified person heard the Generals say they would quit. I don't see how you can tell for sure whether this propaganda attempt is U.S. or Brit in origin.

>>Or are memories so damaged as to leave no understanding of what it is to squeeze an enemy? <<

But yeah, you nailed the main issue - this undermines out ability to pressure Iran and avoid what would likely be a very unpleasant ground war.

Kind of ironic that people may actually make that more likely by damaging President Bush attempt to resolve the issue without war. Isn't it...

[Finalapproach29er]

Now I know why we haven't won in Iraq.

Too many perfumed generals.

Time to purge the Clinton disciples. IMO

[xzins]

You forget the Senate. Mitch McConnell has a solid filibuster-proof group of Senators. If their president tells them this is right, they will support him.

And the resolution will not be repealed. It is a joint resolution and all of Congress would have to be involved.

Besides that, there is the constitutional question of whether congress can undeclare a military authorization. Once you start some things, you have to finish them.

"Guys, guys...Hey, you Islamofascists, Congress said we're finished, so you've gotta stop, too. Got that? Now, go on home. There's nothing to see here. Nothing else to do."

[blade_tenner]

There will be a diplomatic solution to this.

If the admin. was willing to strike a deal with an insane government like N. Korea, they'll probably be willing to deal with anybody. There is a crazy notion amongst the posters here that you can "bomb them back to the stone age" and not have troop presence on the ground.

The admin. can already claim some victory. Amedinijiad's party lost badly in their midterms. We may yet have regime change without firing a single bullet..

[xzins]

To defend ourselves we can take whatever action the President would send the military on.

Shoot....as long as it takes Congress to do anything, and as fast as we win the ground campaigns in these kinds of affairs, we could have their nuke capability destroyed before congress could even decide on a title for their sure-to-fail, probably unconstitutional repeal.

[RegulatorCountry]

"I don't see how you could know that"

The siren song of "little birdies" again?

[Sergio]

Only problem will be; these clowns will start showing up all over the TV morning/Sunday gab-fests..not a pleasant thought.

Tie their pensions to their ability to keep their mouths shut.

[Grizzled Bear]

Any way to find out if they got their stars under Clinton's watch?

---

Also; does anyone recall how many Generals stepped down early under Clinton's watch? IIRC there were a few.

[jude24]

Mitch McConnell has a solid filibuster-proof group of Senators. If their president tells them this is right, they will support him.

That filibuster-proof group of Senators will evaporate if Bush goes off half-cocked against Iran.

"There are roads which must not be followed,
armies which must not be attacked,
towns which must not be besieged,
positions which must not be contested,
commands of the sovereign which must not be obeyed."
-- Sun Tzu, The Art of War, 7.3

Besides that, there is the constitutional question of whether congress can undeclare a military authorization.

Congress has the sole power to declare war, to levy an army and navy, and to regulate said entities. It's pretty clear they can.

[gondramB]

>>"I don't see how you could know that"

---

The siren song of "little birdies" again?<<

Well, I never discount the possibility that a Freeper has a source and if they do I can certainly see not identifying it on a public message board.

But from the information I've seen in public I really cannot tell if the origin of this effort is a Britsh attempt to spin their backing off in the WOT or an American attempt to undermine the President.

[RegulatorCountry]

That reference has specific meaning in context, since they've been utterly (and very publicly) wrong before.

[TheBattman]

“All the generals are perfectly clear that they don’t have the military capacity to take Iran on in any meaningful fashion.

If true, that sure is a sad statement of affairs. I thought the US was the "last superpower". Doesn't sound much like a superpower to me...

If we don't have the military might to take the fight were we see fit, then I suggest that we have been mis-spending our Federal Budget for a long time.

But again, isn't it amazing how so many will whine and moan about our options in the world - including military, yet offer no answers or solutions. The "best" most offer is more negotiations, which really means capitulation. We see how well that has worked in North Korea. Iran continues to enrich Uranium, despite our and the UN's empty threats of sanctions. They know we won't completely cut them off - the world needs their oil and we "cannot afford" the massive price increases that would come with such a cut-off.

For the same reason that I really don't have much faith in an actual attack on Iran. Unless Iran actually has a bomb and maybe even tests/uses it, we won't attach them in the remaining Bush years. The following years, if we are "ruled" by a Democrat, will be marked with passive isolationism - at least until the second term of said liberal is marked by a swearing in in Arabic (or Spanish, or both!). But by then, the population of the US will be unarmed, waiting in line for simple medical care (thank you Hillary-Care socialized medicine), and paying the highest taxes ever known to the US.

But oh well...

[gondramB]

>> That filibuster-proof group of Senators will evaporate if Bush goes off half-cocked against Iran.<<

We cannot afford any half cocked war anywhere right now. But in terms of what country is doing the most to support global terrorism that would be Iran - we dont want then find Hamas and Hezbollah and also having nukes.

>>
Besides that, there is the constitutional question of whether congress can undeclare a military authorization.

Congress has the sole power to declare war, to levy an army and navy, and to regulate said entities. It's pretty clear they can.<<

That is an excellent point/question. Does anybody know how formally declared wars have been ended in the past? Is it by the executive only or is congress involved?

[Obie Wan]

It isn't that I don't think your more intelligent then the rest of us but when you use the handle "Pukin Dog" it can be a little tricky !!!

[gondramB]

>>That reference has specific meaning in context, since they've been utterly (and very publicly) wrong before.<<

I apologize - I did not catch the reference.

[Lancey Howard]

One retired general who participated in the “generals’ revolt” against Donald Rumsfeld’s handling of the Iraq war said he hoped his former colleagues would resign in the event of an order to attack.

There it was, at the end. The clue that puts the screws to the whole story. Remember that bunch of scumbag Democrat generals who were putting their names on various "letters" of protest against the Iraq war? This whole story is a fake news story.

[M Kehoe]

Initially I thought this article was from the Onion, or Scrapple Face. Then I saw the byline. Still, it's funny.

5.56mm

[xzins]

There is no statement that Congress can undeclare an in-process war.

They can get us started, but once in the field, the security of the US is in the hands of the Cdr in Chief.

You're wrong about the Republican Senators siding with Mitch McConnell. They will solidly stand beside the president.

And, like I said, we want to take out a capability Iran possesses. We dont' want to nation build. Israel took out Iraq's capability a couple decades ago, and it took them a long time to get back to where they had been.

Interestingly, Mossad is also active. They've been killing off Iranians key to the nuke program. That's one way to slow it down.

[Gritty]

[Radix]

It looks to me as if Iran is about to take a serious ass whipping from the USA if they don't soon wise up.

Our partners who are countries which most Americans long ago fled from simply do not have the sac to maintain.

The U.K. media is FOS by the way. No American General would ever cut and run in the fashion that they are intimating.