they're the guys these gals cheer for...
Posted on 04/26/2008 4:17:39 AM PDT by freerepublic_or_die
The nation's top military officer said yesterday that the Pentagon is planning for "potential military courses of action" as one of several options against Iran, criticizing what he called the Tehran government's "increasingly lethal and malign influence" in Iraq. Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said a conflict with Iran would be "extremely stressing" but not impossible for U.S. forces, pointing to reserve capabilities in the Navy and Air Force. "It would be a mistake to think that we are out of combat capability," he said at a Pentagon news conference. Speaking of Iran's intentions, Mullen said: "They prefer to see a weak Iraq neighbor. . . . They have expressed long-term goals to be the regional power." Mullen made clear that he prefers a diplomatic solution and does not expect imminent action. "I have no expectations that we're going to get into a conflict with Iran in the immediate future," he said. Mullen's statements and others by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates recently signal new rhetorical pressure on Iran by the Bush administration amid what officials say is increased Iranian provision of weapons, training and financing to Iraqi groups that are attacking and killing Americans. In a speech Monday, Gates said Iran "is hell-bent on acquiring nuclear weapons." He said war would be "disastrous" but added that "the military option must be kept on the table, given the destabilizing policies of the regime and the risks inherent in a future Iranian nuclear threat." Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, who was nominated this week to head all U.S. forces in the Middle East, is preparing a briefing soon on increased Iranian involvement in Iraq, Mullen said.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I don’t believe they’re tired. They know what we are up against, they want to see it through to the end.
Down and out and tired are not in a soldiers or marines vocabulary.
Let’s not forget all of the money spent on illegals.
I would bet our military would LOVE to go after Iran since they are the ones supplying the weapons that are killing their brothers in arms.
‘zackly. Several of our missile subs now are armed with cruise missles with plenty of non-nuclear punch. Not only will they not know what hit them, they won’t know where it came from.
So to those of you out there who know the talk and walk the walk; is it possible that we will really do something?
The ripples from this would be very large it seems.
Politically, economically, etc
I wonder if the IRGC has a unit called “the Immortals”, so that we can put their name to the test.
Well said, every word of it.
Your “About” page is inspiring. But who are these Dallas Cowboys?
Semper Fi
“How much longer can we put tired men and women out to fight and do it with a bankrupt treasury.”
First, we are not “bankrupt” - Congress gets to decide that. Plus, our current federal debt level is well below historical norms. So, stop being a chicken little already.
Second, our men and women are not “tired”. It’s tough work, they are experienced and can handle a lot more. Plus, the “battlefield” is much as it was under Hussein.
Iraq, as the smaller country, compensated for their smaller army with larger, more lethal weapon systems that Iran could neither buy nor operate and maintain. Iran had the men (boys) to make up what was a suicidal army. More weapons v. more men produced a stalemate; which is what the geopolitical strategists wanted.
A war with Iran will be the same thing all over again. We will wipe out most of their major weapons in the first round. After that it becomes a war of attrition involving more weapons v. more men.
The real objective is to cut off the head immediately. They know it, we know it. The mullahs know they have to watch their backs right there in their own offices. The question is when we will be in good enough a position to execute one clean cut?
I'd bet it will be after the November election and before inauguration of the next President. That way it won't skuttle Republican's winning the Presidency, and it won't leave the next President with having to decide whether to hit Iran. Starting it would be "Bush's fault" but he is already damned by the peaceniks for all that anyway -- might as well go the rest of the way. Now which of the candidates could properly finish the job?
We shouldn’t be wishing for this.
What if Bush’s remarks earlier this week to disperse the tax rebates checks early was a sign of a military action against Iran is coming. He did mention this money could be used to help pay for rising fuel cost. All the pundants, including me, thought that was odd for the President to release the tax rebate early to fight rising fuel prices. Maybe he knows once we start the bombing, we Americans are going to need all the money we can get to pay the 6 or 7 dollar a gallon it will be. I think I’ll use my tax rebate to buy a bike.
Get Ready for a rough ride ahead FRiends.
Back online soon ;-)
I got you covered on that one:
Historical US Casualties
The only thing missing here is a scale of "relative pain."
For example, 25,000 US deaths in the Revolutionary War doesn't sound so bad -- until you consider, that's out of a population at the time of only three million or so.
It would be equivalent in today's 300 million population to 2.5 million military deaths. Imagine that...
Same thing with the Civil War. Nearly 600,000 total military deaths, from a population around 30 million, equates in today's world to six million dead soldiers!
I've seen no figures for US civilian deaths in those wars, but must presume, since they aren't usually even mentioned (with a few exceptions) they were quite small to zero.
I think you are right.
they're the guys these gals cheer for...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.