Posted by
on Sunday, February 25, 2007 3:09:53 PM
Captain Ed addresses a blog buzz early this morning thanks to a Times of London report that breathlessly reports that some military "commanders" would resign from the Pentagon should we attack Iran:
SOME of America’s most senior military commanders are prepared to resign if the White House orders a military strike against Iran, according to highly placed defence and intelligence sources.
Tension in the Gulf region has raised fears that an attack on Iran is becoming increasingly likely before President George Bush leaves office. The Sunday Times has learnt that up to five generals and admirals are willing to resign rather than approve what they consider would be a reckless attack.
“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.”
A British defence source confirmed that there were deep misgivings inside the Pentagon about a military strike. “All the generals are perfectly clear that they don’t have the military capacity to take Iran on in any meaningful fashion. Nobody wants to do it and it would be a matter of conscience for them.
“There are enough people who feel this would be an error of judgment too far for there to be resignations.”
A generals’ revolt on such a scale would be unprecedented. “American generals usually stay and fight until they get fired,” said a Pentagon source. Robert Gates, the defence secretary, has repeatedly warned against striking Iran and is believed to represent the view of his senior commanders.
This story shows the idiocy of the Times. Those that are in the Pentagon are not battlefield commanders. They are a part of the general staff there. There are hundreds of officers in the Pentagon, so the resignation of a handful is hardly the breathtaking newsflash the Times makes it out to be. Captain Ed notes that if we do attack Iran (which we are not planning to), and these generals resign, that is the honorable thing to do. I concur. The last thing we need are those int he Pentagon that disapprove of the mission, and work to undermine it.
And let us touch on Iran. The president is actively pursuing a diplomatic solution to the rogue regime and it's desire to fiddle with nuclear power. Vice President Cheney has stated that all options, including a military one, are on the table. Of course we have a military option on the table. We game all sorts of scenarios, and always have. Captain Ed says we probably have one for Russia and China. To that there is no doubt, but WE would not be surprised to see a scenario involving Britain and Israel--our two staunchest allies. (Hey, you never know, and it is always wise to err on the side of caution.)
Point being, the Times of London reported this story much the same way the BBC reported five days ago our so-called "attack plans" for Iran; that is, without merit or intelligence, and a complete lack of understanding with regard to the military and the Pentagon. It really is not such a big deal to see four or five of the big brass in the Pentagon step down. Now, were they serving line officers in the field, that would be newsworthy.
Marcie