Is the U.S. one step away from a military coup?
Nobody in authority has mentioned the word "coup" yet, but the U.S. is getting one step closer. From The Sunday Times, February 25, 2007:
US generals ‘will quit’ if Bush orders Iran attackThe article is here.
Michael Smith and Sarah Baxter, Washington
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.
Labels: military coup, U.S., United States
Powered by Blogger
1 Comments:
Two comments.
1. A coup d'état has been underway since the Bush/Rove team took office. From Cheney’s Energy Task Force onward, the Executive Branch has been squeezing out the role of Congress. Read today’s Tom Friedman’s column Failing by Example in which he decries the Bush Administration’s desire for loyalty over competence and cites for illustrative purposes the Gonzales-8 --- “while the Bush team has been lecturing the Iraqi Shiites to limit de-Baathification in Baghdad, it was carrying out its own de-Democratization in the Justice Department in Washington.
Who would have thunk it that AG Ashcroft would be the person telling Card/Gonzales that the evasdropping program was illegal ? ? ?
2. Regarding Iran, Admiral William Fallon, then commander of the US Pacific Command, expressed strong opposition in February to an administration plan to increase the number of aircraft-carrier strike groups in the Persian Gulf from two to three.
Gareth Porter writes
Fallon's refusal to support a further naval buildup in the Gulf reflected his firm opposition to an attack on Iran and an apparent readiness to put his career on the line to prevent it. A source who met privately with Fallon around the time of his confirmation hearing and who insists on anonymity quoted Fallon as saying that an attack on Iran "will not happen on my watch". Asked how he could be sure, the source said, Fallon replied, "You know what choices I have. I'm a professional." Fallon said he was not alone, according to the source, adding, "There are several of us trying to put the crazies back in the box." Fallon's refusal to request the deployment of a third carrier strike group meant that proceeding with that option would carry political risks. The administration chose not to go ahead with the plan.
Thank God for people who are “trying to put the crazies back in the box."
Post a Comment
<< Home