Hersh: "Some senior officers are prepared to resign"

[kpete]

Hersh: Our Military Is ‘Very Loyal to the President, But They’re Getting to the Edge’ »
This morning on CNN, New Yorker journalist Seymour Hersh addressed the uproar at the highest levels of the U.S. military over plans to launch a massive strike against Iran that would include nuclear weapons:

What I’m writing here is that if this (plan to use nukes) isn’t removed — and I say this very seriously, I’ve been around this town for 40 years — some senior officers are prepared to resign. They’re that upset about the fact that this plan is kept in. … One thing about our military, they’re very loyal to the president, but they’re getting to the edge. They’re getting to the edge with not only Rumsfeld, but with Cheney and the President.

Watch it: http://thinkprogress.org/2006/04/09/hersh-military/

Hersh also addressed claims today by British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw that the idea of a nuclear strike on Iran is “completely nuts.” Hersh’s response: “He didn’t deny there’s serious planning about the military strike, is the point. He’s absolutely right about a nuclear option, but there is planning for conventional war.”
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/04/09/hersh-military/

Full transcript: http://thinkprogress.org/2006/04/09/hersh-military/

and from Talk Left:

HERSH: The word I hear is messianic. He thinks, as I wrote, that he's the only one now who will have the courage to do it. He's politically free. I don't think he's overwhelmingly concerned about the '06 elections, congressional elections. I think he really thinks he has a chance, and this is going to be his mission.

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/014509.html

[TomInTib]

1. Just imagine how pissed off they are...

Those very Senior Officers do not like to be trifled with.

WH commissions a study on a nuclear attack.
Pentagon delivers.
Pentagon then tries to retract same study.
WH refuses and submits the study as a Pentagon plan.

[Amonester]

41. Yeah. Me wonders what they really think of this AWOL deserter...

... with NO combat experience whatsoever, who only got 'catapulted' over their heads to (make himself) be their 'Commander-in-Chief' because his criminal familly had (have) 'relations'

Many of 'em had to EARN every 'step' of the 'ladder' to get where they are. But not the insane 'Leaker-in-Chief' war criminal...

Justice? Where?

They Should Arrest That Dangerous aWoLiar, before it's too late (it's already 'extremely' late).

[Warpy]

2. They don't need to resign

They need to REMOVE THE BASTARD.

It's a mark of how desperate this situation is that even a military coup would be preferable to leaving the insane clown cabal in power.

[iconoclastNYC]

3. Now you know why Bush is using the NSA to spy

On Americans.

[Warpy]

7. Actually, he had no problem getting warrants against

the Raging Grannies and the Quakers. What he was afraid to get warrants for is open to speculation, and mine is that he is spying on anyone in the opposition with the least amount of power, from Congressmen to party bosses to Democratic school board members.

[iconoclastNYC]

8. Anyone in the position to forment a coup

Is being watched by the NSA.

The illusion of a united Republican party is exactly that. Bush has many enemies on the right-wing. The ones that put love of country above love of leader, or love of party.

[electron_blue]

27. yes!

[Cooley Hurd]

4. Yes, and this is the very first time in my life that I would actually...

...support a military coup (of course, my sincere hope is that we can remove him via democratic means in 01/07, but we have someone in the WH that is very clearly insane)...:scared:

[Benhurst]

5. Of course he wasn't put in by democratic means; but it would be

nice to remove him by them.

[BeFree]

20. You got that right. Not by democratic means.

And yes, it would be nice. I'd vote for that! If they'll count it democratically.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

9. If it meant putting Hastert in charge, oh well.

These guys don't understand line of succession/chain of command anyway -

1) Sec. of State Al Haig saying he was "in control" after Reagan was shot...wonder what Poppy was doing...
2) VP Cheney giving shoot down orders on 9/11, although the VP has absolutely NO military authority.

[cartach]

11. Abraham Lincoln - - - "To stand in silence when they should

be protesting makes cowards out of men" There must be a hell of a lot of cowards standing around at this point in time.

[Faygo Kid]

36. Lincoln would have told the truth about these cowards.

He had an incredible "knack" for knowing exactly where people are coming from. He would have stopped this madness. In his absence, we must do so.

[adigal]

43. I do NOT want a military coup

My God, that would be terrible. Any coup would destroy our Constitution, as there is no provision for that in the document we all say we support. Also, we don't want the military any more involved in govt than they already are involved. The military is not supposed to be political or have a preference for any side, and for very good reason.

We, the people, are the bosses, our reps through the power we give them. We need to make absolutely certain that we get the vote out and counted in November.

[Amaryllis]

48. Get the vote out...see this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x890481

[tomp]

64. agreed. but they must refuse illegal orders.

how many illegal orders had to be followed in order to invade iraq? just askin'.

[symbolman]

87. There ARE provisions

Number one. A SWORN officer in the Military does NOT have to follow what he considers and ILLEGAL order.

2) The pResident of the US can be REMOVED from office for insanity, there is remedy in the Constitution.

3) The persons that would be taking him into custody would need to be the military for his own safety.

Simple.

[checks-n-balances]

26. Exactly - because they'll just be replaced with people of less

conscience - i.e., yes-men of this misadministration. At any rate, the entire * cabal consists of either brainwashed fools or madmen, and

To the millions of clear-headed sane people remaining in this country:

WAKE UP!!

[Marie26]

82. No way

If it comes to that, we the people should remove them. Viva la Revolucion!

[flyarm]

6. I SAW THIS LIVE..AND I AM IN UTTER AWE OF THIS MAN!!

Mr Hersh is a national treasure as is Helen Thomas...

we owe a debt of gratitude to Sy Hersh!

and that dick head nazi blitzer..propaganda whore for this administration....tried every way he could to discredit Sy...and it didn't work..i fucking hate nazi blitzer!

what a filthy pig!
to think he could sit there and ask this true reporter and journalist the questions he did..Wolf Nazi Blitzer propagandist.. couldn't hold Sy Hersh's dirty jock strap!

fly

[SoCalDem]

21. Too bad we have not seen/heard as much of HIM and Howard Zinn

and Noam Chomsky, and Robert Greenwald...as we have of Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, Rush Limbaugh & Bill O'Reilly..

Lightweight-liars have been shaping public opinion, while truly intelligent people like these guys have been tied up and gagged in the basement.:(

Can you imagine how much more enlightened the public COULD be today, if we had heard from these people regularly, over the decades

Reagan's people silenced these people, and the stranglehold on the media that he assured, spent 20+ years demonizing their ideas, so that if they ever emerged again, they would spend all their time trying to just get the public's attention again.

[greenman3610]

10. I worship Seymour Hersch, but

he spoke about videos of rape at
Abu Ghraib, and I thought all of those were
released, but I have not seen those yet, nor
an explanation from him where they
went.

[WillyT]

12. He Wasn't The Only One Who Saw Them, And Not Everything Was Released...

as far as I know.

:shrug:

[Roland99]

35. There was a recent case where the Pentagon ceded to the ACLU.

The gov't has been fighting to keep those from being released.

Members of Congress have seen the videos and have commented on them.

[converted_democrat]

69. Google is your friend, try using it.. Many of our "leaders" have seen

the pics and videos, and some had to leave the room when they were viewing them because they were so bad.. Seymour Hersch was right on target with his report.. The courts have ordered the release on several occasions, but surprise, the administration isn't complying.. There have been several release dates put forward, but so far they are stalling, going against court order, and trying to use hail mary legal strategies to keep them from coming out.. Sy was right on target, it isn't his fault that the administration is yet again breaking the law, and going against court order.. Our lawmakers have already verified what his reports said.. Google for the response given by our lawmakers after watching the videos and pics.. Sickening stuff..

[Peace Patriot]

13. kpete, could you clarify this post, as to whether or not Hersh is saying

there IS a nuke Iran plan in place. It gets confusing in the bit about Jack Straw (Hersh's response--is Hersh saying, yes, it's nuts; or yes, there's no such plan, it's a conventional war plan?). I haven't read his article yet, and can't get the video clip--and for those others in the same spot, please clarify: Is Hersh saying it's nuts to use a nuke plan, or that Straw is nuts in saying they don't have one? And is the U.S. military objecting to the nuke part, or the whole thing?

Also, I presume Hersh means Bush, by the "he" in the statement about messianic. (--just to be clear).

I wouldn't be so fuss-budgety, but, really, this is the most extraordinary thing I've ever read--a man of Hersh's stature broadly hinting that the U.S. military is considering...a coup? Saying that the U.S. military have almost had it with the President of the United States, the Vice President of the United States and the Secretary of Defense! "Getting to the edge..."

This has never, never, never, never happened before--NEVER! (Or, if it has, it's never gotten on TV!)

[IndyOp]

17. According to a well-placed R source plans near completion.

According to a well-placed source (a former R member of US Congress) plans for US attack on Iran are nearing completion.

IMPORTANT: According to Steve Clemon's Israel will be endangered by an attack on Iran, Israel says there are many options left to diffuse this situation. Do NOT attack Iran!

Steve Clemon's (Washington Note) just returned from Israel where he expected to find people who supported the growing numbers in the US who are calling for an attack on Iran (whether that be by bombing one or more locations or with a larger assault).

He did NOT find anyone - not Likkud, not Mossad - NO ONE in Israel who thought that there is a need to attack Iran.

The American Jewish Committee just took out a full page ad in the New York Times advocating that the U.S. attack Iran. But there is a gap - a serious gap - between senior defense operatives, intellectuals and political personalities in Israel and the leading voices in the Jewish diaspora (primarily in the US).

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/001333.php

[Amaryllis]

49. "growing numbers in the US who are calling for an attack on Iran "??????

Really? Or is this just spin? I thought most Americans were against it????

[sarge43]

18. Well, at the time there was no TV

There have been vague hints that McClellan (Civil War) talked about a coupe and MacArthur booted the idea around after Roosevelt was elected. But if so, talk, no walk.

But be very very careful what you wish for, everyone. Power given or taken for that matter is seldom if ever returned. Historically, republics fall and die following a coupe. The cure could be worse than the disease.

[Alamom]

23. Peace Patriot. I didn't see the whole interview, I did see part of it.

So I'm not sure either, but it seems Hersh has a source who says there is a plan in place. He seems to believe there is without a doubt.

Also,
Jack Straw said in an interview (British TV) when ask about this situation and using nukes, "Well, it is nuts".
(Jack Straw obviously believes it would be nuts to even consider this option)

I hope this clears up the Straw part...he made the remark in a separate interview.

[Trevelyan]

54. I read the link to the Jack Straw quote and actually he is saying that

the TALK about the Iran Nuclear strike is nuts not the idea of nuking Iran. Was disappointed because I thought Straw had finally gotten the courage to tell the truth.

The link to the original source is at the beginning of the Think Progress article on Hersh.

[Peace Patriot]

25. This OP needs a thousand recommendations RIGHT NOW!

We need to re-evaluate everything that's been happening in the recent past (since Katrina, at least), and what's happening now, on all fronts--in light of this revelation by Hersh that the U.S. military is "getting to the edge" with Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld. Hersh has never misled us. And I'm sure he wouldn't have said this without extremely serious consideration beforehand. He's not a man who would say--or could be led to say--anything he didn't fully intend to say.

It's funny, I was sensing a coup of some kind--or, a very serious fracturing of the Bush White House--back during Katrina, behind the scenes, with odd bits like Bush appearing to be out there on his own in the news media (no spinners around), Rove on strike apparently (who later dropped a turd into the newsstream about having been in the hospital), and Cheney sulking in his tent, his only emergence (in the news) being an order to ground crews to stop restoring power to hospitals but instead to restore power to the Texas to Northeast oil pipeline thru the Gulf states (an order that greatly puzzled ground crews, with local hospitals already on generators). I was sensing some Treasongate stuff going on behind the scenes--blackmail, bargaining for pardons, maybe some kind of payoff to Cheney (say, not to rat on Bush Jr) with plans to turn New Orleans into Cheneyville. Then there was that press moment with Bush Jr. all alone except for Daddy Bush and Clinton behind him.

Weird. Was the war in the WH so furious that the Prez needed outside backing? Was the gov't about to crack up?

Now I'm thinking of Fitzgerals again and what-all might be going on with that. And I'm also thinking of John Kerry's concession on election night. I've always had it in the back of mind--a distant hope--that that concession just came too quick, even for a War Democrat, and that he knew something he couldn't say.

We need to re-evaluate this entire year and a half, actually, since the election. What are we to make of the Democratic Party leadership's utter silence about Bushite corporations 'counting' all our votes with 'trade secret,' proprietary programming code, and virtually no audit/recount controls--and the obviously anomalous 2004 election? Their disinterest in it? And their letting egregious violations of the Voting Rights Act in Ohio just go by?

I just figured corruption--on the electronic voting systems. (--corruption wrought throuthout the land, among both Dem and Repub election officials and legislators, by Tom Delay's and Bob Ney's $4 billion electronic voting boondoggle, the "Hack America's Vote Act," passed by the Anthrax Congress.)

But maybe it's something other than that (or in addition to that): That the war party faction of the Democratic Party wants the war machine to emerge from this fascist coup in tact, and themselves victorious--as "saviors" of the country--and is perhaps working in coordination with the military and the intelligence community, to achieve that end, so that THEY, rather than the American people, rather than the grass roots, end up once again in charge. They DON'T WANT the democratic, leftist revolution that has swept Latin America to sweep in here, puttting Corporate Rule in peril.

But clearly this can't go on--$8 trillion deficits, massive looting of the economy, wars of choice, torture, lawlessness, the US as a pariah state. The American people will only take so much. They're slow-burners. They don't easily revolt. But there is no question we are reaching a boiling point--with Bush contemplating yet another unjust war, with the economy (for most Americans) in ruins.

I doubt that Sy Hersh would lend himself to such scheming. But his being on CNN, and saying what he just said, means that SOMEBODY is letting him do it. And those somebodies likely want to keep Corporate Rule (and big military budgets) in place, but with a somewhat more benign face. ANYTHING they do, compared to Bush, will look good. For instance, they can now freely spy on Americans if they just get a warrant from a Corporate-appointed judge in a secret court. Bush is committing felonies by not getting a warrant. They won't commit felonies--within a Corporate-controlled rule system.

And the leadup to the '06 elections also needs to be re-evaluated. Reports from around the country indicate to me that the Dem Party establishment is going around influencing primary races, often picking out the most "establishment" candidates and promoting them, to prevent a big revolt by the electorate on issues of war (most especially) and, oh, universal health care, etc. (truly solid social equity programs). They especially don't want antiwar candidates succeeding. I don't imagine this is news to anybody here, but if you think of it in this NEW context--that Hersh has revealed--of an extremely unhappy military on the verge of revolt (unheard of in the U.S. of A.), and the military porkbarrel Dems thinking they're going to end up in control....

I don't know. I don't know quite where to go with this--nor how much of this speculation might be on target. I DO think that stopping George Bush from nuking or invading Iran needs to be a priority, no matter what the political consequences are here, or what we have to deal with. (One party Democratic rule--but by the war porkbarrel/corporate faction?) And I wouldn't mind seeing the rule of law re-established, in which we have some chance for fairness.

[Jose Diablo]

34. Sounds like Chicago, don't it.

The anti-war part of the Dem party getting screwed by the war hawks in the 'establishment'. I don't know what's worst, getting fucked by our enemies, or our so called 'friends'.

[MnFats]

38. YES! he is saying exactly that --- bunker-busting nukes to be used in Iran

anyone who has not done so MUST go to www.newyorker.com and read the entire Hersh piece!
Do it without delay, even though it will scare the shit out of you,,,

[caledesi]

14. Good! * is certifiably insane and he must go (take away his toys lst). n

[DemoTex]

15. Look at this Freep response on "Think Progress" .. scariest ever!

ARE WE RESOLVED TO BRING PEACE TO THE MID-EAST ? IF YES, THERES NO BETTER WAY THAN WITH NUCLEAR DEVICES. ITS IRREFUTABLE PROOF THAT GOD IS ON OUR SIDE. THE PERSIANS MUST BE MADE TO UNDERSTAND WHO IS BOSS. WE ARE. AMERICA. FOR NOW AND FOREVER.

ITS ONLY THEIR ARMY THAT WILL BE NUKED. I KNOW MANY LIBERALS PREFER A DIPLOMATIC SOLUTION , BUT IMAGINE HOW WELL DIPLOMACY WIL GO WHEN THEY HAVE NO CHOICE ! AND YOU “KNOW” WE COULD USE A FEW LONG TERM IRANIAN BASES. G.W. BUSH WILL BE KNOWN IN THE FUTURE AS THE MAN WHO TURNED THE MID-EAST INTO AN AMERICAN PROPERTY. ITS BETTER THAN THE LOUISIANA PURCHASE…

AMERICA WILL BE MUCH SAFER ONCE THE ARABS ARE UNDER CHRISTIAN CONTROL. BECAUSE ONLY CHRISTIANS UNDERSTAND PEACE.

Comment by supermushroom — April 9, 2006 @ 1:56 pm

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/04/09/hersh-military/
(scroll down to comment #3)

Supermushroom, all I have to say to you on this Palm Sunday is from Hosea 8: Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind. Does that tried-and-true Old Testament concept register in your mush-for-brains? I doubt it.

[hiley]

19. wonder

who supermushroom really is?
besides insane

[NJCher]

24. !!!

I actually burst out laughing at that post.

Only Christians understand peace.

(!)




Cher

[baby_mouse]

60. "Only Peas understand Christians" nt

[spanone]

78. Wasn't that proven by the Crusades?

:sarcasm:

[Az_lefty]

32. I'm really getting tired of this "God is on our side"

so we (kooks and nuts) can do what ever we want.
Nukes for peace...yea thats it.
We need to impeach that paranoid little Cesar we have in the White House right away. That little son of a bitch is totally insane.

[MADem]

56. Supermushroom--come ON, that's too easy!!

I guess that poor fool is, in a super-duper way, kept in the deepest of dark places, and covered with twice as much shit as the "regular" mushrooms!

[baby_mouse]

59. Poor Supermushroom.

He won't know what hit him when he wakes up.

[Supersedeas]

66. the evolution of nuclear deterence to nuclear preemption

[symbolman]

88. I remember when mushrooms were FUN

must be some new breed out there that makes you INSANE but doen't melt your liver..

Supermushoom,go back to your comicbook basement and have mommy bring you some more thorozine laced cookies.. make sure she takes away your glasses and shoelaces, better yet, tell her that you NEED them, for a secret mission to meet the Lord EARLY.

The one real problem I've had with the Christian religion is this, "If you kill yourself you don't get into heaven.." someone should have rethunk that, "If you kill yourself you get a SPECIAL SEAT right next to jesus, so don't wait, DO IT NOW.."

:)

[IndyOp]

16. The latest Harpers: American Coup D'Etat

On news-stands now!

[Trevelyan]

55. Link to General Dunlap's warning story about military coup that he wrote

in 1992. Dunlap was on the Harper's AMERICAN COUP D'ETAT panel.

The Origins of the American Military Coup of 2012
CHARLES J. DUNLAP, JR.

From Parameters, Winter 1992-93, pp. 2-20.
Go to Cumulative Article Index.

The letter that follows takes us on a darkly imagined excursion into the future. A military coup has taken place in the United States--the year is 2012--and General Thomas E. T. Brutus, Commander-in-Chief of the Unified Armed Forces of the United States, now occupies the White House as permanent Military Plenipotentiary. His position has been ratified by a national referendum, though scattered disorders still prevail and arrests for acts
of sedition are underway. A senior retired officer of the Unified Armed Forces, known here simply as Prisoner 222305759, is one of those arrested, having been convicted by court-martial for opposing the coup.

Prior to his execution, he is able to smuggle out of prison a letter to an old War College classmate discussing the "Origins of the American Military Coup of 2012." In it, he argues that the coup was the outgrowth of trends visible as far back as 1992. These trends were the massive diversion of military forces to civilian uses, the monolithic unification of the armed forces, and the insularity of the military community.

His letter survives and is here presented verbatim.

It goes without saying (I hope) that the coup scenario above is purely a literary device intended to dramatize my concern over certain contemporary developments affecting the armed forces, and is emphatically not a prediction. -- The Author

Dear Old Friend,

It's hard to believe that 20 years have passed since we graduated from the War College! Remember the great discussions, the trips, the parties, the people? Those were the days!!! I'm not having quite as much fun anymore. You've heard about the Sedition Trials? Yeah, I was one of those arrested--convicted of "disloyal statements," and "using contemptuous language towards officials." Disloyal? No. Contemptuous? You bet! With General Brutus in
charge it's not hard to be contemptuous....

http:/www.carlsle.army.mil - Parameters, US Army War College Quarterly - Winter 1992

[4freethinking]

22. I would rather have

a military coup to oust the president than have one nuclear weapon used.

[stevietheman]

28. I absolutely agree.

I'm also convinced that a military coup would be used to restore the Constitution, nothing more, nothing less.

[4freethinking]

30. If a nuclear holocaust is averted so be it.

If they have enough sanity to remove a president from doing so then they more than likly would have sanity to restore the constitution.

[blue state liberal]

47. In 2000 there was a coup against the American people

which was partially instigated by the Supreme Court which s(elected) the worst ever p(resident) this nation had the misfortune to have. A military coup to put him and his criminal cabal out of power would be a blessing for America, no matter how it is accomplished. And I hope it happens! We cannot even get a vote of censure, let alone the IMPEACHMENT he deserves.

[Tom Joad]

29. They need to resign. Sir, NO, Sir! words for this generation, as it

was for an earlier generation. There must be resistance at all levels of the u.s. military to this regimes unlawful orders and empire-building.
The untold story from Vietnam was that u.s. servicmen and women did protest widely, organized resistance, refused missions, even fragged officers, distributed anti-war lit. on base, hung out at cafes that supported their resistance. It wasn't just draftees, but also included officers and even in West Point.

See the movie, "Sir, No Sir". Playing now in the Bay Area. soon to come to a movie theatre near you.
http://www.sirnosir.com/
Winner of the Los Angeles Film Festival, Best Documentary

[MADem]

57. No, they need to stay, and fight the nut, and make him fire them

You only resign when there's nothing more to be done, or if you are given an order that you cannot, in good conscience, carry out. They need to keep squawking, early and often, and leaking, if that is what it takes.

If they--the good ones, the thoughtful ones, the ones who care about our country (and they do exist, many are my friends)--just resign, you'll have kooks like Sanchez and Boykin giving the orders to fire. Of course, that would suit the Monkey just fine....

[tomp]

65. six of one, half a dozen of the other

remove from command and place in the brig vs. resign. in either case a more loyal wingnut gets promoted.

personally i favor refusing illegal orders, but i'm not in their shoes (and that's no accident).

u.s military is a tool of u.s. imperialism (essentially working for civilian, i.e., corporate causes) and has been for at least a hundred years. anyone in the military today who doesn't know that simply hasn't done their homework.

[MADem]

71. Well, I spent decades in service, and I disagree with your assessment

The oath I took was to preserve, protect, and DEFEND the Constitution of the United States, against all enemies, foreign and domestic. And that is what I did, to the best of my ability.

[tomp]

74. i find your response irrelevant.

do you think your six decades in the service gives your argument more weight? i don't.

i'll put my six decades out of the service against yours in the service anyday. one might say you're just biased towards the service. look very closely at the real history of the u.s. military over the last one hundred years and you cannot escape the conclusion: tool of imperialism (i.e., in service to multinational corporations).

i'm sure that you THINK that's what you were doing--defending the constitution and all--and that idea is admirable, but i don't think that's what you really WERE doing. frankly, i think you, like so many other patriotic americans, were suckered.

six decades in the service? you mean you got through the vietnam era thinking you were defending the constituiton? i rest my case.

[MADem]

75. Who said anything about SIX decades? First, that is impossible

Second, reading is fundamental.

And I don't think I was "suckered." I think I performed a service to the nation, and I was happy to do it. How long, realistically, do you think it would be before some other expansionist nation came prancing over the hill, had we not a vital military? Free Chinese lessons for everyone not rounded up!

I rest MY case.

[tomp]

77. several things

my error, i don't know where the six came from

it's not really impossible, is it?

i KNOW what you THINK. i'm saying thinking is fundamental and you're WRONG in what you think.

i have no problem with defending against "invaders".

when was the last time we defended ourselves against invaders? wwii? we could even debate that. there's some very fishy history in the run-up to wwii. but leaving that aside for the moment, when was the other last time we defended ourselves against invaders?

at least since the spanish-american war our military has been used almost exclusively for agressive, imperialistic purposes. the evidence is overwhelming.

for extra credit, how many times have american troops been committed to foreign combat since 1900 (not counting afghanistan and iraq) and how many times were these defensive?

i'm sorry for the delay in posting, i only get here every now and then.

[MADem]

80. Your questions are irrelevant, to be blunt

They are designed to deflect from the central matter of maintenance of a military, which is a concept enshrined in our Constitution (Art 1 Sec 8). We'll need to tinker with that document for you to have your way.

The reason that we do not have to defend against "invaders" is BECAUSE we have a strong military. It isn't a large military, at least in terms of our total population, but it is quite robust and capable.

I certainly am not going to argue that certain asshats in power have never misused and abused our forces, but that is not the fault of the servicemember, it is the fault of the electorate that put the asshats in power. In any event, that does not invalidate our service personnel as an entity --made up of "we, the people" and in these times, volunteers all--that is tasked to protect our nation.

To think that we don't need them, and to dismiss the concept of service to the nation simply because we have a jerk at the helm nowadays, is naive in the extreme.

[The Backlash Cometh]

31. If Bush was this looney-tunes, I wonder why our allies didn't work

harder to expose him sooner? It didn't have to be openly, but they've been spying on us long enough to pick up some juicy information that would turn the American people against this president. Is it possible that they sat quietly while Bush did their dirty work in the Middle East, then hoped the US would burn itself out in the process?

[Faygo Kid]

33. "Seven Days in May": Time to watch it again.

We are in deep trouble here, folks. The president was the hero in the movie, but Burt Lancaster is W. Except Burt was intelligent. Watch or rent this great, great movie. We are in deep trouble here, folks.

[MnFats]

40. course, Lancaster played a rogue general; kirk douglas his nemisis.

the president had signed a weapons treaty with the Soviets, which caused a clique within the military to rise up....
i mentioned this the other night: what we need is a clique within the military to rise up and announce: "Mr. president, we are tired of pursuing your useless wars and we aren't going to do it any more."

[dwp6577]

37. someone help me out here...

Can this dick-head prez bomb iran without congressional approval?

[MnFats]

39. whether he CAN or not, meaning does he have the authority....is irrelevant

...he believes he can do anything!
...look at his record!
...He'll f'n do it, too.

[beltanefauve]

52. I heard on Malloy tonight

that he actually believes it is his LEGACY to "bring democracy" to Iran. He's hearing voices again.

And no, he doesn't think he needs Congressional approval.

[Amaryllis]

50. i remember him saying before Iraq that if congress didn;t approve it,

he would go ahead and do the right thing anyway.

[Nevernose]

79. Under the War Powers Act of 1973, he can

And he probably would anyway.

[Marie26]

83. They've argued that

the Iraq War Resolution authorizes them to expand the war into other surrounding countries w/o needing seperate congressional approval. Rice said as much during her confirmation hearing.

[TrogL]

42. It's time for a left-wing military coup

The United States has had a right-wing political coup through extra-Constitutional means of one form or another since 2000.

The military needs to overthrow the current government, clean up the election mess eg. Diebold, hold elections with international monitoring, then walk away.

[misternormal]

44. If those resign... They will find others who will do the dirty work...

[Ksec]

45. Damn, Seymour gets the story...again

How does he always manage get these important stories?

All I can say is thank goodness we still have a few good journalists left. Hersh is a national treasure.

I suspect they are saying NUKES so a conventional invasion wont look so bad.

[Roland99]

46. He's essentially been reporting this story (well, minus the nuke aspect)

for over a year.

[C_eh_N_eh_D_eh]

51. First you leave the service, then you write about it.

I believe that's how it goes?

And there's no telling what dirty little secrets some of those officers might have dug up during their careers.

[Trevelyan]

53. I don’t want good people to resign over this,I

iI want them to stay and keep some semblance of sanity i this administration, in our government. If good people leave, Bush replaces them with incompetents or nutty people.

Can our country, can the world, really stand another 3 years of this administration?

http://www.WorldCantWait.com

[B Calm]

58. The Republican Crime Family don't care what the military thinks!

From the words of Republican Henry Kissinger... The military are dumb stupid animals to be used for foreign corporate interests..

[baby_mouse]

61. Resigning isn't really going to be an awful lot of use.

All that'll happen is thet Bush will give the guns to somebody younger and more mad and get THEM to push the buttons. Oh, and they'll probably get rid of some of the retired in a more permanent way.

[Redstone]

62. Ha! Did I call it, or what? How many times have I posted that if they

tried to invade / bomb Iran, there would be a mutiny? Half a dozen, at least.

Now can we get back to the real issues and stop taking the bait of this distraction?

REdstone

[lonestarnot]

68. Agree.

[Time for change]

63. Wow

:wow:

Maybe this will wake up some people in this country.

[lonestarnot]

67. messianic maniacal, messoshit!

Messianic is the one word that dropped my jaw. Surely caught my attention:spray: :wow:

[oc2002]

70. They deserve Bush since they did not support Clinton as cheerfully as they

supported Bush and his corporate war machine.

screw them.

[MADem]

72. Plenty did, though quietly--you didn't advertise it

And Clinton didn't care. He knew he was a lightning rod, and he let Bill Cohen take the lead. But make no mistake, he had his hand on the tiller. He had enough sense of his role as President and Commander in Chief not to NEED pictures of crowds of service personnel forced to cheer him in empty, staged events.

Under Clinton and Bill Cohen, the military made enormous gains, not only in terms of personnel quality of life, but technologically, as well. For example, the reason we have drones over Iraq and Afghanistan is because of the investment made by that 'librul' fatboy from Arkansas.

Monkeyboy The Incompetent is destroying the highly professional, motivated, and dedicated force that was shaped under Clinton.

[AnneD]

73. To those of you that remember Watergate....

doesn't this remind you of the Saturday Night Massacre. That was what accelerated Nixon's departure.

[4 t 4]

76. Mr Bush

is COMPLETELY out of his mind, he is NUTS!! They're getting to the edge I'm already on it. heheheheheh

[Marie26]

81. And they are resigning

Which makes me think Bush is going forward on his crazy nuke/Armageddon plan. If the generals had prevailed, they wouldn't be resigning now, would they?

[lovuian]

84. The Military have HAD IT and are walking out!!!

Bush has put them in a IMPOSSIBLE position!!!

[ignatius 2]

85. Hersh is freakin' awesome and a true patriot. Remember he was the first

journalist to have the guts to break the Abu Gharib story.

Thank God that there are still a few journalists with integrity who are as saddened and alarmed by what the Bush maniacs are doing to the world as we are.

[Peter Frank]

86. Imagine if Powell Had Set the Precident; ...

...but better late than never.