How the Military Can Stop an Iran Attack
Sometimes history–and necessity–make strange bedfellows. The German general staff transported Lenin to Russia to lead a revolution. Union-buster Ronald Reagan played godfather to the birth of the Polish Solidarity union. Equally strange–but perhaps equally necessary–is the addressee of a new appeal signed by Daniel Ellsberg, Cindy Sheehan, Ann Wright and many other leaders of the American peace movement:
“ATTENTION: Joint Chiefs of Staff and all U.S. Military Personnel: Do not attack Iran.”
The initiative responds to the growing calls for an attack on Iran from the likes of Norman Podhoretz and John Bolton, and the reports of growing war momentum in Washington by reporters like Seymour Hersh of The New Yorker and Joe Klein of Time. International lawyer Scott Horton says European diplomats at the recent United Nations General Assembly gathering in New York “believe that the United States will launch an air war on Iran, and that it will occur within the next six to eight months.” He puts the likelihood of conflict at 70 percent.
The initiative also responds to the recent failure of Congress to pass legislation requiring its approval before an attack on Iran and the hawk-driven resolution encouraging the President to act against the Iranian military. Marcy Winograd, president of Progressive Democrats of Los Angeles, who originally suggested the petition, told The Nation:
If we thought that our lawmakers would restrain the Bush Administration from further endangering Americans and the rest of the world, we would concentrate solely on them. If we went to Las Vegas today, would we find anyone willing to bet on this Congress restraining Bush? I don’t think so.
Because our soldiers know the horrors of war–severed limbs, blindness, brain injury–they are loath to romanticize the battlefield or glorify expansion of the Iraq genocide that has left a million Iraqis dead and millions others exiled.
Military Resistance
What could be stranger than a group of peace activists petitioning the military to stop a war? And yet there is more logic here than meets the eye.
Asked in an online discussion September 27 whether the Bush Administration will launch a war against Iran, Washington Post intelligence reporter Dana Priest replied, “Frankly, I think the military would revolt and there would be no pilots to fly those missions.”
She acknowledged that she had indulged in a bit of hyperbole, then added, “but not much.”
There have been many other hints of military disaffection from plans to attack Iran–indeed, military resistance may help explain why, despite years of rumors about Bush Administration intentions, such an attack has not yet occurred. A Pentagon consultant told Hersh more than a year ago, “There is a war about the war going on inside the building.” Hersh also reported that Gen. Peter Pace had forced Bush and Cheney to remove the “nuclear option” from the plans for possible conflict with Iran–in the Pentagon it was known as the April Revolution.
In December, according to Time correspondent Joe Klein, President Bush met with the Joint Chiefs of Staff in a secure room known as The Tank. The President was told that “the U.S. could launch a devastating air attack on Iran’s government and military, wiping out the Iranian air force, the command and control structure and some of the more obvious nuclear facilities.” But the Joint Chiefs were “unanimously opposed to taking that course of action,” both because it might not eliminate Iran’s nuclear capacity and because Iran could respond devastatingly in Iraq–and in the United States.
In an article published by Inter Press Service, historian and national security policy analyst Gareth Porter reported that Adm. William Fallon, Bush’s then-nominee to head the Central Command (Centcom), sent the Defense Department a strongly worded message earlier this year opposing the plan to send a third carrier strike group into the Persian Gulf. In another Inter Press analysis, Porter quotes someone who met with Fallon saying an attack on Iran “will not happen on my watch.” He added, “You know what choices I have. I’m a professional…. There are several of us trying to put the crazies back in the box.”
Military officers in the field have frequently refuted Bush Administration claims about Iranian arms in Iraq and Afghanistan. Porter says that when a State Department official this June publicly accused Iran of giving arms to the Taliban in Afghanistan, the US commander of NATO forces there twice denied the claim.
More recently, top brass have warned that the United States is not prepared for new wars. Gen. George Casey, the Army’s top commander, recently made a highly unusual personal request for a House Armed Services Committee hearing in which he warned that “we are consumed with meeting the demands of the current fight and are unable to provide ready forces as rapidly as necessary for other potential contingencies.” While this could surely be interpreted as a call for more troops and resources, it may simultaneously be a warning shot against adventures in Iran.
An October 8 report by Tim Shipman in the Telegraph says that Defense Secretary Robert Gates has “taken charge of the forces in the American government opposed to a US military attack on Iran.” He cites Pentagon sources saying that Gates is waging “a subtle campaign to undermine the Cheney camp” and that he is “encouraging the Army’s senior officers to speak frankly about the overstretch of forces, and the difficulty of fighting another war.” Shipman reports Gates has “forged an alliance with Mike McConnell, the national director of intelligence, and Michael Hayden, the head of the Central Intelligence Agency, to ensure that Mr. Cheney’s office is not the dominant conduit of information and planning on Iran to Mr. Bush.”
Every indication is that the “war about the war” is ongoing. Hersh recently reported that the attack-Iran faction has found a new approach that it hopes will be more acceptable to the public–and presumably to the Pentagon brass. Instead of broad bombing attacks designed to eliminate Iran’s nuclear capacity and promote regime change, it calls for “surgical strikes” on Revolutionary Guard facilities; they would be justified as retaliation in the “proxy war” that General Petraeus alleges Iran is fighting “against the Iraqi state and coalition forces in Iraq.” According to Hersh, the revised bombing plan is “gathering support among generals and admirals in the Pentagon.” But Israeli officials are concerned that such a plan might leave Iran’s nuclear capacity intact.
Appeal to Principle
The appeal for military personnel to resist an attack is primarily based on principle. It asserts that any pre-emptive US attack on Iran would be illegal under international law and a crime under US law. Such an attack would violate Article II, Section 4, of the UN Charter forbidding the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state. Since Iran has not attacked the United States, an attack against it without authorization by the Security Council would be a violation of international law. Under the US Constitution and the UN Charter, this is the law of the land. Under the military’s own laws, armed forces have an obligation to refuse orders that violate US law and the Constitution. And under the principles established by the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal after World War II, “just obeying orders” is no defense for officials who participate in war crimes.
But the petition also addresses some of the practical concerns that have clearly motivated military officers to oppose an attack on Iran. It would open US soldiers in Iraq to decimation by Iranian forces or their Iraqi allies. It would sow the seeds of hatred for generations. Like the attack on Iraq, it would create more enemies, promote terrorism and make American families less safe.
The petitioners recognize the potential risks of such action to military personnel. “If you heed our call and disobey an illegal order you could be falsely charged with crimes including treason. You could be falsely court martialed. You could be imprisoned.”
But they also accept risks themselves, aware that “in violation of our First Amendment rights, we could be charged under remaining section of the unconstitutional Espionage Act or other unconstitutional statute, and that we could be fined, imprisoned, or barred from government employment.”
In ordinary times, peace activists would hardly be likely to turn to the military as allies. Indeed, they would rightfully be wary of military officers acting on their own, rather than those of their civilian superiors–in violation of the Constitution’s provisions for civilian oversight of the military. But these are hardly ordinary times. While the public is highly dubious of getting into another war in the Middle East, there now appear to be virtually no institutional barriers to doing so.
Military-Civilian Alliance
Is there a basis for cooperation between the military brass and citizens who believe an attack on Iran would be criminal and/or suicidal? Perhaps. The brass can go public with the truth and ask Congress to provide a platform for explaining the real consequences of an attack on Iran. They can call for a national debate that is not manipulated by the White House. (They can also inform other players of the consequences: tell Wall Street the effects on oil and stock prices and tell European military and political leaders what it is likely to mean in terms of terrorism.) The peace movement has already forged an alliance with Iraq War veterans who oppose the war and with high military officials who oppose torture; a tacit alliance with the brass to halt an attack on Iran is a logical next step.
Such an approach puts the problem of civilian control of the military in a different light. The purpose of civilian control, after all, is not to subject the military to the dictatorial control of one man who may, at the least, express the foolishness and frailty that all flesh is heir to. The purpose is to subject the military to the control of democratic governance, which is to say of an informed public and its representatives.
What contribution can the peace movement make to this process? We can cover military officials’ backs when they speak out–no one is better placed than the peace movement to defend them against Bushite charges of defying civilian control. We can help open a forum for military officers to speak out. Many retired officers have spoken out publicly on the folly of the war in Iraq. We can use our venues in universities and communities to invite them to speak out even more forcefully on the folly of an attack on Iran. We can place ads pointing out military resistance to an attack on Iran and featuring warnings of its possible consequences from past and present military officials. And we can encourage lawmakers to reach out to military officials and offer to give them cover and a forum to speak out. Says petition initiator Marcy Winograd, “I’d like to see peace activists and soldiers sit down, break bread, march together, testify together and forge a powerful union to end the next war before the bloodletting begins.”
The peace movement leaders who appealed to the military had to break through the conventional presumption that the brass were their enemies in all situations. Such an unlikely alliance could be a starting point for a nonviolent response to the Bush Administration’s pursuit of a permanent state of war.
Jeremy Brecher is a historian whose books include Strike!, Globalization from Below, and, co-edited with Brendan Smith and Jill Cutler, In the Name of Democracy: American War Crimes in Iraq and Beyond (Metropolitan/Holt). He has received five regional Emmy Awards for his documentary film work. He is a co-founder of WarCrimesWatch.org. Brendan Smith is a legal analyst whose books include Globalization From Below and, with Brendan Smith and Jill Cutler, of In the Name of Democracy: American War Crimes in Iraq and Beyond (Metropolitan). He is current co-director of Global Labor Strategies and UCLA Law School’s Globalization and Labor Standards Project, and has worked previously for Congressman Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and a broad range of unions and grassroots groups.
Copyright © 2007 The Nation
I mentioned this myself a few weeks ago. I think there are many in the military that are not for an attack on Iran. Admiral Fallon is the biggie, he has stated on more than one occassion his disapproval of such an attack.
At this point nobody except the military has any ability to stop escalating the Iran “conflict”. A majority of Congress is going against the will of the electorate and there is no mass recall effort to replace the offending members of Congress, nor will there be an election prior to the “conflict” escalating.
The idea sounds strange, but it might influence the brass. As a retired military man I can tell you. The powers in charge of the military are very sensitive to public perception. At this point anything is worth a try. What have we to lose.
Admiral Fallon reportedly called Gen. Petraeus an “ass kissing chickenshit”. And you know whose ass that is. Bush is a replay of Caligula, a man he strongly resembles in his penchant for torture and murder. However, the depraved degenerate in the White House should take note that Caligula was assassinated by his own military.
The military needs to do more than just stop the attack on Iraq. It needs to take its place in society and lead the country to peace. It’s obvious that the government can’t. If this means overthrowing the current government then let it be. I’ll take the conscience and actions of an American military man over those of an American politician or businessman. When it comes to the real good of the country only the military can honestly say that they have the best interests of the country at heart. Politicians and businessmen are to busy sleeping with each other and planning on how to get richer. And they are using the Constitution and the military to get their way.
Hoa binh
Purvis Ames: thanks for the optimistic history lesson. Personally, I’d like to see him toasted with marsh mellows. For Laura Bush to speak out against a foreign personage when she SLEEPS with a MURDERER is beyond the pale. A family of vipers disguised in mortal flesh… a curse upon mankind them all!
It won’t happen. If soldiers weren’t caught up in the mystique of war (which WWII is the ONLY war that ever kinda sorta lived up to the ideal) all wars would have stopped.
Buffy St. Marie says “wrote “Universal Soldier” in the basement of The Purple Onion coffee house in Toronto in the early sixties. It’s about individual responsibility for war and how the old feudal thinking kills us all. Donovan had a hit with it in 1965.
He’s five feet two and he’s six feet four
He fights with missiles and with spears
He’s all of 31 and he’s only 17
He’s been a soldier for a thousand years
He’s a Catholic, a Hindu, an atheist, a Jain,
a Buddhist and a Baptist and a Jew
and he knows he shouldn’t kill
and he knows he always will
kill you for me my friend and me for you
And he’s fighting for Canada,
he’s fighting for France,
he’s fighting for the USA,
and he’s fighting for the Russians
and he’s fighting for Japan,
and he thinks we’ll put an end to war this way
And he’s fighting for Democracy
and fighting for the Reds
He says it’s for the peace of all
He’s the one who must decide
who’s to live and who’s to die
and he never sees the writing on the walls
But without him how would Hitler have
condemned him at Dachau
Without him Caesar would have stood alone
He’s the one who gives his body
as a weapon to a war
and without him all this killing can’t go on
He’s the universal soldier and he
really is to blame
His orders come from far away no more
They come from him, and you, and me
and brothers can’t you see
this is not the way we put an end to war.
Grotesque… Billions of people worldwide now find themselves hoping and praying for a military coup by benign US forces loyal to the Constitution. The suspense is killing us slowly. Shock and awe has become our own experience.
Every soldier takes an oath to protect & defend the constitution.
All we really need is for them to keep their word.
The UCMJ provides for disobeying illegal orders and for relieving an officer of command.
Dubya likes to fancy himself a military man, a “commander-in-chief.” OK, let’s have somebody step up and relieve him of command and arrest him. War crimes are prohbited by the UCMJ, if I recall correctly.
Liberty & Justice,
sj
www.spartacusjones.com
Fighting a war against Iran would be no problem! I can’t believe anybody is actually even worried about it!
Has everyone forgotten that back in Dec. 2004, then Sec. of Defense Donald Rumsfeld announced to the world that the U.S. military was perfectly capable of fighting a war on two fronts - against BOTH North Korea AND Iraq simultaneously. How much reassurance does a country need???
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/east/12/24/nkorea.us.nukes1311/index.html
(North Korea incidentally, having one of the largest armed forces on the planet. If we can tackle them - we can tackle almost any country!)
Everyone can clearly see by now how swimmingly things have gone in Iraq and I’m sure all the present military leadership agrees with former Sec. Rumsfeld’s crack predictions.
It really wouldn’t even BE two fronts anyway, we could just extend the present one in Iraq!
In the words of of our fearless leader, “Bring ‘em on!” LOL!
Fighting a war against Iran would be no problem! I can’t believe anybody is actually even worried about it!
Has everyone forgotten that back in Dec. 2004, then Sec. of Defense Donald Rumsfeld announced to the world that the U.S. military was perfectly capable of fighting a war on two fronts - against BOTH North Korea AND Iraq simultaneously. How much reassurance does a country need???
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/east/12/24/nkorea.us.nukes1311/index.html
(North Korea incidentally, having one of the largest armed forces on the planet. If we can tackle them - we can tackle almost any country!)
Everyone can clearly see by now how swimmingly things have gone in Iraq and I’m sure all the present military leadership agrees with former Sec. Rumsfeld’s crack predictions.
It really wouldn’t even BE two fronts anyway, we could just extend the present one in Iraq!
In the words of of our fearless leader, “Bring ‘em on!” LOL!
US soliders ended the war in Vietnam–they can end the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan too. watch the film that the pentagon doesn’t want soldiers to see!
http://www.sirnosir.com
While it is a rosy concept, I am quite skeptical. It looks to me as if most of those cited in the article are reporters talking about things they overheard, not actual military men. Besides, if the military won’t do their job as Bush sees it Blackwater et al will. After all, the great conservative movement is towards privatization of everything. Also, the inflated contracts that they will be awarded will surely break the U.S. government, which is one sure way to guarantee privatization – everything that the government currently does will now be hired out, and of course those fees will be astronomical. Of course, in addition to those fees we will continue to pay taxes, necessary to pay for Bush’s war profiteering.
Also, do you think Bush really cares about international law? He doesn’t care about U.S. law, what makes you think he gives two pinches about what a foreigner has to say? In fact, Kerry was the fool for suggesting he MIGHT bend to international pressure.
Finally, Washington doesn’t care about what the people think, only what the corporations think. And since Fox news has shown that more than half the population is of below average intelligence (weird, eh?) they can get a majority of the sheople on their side anyway. If not, remember what Stallin said: “It’s enough that the people know there was an election. It’s not the people that vote that matter, it’s the people that count the votes.”
This article just provides a false sense of security.
America cought in the web of SATANIC rule needs now a hero, to bring us back to the country thired generation I was born too.
Yes, these times do make for very strange bedfellows. We have the worst president and the worst congress in American history, which happens to be the best president and best congress in the eyes of AIPAC. No AIPAC we do NOT share the same interests.
Sure, keep writing your congressmen, everything little bit helps, but now more importantly write our generals, colonels, and military officers and tell them you will not stand for an attack on Iran. Keep putting the pressure on them, tell them you have their full support for standing up to the illegitimate chicken-hawk crazy who is the commander in chief.
Have made many lengthy posts recently, and I promise this is the last for awhile. I submitted this to my local paper and it was printed (I guarantee it is exactly 500 words, the maximum allowable.)
January 18, 2007
To The Editor:
It is now a matter of historical fact that the accusations were proved untrue – those claims traceable solely to the presidential administration of George Bush - which forced a war upon Iraq and America.
As that understanding has taken root we’ve also witnessed how the Bush Administration, under growing evidence of being manipulative and incompetent, deflected censure and inquiry by unveiling a larger more ominous intention than merely illegally launching pre-emptive war against a threat that did not exist. George Bush’s present gambit is to assert that authority for all further military decisions – as Commander In Chief – falls to him naturally from the Resolution Authorizing Force Against Iraq. But it certainly does not; that document is purposely specific to goals in Iraq, and authorizes no use of force against other unnamed sovereign nations in pursuit of that declared resolution.
The duty of a president as commander in chief is to ensure the effective and responsible use of our military forces, as formally authorized and committed by the nation as a whole. An attack against Iran or any other nation under the guise of pursuing the writ against Iraq, puts this nation, by default, at war with that sovereign nation, a course never authorized by that document. Without consultation or debate and without gaining the consent of the citizens of this democracy, without acquiring a lawfully proposed and ratified Declaration Of War from our constitutionally empowered representatives, George Bush attempts to usurp powers, duties, and responsibilities that were never the right or the necessity of the executive.
Following along a now-familiar pattern of accusation, escalating threats, and crisis mongering, George Bush appears determined to attack the sovereign nation of Iran without the consent, authority, or ratification of the nation to which he is liable. This Administration attempts to maneuver quickly, as always, before a unified opposition can prevent them from launching our bombs and missiles upon the nation and people of Iran.
The Iranian threat insisted upon by this presidential administration is neither imminent nor proven. It resembles the Iraq accusations.
If there is any greatness left in Americans of the 21st Century, we must prove it now by demanding that actions taken in our country’s name reflect the sense and the will of the majority, our shared clearer sense and wrongfully ignored will until now stymied against the counterproductive results of a failed ideology and the furtive machinations of a dangerously failing leadership.
There is no other business or issue pending before the Houses of Congress of the elected representatives of this nation that is now more pressing or necessary than the reaffirmation of the sole authority of the American people, through these elected representatives, to declare war upon another sovereign state. Both Houses must immediately pass strong and unified binding resolutions alerting our most senior military leadership that any order to attack the nation of Iran, or any other nation, is null and void without a formal Declaration of War by the Congress of the United States of America.
Respectfully,
Vince Lawrence
The planners pulling the strings of the US government are surely anticipating resistance both in the military and the civilian population and are also aware that the military is already overextended. It seems to me very likely that the recent “accidental” movement of nuclear armed cruise missles is part of preperations to do the Iran thing in spite of these potential difficulties. Making a big radioactive mess wouldn’t really interfere with US corporate control of the oil and downwind is just China, so they may well be thinking, why not?
The idea that a senior US military officer would more loyal to his nation (a land and its people) than the chain of command and his career is so totally alien to how the US military works it will never happen. If it had a chance, they’d have begged the US poplace to vote out Bush/Cheney in 2004.
How badly things have gotten, the antiwar people looking to the military as their last hope. et tu Petra? Probably not, but we can hope. How much would that shake things up? the military refusing an executive order!?
The most troubling line in the article was, in reference to a US attack on Iran;
“It would open US forces in Iraq to decimation by Iranian forces or their Iraqi allies”.
Were that to happen, say goodbye to any antiwar efforts. There would likely be an outcry from the American public, regardless of how bad things are now. It would become a rallying cry for an even larger conflict. The consequences of which we can only imagine.
Why not take it a step further? We now have enough “insider” confirmation that our military was used illegally to aggressively invade a sovereign nation solely to steal/control resources. Plus, the FISA statute specially states that even a sitting President can be arrested for violations; Bush has proudly confessed to violating FISA and vowed to continue.
Our Military takes an oath to protect and defend the Constitution from enemies foreign and domestic. There is way more than enough evidence that the entire Bush administration is one of the most dangerous domestic Constitution enemies in our history. If this were an episode of “Law and Order,” the Grand Jury would have handed down indictments long ago.
It’s time for our Military to exercise our last option: arrest the Executive Branch before it’s too late.
Extraordinary times require extraordinary courage; America’s men and women are up to the challenge.
I damn sure don’t want to see a military coup. I spent 21 years with those people. Most of them are batshit nut’s. Trust me on this one.
Thomas, I agree with you. I think it is a very dangerous road to be considering going down. It’s tragically ironic that we would even think in these terms given that the Constitution is a doctrine written to prevent military domination.
A “surgical strike” is a misnomer probably concocted by Cheney. Once the first bomb is dropped, there is no telling what will ensue. It is, however, a sexy sounding name, like it’s sister “min-nuke.”
There are many excellent reasons not to wage any sort of war on Iran. But the most important one is Osama bin Laden. If we go into Iran his group, Al Queda, will gain so many members they will likely overwhelm us. An invasion of Iran is exactly what bin Laden hopes for.
Anyone ever hear of the term “fragging” during the Vietnam War?
http://home.mweb.co.za/re/redcap/vietcrim.htm
Just scroll down a little ways and check it out.
One has to wonder….if there were a Constitutional mutiny of the U.S. Military from many top brass on down, would all the corporate mercenaries in Iraq and in the United States (Blackwater, Triple Canopy etc.), who are being paid three times that of our enlisted men and women have more allegiance to “protect” the Constitution, the People and our enlisted military working under the Uniform Code of Military Justice….or those whose asses they’ve been “protecting”?
This is a cross post, but it suddenly seems apropos here. This was concerning the discussion about the cruise missile armed B-52 that flew across the United States.
Unless I misread the timing on this incident, it took place about the time Israel hit Syria. If the B-52 were airborne, with six live missiles on board, and the Syrian raid had unleashed a strong reaction, all it would take is a go code from CENTCOM to divert to Iran. If it weren’t fully tanked up, a refueling could take place enroute. Essentially, no one would know about this attack except a few “Top Secret or above” cleared personnel. The first thing we would know about it was when the missiles hit their targets in Iran and possibly Syria and Iran launched a counterattack. Possibly this could be the first thing that the military knew about it also.
I have a hunch that the only thing that put that bomber down at Barksdale was the lack of response from Syria for the apparently unprovoked “pre-emptive” raid on its facilities.
This gang is looking for any excuse, and it is rumored that they occasionally cooperate very closely with Israel.
I don’t know if this is too Machiavellian or not, but I wouldn’t put anything past this gang. Consider the fact that the military has repeatedly expressed reluctance to go to war with Iran, for many reasons.
If the above mentioned bomber, or some other secret mission had succeeded in “Pearl Harboring” Iran, Iran would have no choice but to strike back in self defense, not to mention they would have the same feelings we had in December of ‘41.
Our military would then have to go for broke as it would then be under attack itself. The neocons would win again and we would be involved in a total war, despite sanity and misgivings amongst our own general staff.
I have written my alleged representatives many times, asking them to carefully evaluate any black op (aka false flag) that seems to point us towards a war, before jumping on the bandwagon. Remember the Maine and the Gulf of Tonkin, and perhaps 9-11 (the jury is still out on that one).
The ultimate black op would be a sneak attack upon Iran, by, say, one bomber laden with nuclear cruise missiles. Dr Strangelove lives?
Military makes it possible to continue the illegal war of aggression war in Iraq, and it’s the military that will make the war in Iran.
So, they are part of the problem. So, don;t support the troop - condemn the troops.
Paranoid Pessimist–
Thanks for posting te lyrics to “Universal Soldier”
It is past time to stop with the “support our troops” crap. When they click their heels and chant, “sir, yes sir!” to anything they are told to do, they, by their actions, are accessories to the war crimes of the executive and furthermore they are in no way “our troops” but rather “the President’s troops”.
I think the best way to support our troops is to get them the hell out of Iraq and Afghanistan and bring them home. Then, get rid of the lying bastards that started this whole thing in the first place.
Then, we have to take a deep breath, borrow Diogenes’ lamp and start looking for some honest people to form a representative government which follows the Constitution that created it.
Unfortunately, statesmen are in very short supply these days. Usually, if one does turn up and it appears they can survive the ritual character assassinations, they get killed by a very well organized cadre of “lone crazed assassins.”
A nice lot of scenarios here on what should be done with our disastrous mess we are in, but I believe most also know none of them will happen. Much more likely is some time before the elections, another “terrorist attack”, real or staged will take place at the proper time to throw the American people off balance and all bets will be off on what will happen to our war involvment or to our fair and balanced elections. These people in power now do not intend to give up easily as everything is going their way and no thought is given to consequences of their radical actions.
If they had any sense they would overthrow the current administration and replace it with a temporary Admin. headed by Nancy Pelosi (enabler)until we can get some free and fair elections in this country. Thank god they are loyal to a fault… I’ve seen what happens when guys who mean well take over with M16s or AKs and what happens to the people who support them. And I ain’t talkin’ about Castro or Hugo. Fascist are attacking we must drive them back!
Ran across this link, which ties in with my speculations above.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=6909
namvet67:
never ever ever thought i would think and say this..
i agree!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ken
Paranoid Pessimist, Buffy, and some of you can blame the soldiers, and in some sense she and you are right. But there’s a whole lot more truth in this one..
Masters of War Bob Dylan
Come you masters of war
You that build all the guns
You that build the death planes
You that build the big bombs
You that hide behind walls
You that hide behind desks
I just want you to know
I can see through your masks
You that never done nothin’
But build to destroy
You play with my world
Like it’s your little toy
You put a gun in my hand
And you hide from my eyes
And you turn and run farther
When the fast bullets fly
Like Judas of old
You lie and deceive
A world war can be won
You want me to believe
But I see through your eyes
And I see through your brain
Like I see through the water
That runs down my drain
You fasten the triggers
For the others to fire
Then you set back and watch
When the death count gets higher
You hide in your mansion
As young people’s blood
Flows out of their bodies
And is buried in the mud
You’ve thrown the worst fear
That can ever be hurled
Fear to bring children
Into the world
For threatening my baby
Unborn and unnamed
You ain’t worth the blood
That runs in your veins
How much do I know
To talk out of turn
You might say that I’m young
You might say I’m unlearned
But there’s one thing I know
Though I’m younger than you
Even Jesus would never
Forgive what you do
Let me ask you one question
Is your money that good
Will it buy you forgiveness
Do you think that it could
I think you will find
When your death takes its toll
All the money you made
Will never buy back your soul
And I hope that you die
And your death’ll come soon
I will follow your casket
In the pale afternoon
And I’ll watch while you’re lowered
Down to your deathbed
And I’ll stand o’er your grave
‘Til I’m sure that you’re dead
The only way for the military to stop a war with Iran is for each officer in the chain of command to refuse the illegal orders. Big Saturday night massacre.
A Robert Bork type would take the orders, but if you got enough officers the soldiers might refuse as well.
Of course, Blackwater would go right ahead.
it’s time for all of us to
WAKE UP!
and
STAND DOWN!
NOW!
1st Lt. Ehren Watada is demonstrating his Constitutional right to “STAND DOWN”, to refuse deployment to Iraq, on the grounds that the U$ invasion of Iraq was and is an ILLEGAL ACT OF WAR perpetrated by the Cheney/Bush administration. Participation in an
illegal war would be a Constitutional violation based on the enlistment oath he took, to uphold the Constitution.
We need, NOW, to FOCUS on Watada’s efforts, to join with him in insisting that the Truth of the legality or illegality of the War on Iraq,
be Judicially and Legislatively determined . . . Now!
Perhaps, we, like Ehren Watada, have a Constitutional basis in our rights and responsibilities, to “Stand Down”, by demanding that the percentage of our taxes that goes to anything related to the war this administration has caused in Iraq and plans in Iran, be with-held, until the question of the legality of the Iraq invasion is determined.
(on the grounds that the use of our taxes for an illegal war makes us
criminally complicit with those who perpetrated the crime(s)
Watada’s trial is coming up at the end of this month unless it is postponed again.
Let’s join with him ~ get the words out, WAKE UP!
STAND DOWN!
NOW!
The image came to mind, of posters, bumper stickers, lawn signs . . . of an upside down Flag covering the background, with those words in bright green capital letters, front and center.
Start with this image . . . the Flag in distress, and the words.
Just an idea for a collective image, simply stated and right to the point, to anchor us, collectively. Make your own, or if you have the means print some off, turn the image into a fund raiser for the election of Truth-Full political candidates . . . let the ideas unfold.
We must help each other to stay focused and target all “legal” actions at exposing Truth at the root level, the rest will unfold like dominoes set in a maze.
We must keep our focus in spite of the seemingly unending destabilizations and media seductions that aim to distract us from our collective aim.
WAKE UP AND STAND DOWN for the TRUTH, NOW!
first, the Truth of the U$ invasion of Iraq
second, the Truth of 9-11
Get creative by staying Legal and being prepared to be generous,
frugal, and increasing personal self sufficiency, as we meet the uncertain consequences of our collective efforts to “midwife” the unfolding of the Truth of this apparent nightmare.
If nothing else, keep Truth and Ehren Watada in your thoughts and/or prayers as his efforts unfold.
His work may well provide the moral/spiritual “checkmate” we so desperately need in this time.
So, if the military stands down, will Israel stand up and do their dirty work? Haven’t they been ramping up military ‘aid’ to Israel?
As far as the US military top brass is concerned, the appeal will fall on deaf ears. Just look at the name: Military/Industrial/Complex. Is it difficult to see that the military is part of the problem? In fact, the war machine is the main problem.
In the Nuremberg trials it was not only the civilians but also the military personnel who were tried and executed. By comparison, the top military brass are already war criminals because with so much information already out, they cannot plead that they didn’t know that Iraq war was illegal and a war crime and crime against humanity. So, we the people are appealing to the war criminals, like sheep appealing to the wolves.
They may feel a false sense of security that they will be victors and no one will be able to try and execute them. The Nazis thought the same way.
I think that our military will execute an attack on Iran if they are ordered. I come from a predominantly military town and see the Bush/Cheney 2004 stickers all the time. These wingnuts can’t wait to “kill for Jesus”.
Here’s an example of one of today’s editorials:
WHAT BUSH DID RIGHT
In her letter (”Just what has Bush done right? Oct. 2) Hilda Huggins called President Bush a warmonger and pathological liar. She also attacked his supporters. I will not dignify her remarks with a response other then to say she embodies the success the liberal media and left-wing Bush hate groups have had in brainwashing many Americans.
However, to educate her here are some of President Bush’s accomplishments from his first term 2001-2004 that the liberal media can’t cover up.
He successfully executed two wars, in Afghanistan and Iraq, in the aftermath of 9/11. Over 50 million people who had lived under tyrannical regimes now live in freedom. He banned partial birth abortion. He signed two income tax cuts, one of which was the largest dollar-value tax cut in world history. He changed the tone in the White House, restoring honor and dignity to the presidency. He signed the No Child Left Behind Act, delivering the most dramatic education reforms in a generation. He killed U.S. participation in the Kyoto Global Warming Treaty that has proven to be a disaster.
We will discuss accomplishments from Bush’s second term in a later class.
This is the day to day lunacy I live with. Maybe it’s time to move. I hear Seattle is pretty sane.
If America attacked Iran there is a good chance that much of our Navy fleet would be destroyed in the Persian Gulf. Ship’s don’t have much defense against the Russian missles the Iranians have.
But with the questionable loyalty to the USA of Bush and his handlers this might just be the outcome they want. They have inflicted more damage on the U.S. than they have anyone else and from my perspective I personally believe this must be what the really wanted to achieve. To destroy the U.S. from within.
TheLorax, I feel your pain, I see the same drivel in the editorials here in Northern Florida. I can only shake my head and try to figure how these people can possibly be so stupid and yet, still remember to breath in and out unassisted…
If any of you have been to the moveon.org site recently you will notice that the General Petraeus ad is gone. It isn’t even in the archives. So Moveon.org has been whipped. Others are sure to follow. WAKE UP AMERICA! The first major internet censorship is upon you.
Kristina -
So we’re in the same dirty pond. I don’t think it’s so much that these people are stupid (Unless you get really close to Alabama), I think they genuinely don’t care. As long as they aren’t personally affected, they just don’t care about the country, the troops, or their freedom.
The ad is FROM Northern Florida
TheLorax___In reference to your post about all of Bush`s “accomplishments” and how he has brought honor and dignity back to the white house_____Are you kidding, or are you nuts?
The guy that wrote about all those ‘accomplishments’ (an editorial in today’s news) is clearly uninformed and fanatical. His writing expresses a point of view that can only be described as fantasy. In his mind, it is reality. I posted that in an effort to show the kind of mental attitude existing among some Americans. It is prevalent in our military force as a whole.
The article implies that the US Military may ‘revolt’ to stop an attack on Iran but I do not believe that will be the case. The only way to prevent an attack on Iran is to stop the order from being given.
Guys, as I said so many times before - there are a few million this side of the Atlantic who will be with you when the time comes………………
BROTHERS HOLDIN TRUE”
Words By Roger Carter
Music By Barry David Butler
(c) 2006 All Rights Reserved
Filed USA and UK protected under Berne Convention
We’ll stand together
And see it through
Rock steady firm
That’s what brothers do
Gonna beat the odds
And claim victory
Just stand firm, brothers
And trust in me
(Chorus)
No way we’ll give in, give up or lose
True grit, it saw us through
No way we’ll quit,
We’ve come this far
Brothers holdin’ true
Faced the dangers
And risked it all
Knew we had to win
No way that we would fall
We bit the bullet
And held our nerve
Courage was the word
Made the winning call
(Chorus)
No way we’ll give in, give up or lose
True grit it saw us through
No way we’ll quit,
We’ve come this far
Brothers holdin’ true
We stood together
And saw it through
Rock steady, firm
That’s what brothers do
Gonna beat the odds
Claim victory
Just stand firm brother
And trust in me
(Chorus)
No way we’ll give in, give up or lose
True grit it saw us through
No way we’ll quit, We’ve come this far
Brothers holdin’ true
“A TIME FOR HEROES”
Words by Roger Antony Carter
Music by Barry David Butler
(c) 2006 All Rights Reserved
Intro
Are they about, well give ‘em a shout
If you know one or two, and surely you do
The hour has arrived, and if we’re to survive
To survive
Dark forces move about
In the Land Of The Free
Who will be on hand
To save our destiny
This is a time for heroes
A time for men of steel
This is a time for heroes
Men…who are real
(Repeat Chorus)
History has placed its call
Why can’t they hear
Will they get here in time
When will they appear
Dark forces, they march on
Threatening liberty
We cannot let them win
Or rule by decree
(Repeat Chorus)
Dark forces move about
In the land of the free
Who will be on hand
To save our destiny
This is a time for heroes
A time for men of steel
This is a time for heroes
Men…who are real
(Repeat Chorus)
Kristina40, I mentioned this a few weeks ago also — and just sent the following letter about this article to ‘The Nation’:
This article and its analysis of the valiant efforts of the principled antiwar left to appeal to “the generals” to avoid the next war of Empire in the Middle East is hopeful, but perhaps does not take into account the reality of how the Bush/Cheney global corporate Empire hiding behind the facade of “Vichy America” has already raised defenses against any such failsafe. Unfortunately, the senior military resistance/revolt had been the only force holding Bush back and was the only possible check on the Empire’s war plans.
I had long ago concluded that Democrat and US public resistance would be a non-issue against pre-emptive (and nuclear) expansion of the Empire’s oil-war from Iraq to Iran. I had long ago concluded that the only hope was in “the generals.” But now the global corporate fascist war Empire behind this facade of “Vichy America” has even thrown out the last defense of the generals (including Peter Pace, who aborted the February 2007 war launch plan)–and brought in their own war admiral, “Mad Dog” Mullen.
There is no question that military revolts have been the only thing standing in the way of the Empire’s planned nuclear war in Iran. In fact, there have already been several military revolts, starting with Pace’s clear instructions to his senior officers that they are “not to carry out illegal and/or immoral orders” in February–which stopped the Empire’s first planned war launch, and predictably got him removed by the Empire as Joint Chief’s Chairman–right up to the latest military revolt, just recently, to abort Cheney’s planned B-52, ACM/W-80 nuclear bomb “accidental strike.”
However, notwithstanding Cheney’s premature ejaculation of nuke cruise missiles on the aborted B-52 scam, the Empire will not have long to wait in launching their long planned “global strike,” pre-emptive, nuclear attack on Iran with the cover of entirely legal means–thanks to the installation by the Empire of their preferred nuclear spear carriers, Admiral Mullen and his spacebot bomber side-kick, StratCom “Ripper” Cartwright. Aided and politically endorsed by the AIPAC-drafted and -greased US Senate passage of the “attack Iran now” vote a few weeks ago.
Note, for those who do not remember (including the MSM from their own reporting) Admiral “Quick Trigger” Mullen is the one, who as CNO during the Iran/British seaman capture dust-up, infamously growled that “if that had happened to my sailors there would have been shots fired–even if it started a war.” Perhaps that was the cameo role and performance that earned Admiral “War-Starter” Mullen his new stripes.
Or for those who continue to hold out hope against the next phase of this war, perhaps that hope in the generals will be replaced by hope in a battle of the admirals–as we learn that Admiral William Fallon seems to be willing to take on his subordinate General Petraeus (whom Fallon called an “ass-kissing chickenshit”) in reducing the war in the Middle East–this “constant drumbeat of conflict” concerning Iran, said Admiral William Fallon, head of the US Central Command, is “not helpful and not useful.” Fallon wants to head off such talk. “There will be no war.”
So will it be Admiral Mullen ordering the war, and Admiral Fallon holding back the nuclear holocaust? The only problem here is that Mullen (and Cartwright) out-rank Fallon–by a lot.
* Alan MacDonald
*
* Sanford, ME
Kristina, while Admiral Fallon is indeed a bright spot regarding the Bush/Cheney/AIPAC/oil industry plans for war on Iran, keep in mind that the commanding power in the military has just been preemptively changed by this Bush cabal to the hands of reliable nuclear war launchers in the roles of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and Vice Chairman from the Stratcom command that would actually launch any Global Strike (aka CONPLAN 8022). Keep track of your Admirals. This is a game of good cop/bad cop.
TheLorax, I’m in “LA” or lower Alabama aka Panama City Fl. I’m gonna opt for the ’stupid’ choice for most here. They believe whatever they are told to believe and proudly display their “W Still the President” bumper stickers right next to their yellow, magnetic “Support the Troops” stickers on their pick ‘em up trucks with the gunracks and monster tires…
amacd, I agree with what you are saying, it’s a long shot at best and I know the deck has been stacked but I still believe there are men of principle in our military that will stand up. My father was Army for 35 years and a lifelong Republican but in the end before he passed he absolutely HATED Bush and all he stood for, and that was before he got re-elected.
kengarjagalouski - I never thought I would believe it either. I used to love my country.
Hoa binh
Kristina -
Lucky you. I’m in Pensacola, the armpit of Alabama.
The people here have said “Bush paid me $500. Gore didn’t pay me nothin’. Anybody wants to pay me more then I’ll give ‘em my vote! Until then it’s Bush!”
The thought process here is to punch your way out of an intellectual conversation, especially at Wal-Mart.
Isn’t there a name for a situation when a military “arrests” elected members of the government in order to “preserve” the state?
I amazed that in the end, even many members of the progressive community in America has a profound trust in its nation’s military, a trust that transends even its electoral process.
I cannot think of any modern democracy that would ever consider allowing their military to act outside of elected authority.
Are there no electoral system solutions?
-can’t a district recall their congressman/woman through petitions if they don’t do what they promised to do?
-what about your impeachment process?
IT seems to me that if the majority of American’s really felt there was a serious problem, there would be processes in place that could be activated inside the political system.
TheLorax implies that many people in his hometown WANT war with Iran. Therefore the problem may not be GWB, but really its amongst yourselves - among your own neighbours.
PErhaps there is a great divide in the general public, in the vast middle centre of America. And most of you just cannot accept that conflict, but would rather believe in some sort of conspiracy theory.
Politicians follow the polls at election time, and if even the American democratic candidates are leaning “pro-war” than it implies the majority of Americans are slightly leaning the same way. That is the simple explaination, and the simple explaination is usually the right one.
Is my simple logic here just plain nieve?
Love the positive direction of the article.
“Frankly, I think the military would revolt and there would be no pilots to fly those missions.”
EXCEPT… The author makes a BIG assumption. That laws will prevent a strike or any other type of military action in the world. People, especially Industrial Military Complex Corporations have profit quotas to meet and we think they will just lay down and abide by “laws” - National or International. HA! That’s what False Flag Operations were invented to avoid - laws and logic.
For awareness sake and to know what tricks our murderous challengers may pose and for those of us that are new to the idea of False Flag Ops (Operations) and the like I have provided a quick reading list:
False Flags operations - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag
Black Op missions often fall into the deniability category, where no government will claim responsibility for the action, or where responsibility is shifted to another actor in the case of a “false flag” operation. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_op
Covert operation - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covert_operations
Clandestine Operation - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clandestine_operation
Black bag operation - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Bag_Operations
Blowback - a term now broadly used in espionage to describe the unintended consequences of covert operations. Blowback typically appears random and without cause, because the public is unaware of the secret operations that provoked it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowback_%28intelligence%29
Proxy soldiers/Proxy war - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_war
Plausible deniability - term given to the creation of loose and informal chains of command in governments and other large organizations. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plausible_deniability
Compos Mentis,
JD