Military chief warns against striking Iran

Aamer Madhani
Chicago Tribune
Friday, July 4, 2008

The words Wednesday from Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, were notable for their blunt pragmatism: An Israeli airstrike on Iran would be high-risk and could further destabilize the region, leading to political and economic chaos.

On Iran’s western border, the U.S. military is more than five years into a war in Iraq that has taken 4,113 American lives and cost U.S. taxpayers more than $600 billion. And on Iran’s eastern border, American commanders are now openly questioning whether they have lost their way in the fight against a resurgent Taliban.

Israel, the United States’ closest ally in the Middle East, has refused to rule out a strike against Iranian nuclear sites, and this week’s New Yorker magazine reported that the U.S. has stepped up its covert operations inside Iran.

(Article continues below)

While President George W. Bush repeated Wednesday that a military strike remains an option, Mullen’s words of caution underscored the Pentagon’s belief that a move against Iran—by the U.S. or one of its allies—would have an undeniable effect on the ongoing U.S. missions in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“Opening up a third front right now would be extremely stressful on us,” Mullen acknowledged during a Pentagon news conference. He added moments later, “This is a very unstable part of the world, and I don’t need it to be more unstable.”

The White House, Israel and Western powers say Iran continues to work toward producing nuclear weapons. Iran says its nuclear program is intended only for generating electricity. This week, Iran’s foreign minister struck a conciliatory tone when speaking to reporters about the possibility of Tehran agreeing to suspend its uranium enrichment program.

READ THE REST.

• 
• Social bookmarks
• 
• Email this article
• 
• Print this page

Comment Terms Of Use

9 Responses to “Military chief warns against striking Iran”

1. RayB Says:
   July 4th, 2008 at 7:35 am

   They never thought of saying “NO” to Bush?

2. ThePatriot Says:
   July 4th, 2008 at 8:20 am

   World War II last ONLY 5 years. When wars like this last this long they are INTENDED to last… for as long as the Public will continue to sponsor the war.

   Starting yet another war is a military blunder, but one which greedy idiots or tyrants cannot resist as Hitler.

   Bush is most dangerous from now until he is replaced.

3. moi Says:
   July 4th, 2008 at 10:04 am

   Greed will be the downfall of these tyrants. When I say tyrants i am of course referring to Cheney, Rice and Bush. And the cronies behind the scene. War criminals the lot of them. A country that defends and adopts as policy, the ideas of one of histories most evil, ruthless and cowardly men, Henry Kissinger, lost its way a long, long time ago. America is dying a slow, drawn out death.

4. beagle Says:
   July 4th, 2008 at 10:19 am

   It is not Bush that is the problem. Bush just signs the final documents and gives the green light. It is Cheney and his neo-con cronies that are the problem. They’ve envisioned this almost a decade ago.

   I also put large blame on the mainstream media who are complicit in deceiving the American public about what is truly going on in Iran. It’s much easier for them to put up “Iranians developing Nukes” in their headlines, than it is to explain the real truth about the Iranian intentions.

   You want to see $15/gallon of gas? You want the whole middle class to be wiped out? You want America to go trillion more in debt? You want more of our soldiers dying for another illegal war? You want Iranians hellbent to revenge the death of their loved ones? You want the whole Muslim community world wide to stand against the US? You want mass chaos in the Middle East? You want our economy to go into a major depression? If so, then go ahead and attack Iran.

5. Masked Phrogg Says:
   July 4th, 2008 at 12:52 pm

   From the article:
   ======================================================
   And on Iran’s eastern border, American commanders are now openly questioning whether they have lost their way in the fight against a resurgent Taliban.
   ======================================================
   WTF?
   Taliban were our ALLIES not so long ago. They even ERADICATED opium production in Afghanistan. WHY are we fighting them? They successfully worked toward and obtained many of the supposed goals our government allegedly were seeking for the area. Bush, Cheney, Rice, et al have successfully foiled attempts at democratic representative government in the area. Answer is simple. Get US troops out of sovereign nations and return to Monroe Doctrine principles.
   So emphatically YES! We have “lost our way” in foreign relations with former allies.

6. DABIGRAGU Says:
   July 4th, 2008 at 2:15 pm

   RayB: “They never thought of saying “NO” to Bush?”
   Heavens no! “They” are all the same.

7. will hale Says:
   July 4th, 2008 at 3:10 pm

   beagle i agree with what you have said,however bush is the DECIDER remember,he could decide to use the higher part of his brain and flush cheney’s plans down the drain.
   Bush is the man responsible,he has spent 8 years systematically dismantling your freedoms (i am an aussie )your country has lost all respect i travel the globe constantly and all i hear is how bad this man is.Seriously, the Soviet Union in its hey day was not as bad as the U.S. is today.
   9/11 was the start of this downhill slide it is vitally important the truth of that event is exposed to the masses.

8. yellowhak1 Says:
   July 4th, 2008 at 6:57 pm

   like ron paul said who gave us the moral authority, legal authority, and international authority to bomb, nuke, or starve people to death? and he wasnt just talking about iraq either.

9. R0CR Says:
   July 4th, 2008 at 7:51 pm

   Deek says it best

   http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=KGMEn1gnCTs