Adm. Mullen on FOX: "Right now I'm fighting 2 wars, and I don't need a third one..."
By SilentPatriot Saturday Jul 19, 2008 5:00pm
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Admiral Mike Mullen, appeared on FOX today and delivered a message that's sure to upset Bill Kristol and the rest of the neocon armchair generals.
Download | play 
Download | play (h/t Dan)
WALLACE: I want to ask you two questions about Iran. How do you weigh as a military man, as the top military man, the downside risk if either the U.S. or Israel were to militarily strike Iran in terms of blowback from Iran and its allies in the region, increased turmoil in that area, increased turmoil in the oil market?
MULLEN: I think it would be significant. I worry about it a lot. I've said when I've been asked this before right now I'm fighting two wars, and I don't need a third one. [...]
But I worry about the instability in that part of the world and, in fact, the possible unintended consequences of a strike like that and, in fact, having an impact throughout the region that would be difficult to both predict exactly what it would be and then the actions that we would have to take to contain it.
Login or Register to post comments.
But he's an Admiral and Bush only listens to the "Generals".
I know a certain Adm. that may be forced to find a new job soon... Unfortunately...
That's unbelievable! I thought Fox News screened for guys like that first!
(the late-day rerun will probably bleep out the sentence)
Why don't the Neo-cons fight in the war itself? I guess it's OK to send other peoples children (i.e.poor and middle class) to do their dirty work for them.
Don't listen to Mullen.
He's a military guy under civilian control.
He will not tell the truth.
He will say what he is supposed to say.
Ignore him.
Seek the truth.
Bush seems intent on starting the 3rd world war.
theWalrus @ 1:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Shinseki
Uh...only the ACTIVE DUTY ones. And, it's also handy if you can fire the ones who don't say what you want them to say.
Admiral Mullen is such a socialist coward hand wringing liberal. I hope Mr. Kristol set him straight.
;)
Didn't somebody send the IRAN WAR MEMO to the Joint Chiefs?
I didn't send it. I thought you sent it!
Goddamned it. WHO was supposed to send it?
Time to call up the 666th fighting neocons...only the best!
theWalrus @ 1:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Shinseki
"...until he gets tired of listening to them, and then he replaces them."
--Wesley Clark
Why does Admiral Mullen hate freedom?
Congress should draft a bill to reinstate the draft and send it to Bush to Sign.
jiminyjilliker @ 10:
Don't we have to bring freedom and democracy to Iran? We can't leave them out.
Yeah Ron, Every morning when I get up, I'm terrified to learn if we invaded or used airstrikes or not. God I hate neo-cons!
Random musings this brings up in my mind . . . .
So Israel can have nukes, but no one else?
I'd love to see Bill K the millionare's sone argue with this man who is actually in the militiary.
Cynical suspicious me says all the anti-Iran saber rattling was intended to drive up oil prices and thus weath transfer, as well as to soften up public sentiment to
allow ANWAR and offshore drilling. It is any coencidence oil prices drop at the same time there are initial US-Iran diplomaitc moves. Watch for troop withdrawls, diplomatic agreements with Iran and gas prices to drop just before the election.
tz @ 14:
Billo says that we the people did it by not buying as much gas. If we could use the gas that Billo spews for fuel, we could put the oil companies out of business.
They need MORE war, MORE chaos (the better), because that is "the" way they can E-A-S-I-L-Y gain more control over the people, in their time of fear and struggling with EXTREME poverty. You got nuthin? There are 600+ camps to choose from. Hope it ain't the biggest one in Alaska. From the constant, repeatative History Channel programs, on anything and everything about Alaska, it don't look very comfortable.
They THRIVE on, gain more power, and make RECORD PROFITS, after any and all types of DISASTERS. That's the NWO way.
It is DESTINCTLY in their PLANS of world domination, which has already started.
Here is my general rule for predicting what Bush will do next: If it will raise the price of oil, it will happen.
VietVet8666 @ 5:
You're right....we'll ignore Mullen because, according to you "He will say what he is supposed to say". We'll all listen to you instead since you seem so much more qualified....dope.
tz @ 14:
Even if Iran acquires nukes, i think there's less chance of them using them than either Israel or the U.S. It sure would set up an interesting power dynamic in the Middle East, for the first time Israel would have to deal with it's neighbors as equals. What an appalling thought.
One of the consequences of striking Iran by either Israel or the U.S. will be the destruction of the U.S.Navy within range of Iran's missles. Possibly the sinking of a flattop. Admiral Mullen knows from whence he speaks.
You're fighting two wars, Admiral Mike Mullen, but tell us again, why are we fighting and what will we "win?"
Doesnt Admiral Mullen know the expression 'third time lucky'
Bushco desperately needs WW3 for the rapture to occur, and pardons for all for them.
He better get his ass in gear, with 7 +/- months to go w/ B/C running the show the thirst for blood hasn't been sated by a long shot. You got to figure they plan to go out w/ a bigger bang than anything we've seen so far.
Thank you, Tyr! Someone decided to restrain the followers of the Palestinian war god for a change!
Oh, I'm I supposed to be suprised that this Admiral has common sense?
"ISRAEL will almost surely attack Iran’s nuclear sites in the next four to seven months — and the leaders in Washington and even Tehran should hope that the attack will be successful enough to cause at least a significant delay in the Iranian production schedule, if not complete destruction, of that country’s nuclear program. Because if the attack fails, the Middle East will almost certainly face a nuclear war — either through a subsequent pre-emptive Israeli nuclear strike or a nuclear exchange shortly after Iran gets the bomb..."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/18/opinion/18morris.html
now bring adm. fallon on faux....you remember him the commander that was getting pressured to resign because
he wants withdrawl and diplomacy
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=58325§ionid=3510203
burnt @ 7:
Yeah, the Admiral better find a secret location to hide in before tough guy Billy finds him and goes one on one with "his" facts. Mullen just doesn't realize what Big Bad Bloody Billy is capable of doing to him.
Left&Left @ 28:
And, wasn't it Rumsfeld who whined about all these senior military brass who "don't want to fight"? I seem to recall something like that.
Obviously.....Admiral Mullen wants to spend more time with his family......
How about no wars, is that too much to expect from our government.
The second American Revolution is being fought, right now, within the Armed Forces of the United States, in American homes, workplaces, schools and houses of worship. God help the ruling class and their stooges if they drive it into the streets. There is no Roosevelt or New Deal to save them this time. Yes, Virginia, the rhetoric of the American people is becoming as militant as it is desperate. Imagine that. Although we are lazy and self indulgent, we are unaccustomed to authoritarian rule or to aristocratic pretension and will not likely tolerate it, even for cheap gas and certainly not without it.
Jeff F @ 33:
Look, you can't expect the oil companies to offer fair prices for other country's resources when they can use our military to steal their resources at the expense of the American taxpayer and then charge the consumers, which is just about everyone, outrages prices for oil that we payed for with our military might.
Wow, such truthfulness and candor from a non-retired military officer. He'll be gone by the end of the week.
We're right there with you Admiral. The majority of the nation and the planet are holding their collective breaths that Chimp & Cheney won't start a 3rd war before January 2009.
Admiral Mullen, Admiral Fallon, and General Pace have put the kibosh on Cheney's bomb Iran plan up until this point BUT I am sorry to say that Cheney looks like he is in the process of winning this chess game. The diplomacy has done what it was supposed to do which is cause a stalemate. The Iranians have rejected the idea of halting uranium enrichment today.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/20/world/middleeast/20nuke.html
The United States has given them two weeks to comply.
http://news.google.com/news?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Ao...
When the two weeks are up Bush will enact the blockade that will most likely have passed through Congress at that point. It now has over 220 cosponsors in the House and over 30 cosponsors in the Senate. HR 362 and SR 580
http://www.campaigniran.org/casmii/index.php?q=node/5562
Cheney's plan is so transparent. I have been asking this site to post something about HR 362 for the last three weeks. Ultimately, I am not sure there would have been any way to stop it. But this whole thing has been quite maddening. What we have on this site is the same thing that we have in this country--- a reactionary left that is only good at whining after the decisions have already been made.
The game is not finished. Putin, Ahmedinejad, and people like Mullen will still do their best to stop it. But the American people need to start becoming more active instead of saying, "It can't happen here."
America rules the waves. Anybody here think this administration likes the idea of the Iranians putting a pipeline through Pakistan or Afghanistan to either the Indians or the Chinese? Here's a map:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=iran&ie=UTF8&ll=30.3728...
Gosh, looks like they could be selling their oil to someone besides us, and getting it out some other way than through the Persian Gulf.
Admiral - thank you for your service, but today especially, thank you for your honesty and candor.
*
sulphurdunn @ 34:
Unused to it? Guess the history of the Antebellum South or how the Founders were an aristocracy in all but name doesn't register, hmm? The Antebellum South was an aristocratic, I'd even venture oligarchic, dare even use the term despotic region, and it was as American as American can be. The Founders were also an aristocracy. Hell, the 1% with 40% of the wealth is an aristocracy! Where are you getting this stuff from?
BobbyG @ 28:
Dick Morris is a Bushcon. Israel won't be so stupid, they have a tremendous advantage over Iran in nukes but with its conventional arsenal Iran would bury them. The Israelis are not suicidal and neither is the Islamic Republic.
"Great jumping Jehoshaphat!" - Lieut. Comdr. Quinton McHale:
Apparently, according to AP, Mullen also said this:
WASHINGTON (AP) — A fixed timetable for withdrawing U.S. combat troops from Iraq could jeopardize political and economic progress, the Pentagon’s top military officer said Sunday.
Adm. Mike Mullen said the agreement between President Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to set a “general time horizon” for bringing more troops home from the war was a sign of “healthy negotiations for a burgeoning democracy.”
The best way to determine troops levels, the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman said, is to assess the conditions on the ground and to consult with American commanders.
The prime minister was quoted by a German magazine over the weekend as saying U.S. troops should leave “as soon as possible” and he called Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama’s suggestion of 16 months “the right timeframe for a withdrawal.”
Mullen, asked about the possibility of withdrawing all combat troops within two years, said, “I think the consequences could be very dangerous.”
The military buildup in Iraq that began more than 18 months ago has ended. In recent days, the last of the five additional combat brigades sent in by Bush last year has left the country.
If conditions keep improving, “I would look to be able to make recommendations to President Bush in the fall to continue those reductions,” Mullen said.
Turning attention to Afghanistan, where violence is on the rise from Taliban attacks, Mullen said expressed concern about “a syndication of various extremists and terrorist groups” in Pakistan’s tribal areas along the Afghan border that poses a serious threat to both countries.
He cited “mixed progress” in Afghanistan, but said he added, “I would not say in any way, shape or form that we are losing in Afghanistan.”
So, currently we're fighting two wars, which is just peachy. Just don't add a third, or THEN we'll be in trouble.
I should also say, that my previous post WOULD be the angle AP would emphasize.
Bombing Iran has always been the most important part of the neocon plan. As we invaded Iraq the neocons in the Pentagon said, "Anyone can go to Baghdad, real men go to Tehran."
Now the neocons have their Trojan Horse---- HR 362. They know their history. They know that an embargo of petroleum for Japan helped cause Pearl Harbor--- that is why they wrote a petroleum embargo into HR 362. These a-------s are so transparent. As Bush said, "Our enemies never stop thinking of how they can harm America and neither do we." Cheney, Wolfowitz, Bolton, Perle--- they never stopped but the Left watched the chaos in Iraq and they started to become complacent. The first thing the Left has to do is realize what the plan of the neocons is and then we can stop it-- maybe.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcxI5wpDueE
Puppet Wallace: "So, I'll take that as a yes,and can we start bombing them this afternoon?
Strange how Mutual assured destruction (MAD) was so touted during the cold war.
All those countries that developed nukes actually kept everything in balance.
How come now that Iran wants to acquire nukes to offset Israeli nukes, it is destabalizing?
Why does the Admiral hate America?
Why doesn't he NUKE IRAN now??
As a true Christian conservative and follower of the LOVING Christ, I want to nuke the whole Middle East and see the smoke rising from the corpses of the dead children.
I will chear along with Fox News and the rest of God Fearing country that the flesh gets burned from their bones. In God's name, let them burn!!
Amen.
It is heartening to see people like Pace, Fallon and Mullen actually standing up and telling the truth about the situation. Unfortunately, the current reincarnation of
"Tricky DICK" and his sock puppet, George, will just keep "resigning" these generals and admirals until they find one who will do their bidding.
The really sad thing is that even if no one in our military is willing to start WWIII - it appears the Israelis are.
Kilgore Trout @ 47:
Short answer: The removal of Saddam removed the buffer state.
Long answer: The creation of Israel in 1948 upset the balance of power in the Middle East left after European withdrawal from colonialism after the fall of the Ottoman Empire. The repeated wars since then have turned Israel increasingly paranoid, picture the dittoheads squared and then cubed, and you have some idea while Iran had a joint invasion from the USSR and UK to deal with, then the removal of Mossadeqh in Ajax, the tyrannical Shah and then the Islamic Revolution. The Iraqi state under Qasim and then Saddam provided a convienent rallying point for the newborn Islamic Republic, particularly after Saddam's invasion, which the Israelis incidentally provided some arms for. When Bush, for some unfathomable reason invaded Iraq, he removed a lynchpin in the ladder of Middle Eastern stability, creating a power vacuum. Now, you had two states with a long, justified history of paranoia and hate, not always to each other with immense (for the region) military power, Israel with 400 nukes and one of the best armies in the world, Iran with enough firepower to bury Israel 100 feet deep in missle shrapnel. Considering the history of those two nations, the removal of Saddam almost guaranteed that the Jews and Persians would fight for Middle Eastern dominance. Israel in part guarantees a balance of terror over the Arabs by nukes, but the Islamic Republic with nukes would actually push Israel into the Arabs' arms as an ally, as they have little reason to love Iran on either religious or tribal grounds. The destablization would follow in a war perhaps seeing secular Zionist Israel allied with Alawi and Sunni Arab states against the Shia Iranians, with the US Army in Iraq caught in the middle. I doubt either Israel or Iran will want that.
General_Rennenkampf @ 41:
I can't argue with your historical rebuttal. Respectfully, I get this stuff from the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Enlightenment, Humanism, religion, history and from my own experience. Please consider all of American history. It remains, I believe , basically a continuation of the struggle between the opposing forces of revealed and acquired truth. A contest between merit and heredity, between egalitarian and authoritarian precepts, between what men and women of war and of peace can dream and what they are willing to do about it. America isn't irredeemably corrupt and it isn't dead yet by a long shot, unless we let it die without a fight.
Mike @ 21:
Have to disagree with you there. One nuclear weapon would make large sections of Israel uninhabitable. Whatever the status of their weapons program they are still enriching uranium and have been testing missile delivery systems. I very much doubt that Israel will let development get that far. Stand by for another Osirak like operation. If you think nuclear proliferation will add anything to the stability of the region you should,perhaps, examine the tense relationship between India and Pakistan. It is an appalling thought.
sulphurdunn @ 52:
Yes, I know the ideological underpinning, but like the Soviet Union the measure of ideology is how it's put into practice. I want a true America, one free of this, I simply don't want to make our history something it was not, which is just as bad as the Christianists pretending Jefferson was a SoBap.
Kilgore Trout @ 48:
Instead they fought proxy wars like Vietnam and Afghanistan. MAD didn't work out so well for the people of those countries did it. A lot of the residue of hatred in the Middle East was caused by the numerous wars fought there were proxy wars funded by the U.S. and the Soviet Union. This will happen again in the Middle East, although the proxies will be terrorist organizations supported by one side or another.
So, Mullen - you're concerned about fighting wars on THREE fronts?
Then Sen. Obama is most definitely you're man.
He'll end the Iraq war (with no less an endorsement than Iraq's own Prime Minister Maliki, I might add) in 16 months.
PROBLEM SOLVED!
General_Rennenkampf @ 54:
I agree. No reasoning person can refute the dark side of American history or the silly myths that reinforce it. But we are not enslaved to the past. The founders were flawed but wise. They had a vision of something greater than themselves, the ideological underpinning. They knew they couldn't create a just society. But they did lay the foundation for us to do it. They amalgamated the art of the Renaissance, the political philosophy of the Enlightenment, the governing model of the ancient Roman Republic and the tribalism of the Saxons and the Native Americans to create this country. They did a better job making it than we have done improving it. They were, after all, rational skeptics, not cynics. Revolutionaries, not anarchists.
sulphurdunn @ 52:
Isn't dead yet? When the president and vice president have been shown to have lied and illegally entered a war, causing the death of over 4,000 of their own citizens and the murder of 100,000 others and the populace doesn't take to the street screaming for them both to be jailed, then please tell what is that died, if not America and it's heart and soul?
dmhlt @ 56:
yes and the 100,000 he plans to leave there will be no problem at all!
According to the Bush administration, the U.S. is fighting ONE war which is the Global War on Terror. This war is being fought on two fronts currently, but it is still the same objective. Or is it? The fact that Mullen sees this as two wars must mean there are two completely different objectives. Objective in Iraq is to seize control of Iraqi oil structure to continue the PAX Americana plan of the NeoCons to maintain its status as the sole superpower. Objective in Afghanistan is to secure the area in order to build a pipeline to start pumping oil from the Caspian Basin (completed already) as well as reap the benefits off the opium drug trade to buy off more players in the region. Oh, there is that other item of business which is to capture Bin Ladin although Bush doesn't know where he is and just doesn't spend that much time on him.
moonsha: Just like when CentCom had Maliki re-release his support for US troop withdrawl -- again -- with the use of "timelines" -- OOOPS . . . Mullen overplays his hand by being quite clear about "two" wars. As I have asid many-a-time, Iraq was and is all about re-election 2004.
Just before Nixon left the White House, a Top Secret codeword message went out to all commands to the effect "Do not obey any orders from the President." We can only hope that same
moral strength exists today in the Pentagon. "Attack Iran!" "Sir, I'm sorry you're breaking up - say again -- Sir, you are totally garbled, and I cannot understand you." Duty, Honor, Country.
whelp, it's been nice knowing you admiral mullen. get that resume polished up because chimpy will be firing you soon because you committed the ultimate sin; you questioned der fuhrers idiot military strategy.
This America-hating pussy needs to suck it up.
Rush Limbaugh Listener @ 64:
Great post. Now go enlist, tough man. After all, YOU SHOULD NEVER ADVOCATE SOMETHING YOU WOULDN'T DO YOURSELF.
"Anyone who fights a war on two fronts is an idiot. Anyone who fights a war on *twelve* fronts is the heir to the Kingdom of Idiots." -- Londo Mollari
Peter G @ 55:
I strongly disagree with your assertion that the wars you cite were "proxy wars". Vietnam was a civil war between the Vietnamese that into which both the US and the communist bloc sought to influence the outcomes. The Vietnamese were not fighting for the US or the Soviets or the Maoists. They were fighting to kick them all out just like they did against the Japanese invaders from 1940-1945 and the French colonialists until 1954. Just IMO of course.
Time for a new Admiral, this guys must be weeks, no days from "retirement". Otherwise why would he be telling the truth as he knows it? Can't wait for Petraus to be near retirement to hear what he really has to say. Shades of McClellan.
If mcCain is elected, we WILL attack iran- and do you think the democrats will finally stand up to the Republicans? Not a chance.
Nancy Pelosi will be mcCain's official apologist...
If we attack Iran- it will be a domino effect that will lead to WW3- but this is what the rapture right wants- they want a global holocoust, so their fictional Jesus can return...
Login or Register to post comments.