What!!??
Miss that l'il tidbit, didja? So did I, but it was a "Friday dump" so we weren't supposed to see it.
The nation's top military officer said yesterday that the Pentagon is planning for "potential military courses of action" as one of several options against Iran, criticizing what he called the Tehran government's "increasingly lethal and malign influence" in Iraq.
Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said a conflict with Iran would be "extremely stressing" but not impossible for U.S. forces, pointing to reserve capabilities in the Navy and Air Force.
"It would be a mistake to think that we are out of combat capability," he said at a Pentagon news conference. Speaking of Iran's intentions, Mullen said: "They prefer to see a weak Iraq neighbor. . . . They have expressed long-term goals to be the regional power."
Mind you, when Mullen had been nominated by Bush and was standing for confirmation from a then-anti-war Democratic Senate a bare 8 months ago, he was singing a slightly different tune.
Adm. Michael G. Mullen, President Bush's nominee to head the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a Senate panel yesterday that the war in Iraq is taking a heavy toll on the U.S. military, warning that American forces are "not unbreakable" and stressing the need to "plan for an eventual drawdown" of troops.
Appearing in a confirmation hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Mullen, 60, acknowledged that the increase in U.S. forces cannot continue past April 2008 under the military's current force structure. He also cautioned that Iraqi political reconciliation is not keeping pace with security improvements.
Uh-huh. Well now it's April of 2008 and not only is the increase that "could not" be maintained being maintained, but Mr Mullen sees no problem adding to the problem with an attack on a whole new enemy.
But not to worry. Just as Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, and Tommy Franks did before the invasion of Iraq, Mullen is reassuring us that it ain't gonna happen, like, tomorrow.
Mullen made clear that he prefers a diplomatic solution and does not expect imminent action. "I have no expectations that we're going to get into a conflict with Iran in the immediate future," he said.
Well, that's alright then. I feel so much better, don't you? Despite:
Mullen's statements and others by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates recently signal new rhetorical pressure on Iran by the Bush administration amid what officials say is increased Iranian provision of weapons, training and financing to Iraqi groups that are attacking and killing Americans.
In a speech Monday, Gates said Iran "is hell-bent on acquiring nuclear weapons." He said war would be "disastrous" but added that "the military option must be kept on the table, given the destabilizing policies of the regime and the risks inherent in a future Iranian nuclear threat."
Well, here we go again. "The real men want to go to Tehran."
Comments