Joint Chiefs Chairman: U.S. Could Easily Fight A Third Front
Related, With Video: JCC Saying Preparing For Iran Strike
The U.S. has no interest in a third major conflict at this time - meaning war in Iran - the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said today.
Yet the military is concerned about the role that Iranians are playing in fighting in Iraq, and the military is contiuously planning for such contingencies — and no one should underestimate the ability of U.S. forces to take on a third military challenge, Adm. Mike Mullen said today.
“A third conflict in this part of the world would be extremely stressing for us,” Mullen said at a Defense Department briefing today. “That said, I have reserve capability, in particularly our Navy and our Air Force, not just there but available globally. So it would be a mistake to think that we are out of combat capability…
“I have no expectations that — you know — that we’re going to get into a conflict with Iran in the immediate future,” he said. “In terms of having another conflict in that region, I certainly don’t think that would be where we’d want to go right now.”
As the president has said many times, however, military options have not been removed from the table. “There are lots of potential military courses of action, depending on specifics that occurred. And I wouldn’t want to prognosticate what those might be,” Mullen said. “There are planning activities which occur routinely against possibilities — and actually, those change over time, depending on the circumstances..
“But I am concerned over time just in these last couple years, you know, that tensions continue to rise, Iran does not respond, and in fact they seem to be ratcheting it up in terms of their support for terrorism. And I am concerned about where that goes in the long term.
“I think we need to continue to press, using all available means” to pressure Iran to refrain from interfeering in Iraq, he said. “I am, however, where I have been in terms of using all elements of national power, whether it’s economic or financial, international, diplomatic, and not taking any military options off the table. And I think it is in that combination that we have to continue to increase pressure.
“I’ve been clear lately that I’m extremely concerned about what I believe to be an increasingly lethal and malign influence by that government and the Qods Force in particular in Iraq and throughout the Middle East,” the adminiral said today. “I believe recent events, especially the Basra operation, have revealed just how much and just how far Iran is reaching into Iraq to foment instability.
” Their support to criminal groups in the form of munitions and training, as well as other assistance they are providing and the attacks they are encouraging, continues to kill coalition and Iraqi personnel,” he said. “The Iranian government pledged to halt such activities some months ago. It’s plainly obvious they have not. Indeed, they seem to have gone the other way.
“Whether it goes all the way to the top, I haven’t seen anything to confirm that,” he said. “I have no smoking gun which could prove that the highest leadership is involved in this.”
Be respectful of others and their opinions. Inflammatory remarks and inane leftist drivel will be deleted. It ain’t about free speech, remember you’re in a private domain. My website, my prerogative.
If you can't handle using your real email address, don't bother posting a comment.
Yeah, we can …
Bombs.
Bombs.
Bombs.
And more Bombs …
April 25th, 2008 at 5:44 pmNo smoking gun? Make Tehran a smoking hole and negotiate with the survivors.
April 25th, 2008 at 5:50 pmIt’s good to know that we’re officially considering the military option if all else fails. Deterrence will not work with Iran, and neither will defense. Face it you can’t scare these people, and you can’t ignore the threat. As much as we want to they want to rid that part of the world of western influence, and to put it plainly there’s a larger chance of hell freezing over.
April 25th, 2008 at 7:15 pmFirst one goes in the well, buddy!
April 25th, 2008 at 7:53 pmBare with me here for a moment. The USA’s current population has more than doubled since 1940. There were more than a million active duty troops during WWII and military deaths of over 400,000 in 4 years. Per capita income of 1940 was $8,000.
Per Capita income in 2001 is $39,000 with military deaths at 4000 for a four year period. We have 1.4 million troops Active Duty and another 1.3 million in National Guard. During WWII we had over 5 million active. 39% of the National Budget was spent on the Military in 1945. %3 is budget spent as of 2007. Our Military budget has been shrinking over the past 60 years steadily as a ratio of government expenses.
Why am I saying this? The comparison and contrast is striking between troop levels, expenses, and sacrifices made with lives. Our force effectiveness as a military power has been barely used in the last 30 years, including Iraq and is immensely effective like no other time in history. This is the least amount we have ever expended in any miltary operation as a percentage of GNP.
If we were to move our ratios to WWII levels we would have over 10 million active duty troops with 9 million reserve. We would approach %30 we would spent 5 times more than all the world’s countries combined. We have plenty of reserve!
April 26th, 2008 at 2:48 amAnyone who thinks that we couldn’t wake a devasting air war on Tehran while fighting the mustifoons elsewhere is sadly mistaken. We got the bombs, we got the target list and the aircraft to deliver whatever level of pain we wish to dish out to the apostate regime in Iranistan; whenever and wherever we want to.
Like the dude said. “YES we can”.
April 26th, 2008 at 7:45 amof course we could fight on a third front. shit, the US has been fighting on two fronts with one hand AND one leg tied behind our back the whole time
April 26th, 2008 at 10:36 am