T Nation

US Generals Will Quit


US Generals Will Quit if Bush Orders Iran Attack


Good to see some sanity.



Nice to see that you have NO IDEA what the stakes are.

No surprise.

Notice that the U.S. found more iranian roadside IED technology today?

Elite iranian units funneling weaponery to the shiite militia.

Let me update you if you haven't been paying attention: THESE BOMBS ARE KILLING AMERICANS.

Now either you are one of those traitorous cowards who thinks "we deserve it for Bush's War" or you aren't fully aware of iran's intentions.

One more thing, pal, your hatred of George Bush ISN'T going to make ahmadinejad go away.

What was it this week: "The train of the Iranian nation is without brakes and a rear gear," the radio quoted Ahmadinejad as telling a gathering of Islamic clerics. "We dismantled the rear gear and brakes of the train and threw them away sometime ago."


Let's have some more quotes:

"Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury,?

"Iran is ready to transfer nuclear know-how to the
Islamic countries due to their need"

"There is no doubt that the new wave (of attacks) in Palestine will wipe off this stigma (Israel) from the face of the Islamic world, ... The World without Zionism.?

"As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map,?

from: thinkexist.com/quote

"We ask the West to remove what they created sixty years ago and if they do not listen to our recommendations, then the Palestinian nation and other nations will eventually do this for them."

"If the West does not support Israel, this regime will be toppled. As it has lost its raison d' tre, Israel will be annihilated."

"Israel is a tyrannical regime that will one day will be destroyed."

"Israel is a rotten, dried tree that will be annihilated in one storm."


"And God willing, with the force of God behind it, we shall soon experience a world without the United States and Zionism,"


Let's get to the crux of the issue: Your hatred for Bush IS NOT helping anything.

Let me repeat: Not helping anything.

There are a multitude more of these quotes.

If your hatred for Bush does not allow you to see that this guy is arming and will be a threat, then it's you that needs the help.

This is one time where I would LOVE for you liberals to be correct. I would LOVE for this to be a "manufactured" "Bush lied, everyone died" scenario.

Unfortunately, I am quite worried about this guy. He knows that there are plenty of Americans that wouldn't support Bush in anything he does. He's counting on it.




I hate even addressing your posts because you are the definition of a partisan hack, the last thing this country (or the battered GOP) needs right now. But at any rate.

I don't even hate Bush. You can toss around your usual ad hominem attacks, call me a liberal and a Bush-hater, and whatever other garbage you want. Bush strikes me as probably a pretty genuinely good guy, just someone who's in way over his head. I think he's a real Christian, unlike some of the fringe assholes his party sometimes caters to.

That said, notice how General Peter Pace, who has had the reputation of being a near sycophant to the Pentagon and the White House in the past, backed away from claims about Iranian involvement in Iraq? Or did you not read the article I posted? I'm gonna guess the latter. I would be pretty surprised if Iran wasn't supplying arms to at least the Shiites in Iraq, but it's not a "slam dunk" yet.

Don't lecture me about not understanding the stakes and then post a flurry of Ahmedinejad quotes, as if that explains everything. On the contrary, you don't even understand the fundamentals of the situation, let alone the stakes. Should we review?

  1. Ahmedinejad is the elected (sort of) president of Iran. He has minimal real power, is undoubtedly every bit the fanatic he appears, and is not the power in that country. The mullahs are. He may well mean what he says. IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER.

  2. Muslims, even zealots, are not automatically mindless. His saber-rattling often serves a purpose. Look up the "risk premium" on oil sometime. Iran has made tens of billions on oil exports in just the last couple of years due to the risk premium being higher. Guess whose speeches help drive it up?

  3. Do you have any reason to bet the stability of the Middle East and quite likely the US economy (those are the real stakes) on the fact that Iran and its leaders desire national annihilation for the sake of destroying Tel Aviv or New York? Beyond a half-assed understanding of Islam and some Ahmedinejad or Rafsanjani quotes?

  4. Ever heard of MAD? Mutually Assured Destruction? Kept the peace in the Cold War, and has indeed probably ended warfare between major military powers. Same thing will happen in the Middle East. Israel can turn Iran into a sea of glass. Iran can (maybe) do the same thing to Israel in five to ten years. This is not a good thing. It's also not the end of the world.

If you want to hear what a grownup has to say about this, instead of the shouting idiots I have no doubt you listen to on Fox News, read what General William Odom thinks about Iran:


I'd welcome a real rebuttal of any of what I've written when you have the chance.



Usually I take your stupidity with a grain of salt.

However, on this one issue, I'm angry.

This goes way beyond the usual partisan saber rattling. At the end of the day we will be staring directly into the muzzle of a nuclear iran.

Wrap your mind around this one: It won't be up to Bush to fix this.

Remove him from your mind, if you are able.

Let's look at things exactly as they are.

First, LOOK!!! www.breitbart.com/news/2007/02/26/D8NHMIB81.html


The Associated Press.

Everyone raise your hand if you think the AP is biased positively for the Administration.

(As if the administration wants to go to war with iran right now.)



Accoring to the UK telegraph YESTERDAY he will be weapons capable by 2009.

Anyone want to bet that he won't have one by next year?

Usually, I don't give a sh.. if you want to come on here and act like your internet persona means something. On every other matter, I just laugh at you, Mister "I voted straight democratic ticket." It amuses me to think of YOU calling anyone partisan.

Again, this issue goes way beyond your silly little games.

This is serious business.

I want you to go to the family member of any of our servicemen/woman with that article in hand and look them in the face and say, "the iranian President has no real power."

Even if he was a figurehead (which he isn't), Americans are still dying at his hands!!!

You know what, when you are proven wrong, I can gauge the exact respone I'll get from you, SILENCE.

If you are right, and ahmadinejad's policy of rapid enrichment, killing American soldiers is halted. Or, he is deposed by a more moderate individual, I will type these words: gdollars, in his infinitely superior wisdom has dominated, destroyed, humiliated, and made an utter fool out of JeffR. I will now take myself off this server forever. Thank God for gdollars!!!

Unfortunately, it will take a nuclear weapon going off before you and your pals (you voted straight democratic ticket in 2006) are convinced.

I want to be wrong. I'm yearning, begging, and lusting to be wrong.



OK, I don't know whether your anger is real or contrived, but could you address what's actually been posted, instead of making things up and imputing positions or statements to others, which seems to be your usual MO? Try something different just this once.


Where did I ever say Iran was not on its way to getting nukes? I said the exact opposite, both in what I wrote and in what I quoted from General Odom (which again, I highly doubt you took the trouble to read).

I said that I would be very surprised if Iran WASN'T providing arms to the Shiite militias at the very least. Possibly the Sunnis too. Go back and look at what I wrote.

I don't even hate Bush. It's the last time I'll bother typing it. I think he's been the worst president since Carter, and maybe since America became a world power, but I don't hate the man. And of course Iran is going to be somebody else's problem to handle long after Bush has left office.

So, care to talk about what Iran could and (more importantly) would do with the nuclear weapons it will probably be getting in the near future, or do you just have more fake frothing at the mouth to do?


Hey Jeff,

How feasible do you honestly think attacking Iran would be?

The military is already stretched damn thin. A three front war with our current military capabilities could be a recipe for disaster.

GW's administration would, more than likely, have to draft.

A draft would be very unpopular, not to mention you'd be forcing people who don't want to fight into combat. How well do you think combat units do when moral is abysmally low?

Hell, with this generations slacker mentality, the Iranians could probably kick the crap out of hastily trained unmotivated troops.


The stakes are that we already know whatever the Bush administration touches turns to poop.

We know without doubt that their intentions are never what they state.

They've spent all their credibility and then some.

Your already resigned to relinquish your freedom for perpetual war. If we start a war with Iran, life as you know it will probably never be the same. Its not just Iran we'll have to deal with.

Russia will not let the U.S. attain unchallenged world nuclear, political, or energy domination
Putin's angry speech is a warning that Russia, which remains a great power with a large, capable missile force, will not let the U.S. attain unchallenged world nuclear, political, or energy domination. China echoes this warning.

Maybe they should try trotting out the phony Iranian badge story again


Ha, I was just thinking the same thing.

Here is our future draft pool...

Study: Child obesity expected to soar worldwide
Nearly half of kids in North and South America could be overweight by 2010

Report: Children's obesity now 'modern day epidemic'

Diabetes growing rapidly among children


Iranian IED technology...


Semtex and a wire?


Not exactly.

Semtex and a wire and ... a SCARY NAME!!!



You state that they are killing our soldiers and will be getting nuclear weapons soon.

However, you gleefully point out that some of our military generals may quit if iran is attacked. It's "sanity" as you put it.

What is your solution?





iran is emboldened by our involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq. They are counting on people like yourself allowing them to do whatever they wish. They are betting they'll be able to do whatever they want.

Oh, it won't be Bush who ultimately deals with iran.

As far as motivation, that is a frightening thought. You can see plenty of guys on this forum who don't think iran is a threat.

Convincing the populace that that iran is a deadly threat would be the great challenge for the next President.

As an aside, it gives me no pleasure to point out the fact that there is silence or opposition from the cabal who loudly proclaimed "Hey, if we remove saddam to foster freedom, why don't we remove all the dictators?" or "iran is more of a threat than Iraq ever was."

It was all hot air. Those people wouldn't support anything Bush did under any circumstances.



Actually, armchair generals, the explosive formed projectiles were manufactured and mass produced. Far behind workshop production.

I'm sure it's possible that an industialized nation like Austria or Sweden produced them and then labeled them in farsi...just not likely unless you've already made up your mind.


This is nothing more then propoganda and speculation. I'd bet that not one general resigns when we strike Iran. If your a general you understand the implications of a nuclear armed Iran.


(1) The Divide between the military and the civilians who are supposed to be in charge is widening. Once our economy collapses, the military will be given power to restore or maintain order. I suspect that, with their low regard for the civilian leaders, they will not give that power back any time soon.

(2) If Iran is a danger, why don't we simply nuke the sites? Who's going to bother us about that? According to Kerry, we're already an 'international pariah'. Okay, then what's to lose? What's China or Russia going to do? Lodge a protest? So what?

Hell, nuke the sites and say the Iranians blew themselves up! How'd anyone prove otherwise?


I don't believe it. Making such a statement would likely be the end of their careers. Generals are political animals.

It just does not ring true.`


And what are you basing that on? The article is from the Times of London, one of the most reputable papers in the world. Have you read Ricks' "Fiasco"? There are a lot of generals who are appalled by how reckless this administration has been. I posted an interview with one of them in this thread, curious to hear your thoughts on it.


Solutions about iran?

Thanks in advance.



Why attacking Iran is a bad idea, by a brilliant Israeli military historian:


As for a solution, we treat Iran the same way we treated the USSR. Deter them militarily through with both conventional and nuclear strength, build tight alliances in the region, and win the war of ideas (something we were doing pre-Bush) so that western democracy becomes a goal for their people. It's not as exciting as instant "regime change," but that hasn't worked out so well for us now has it?


Quote- "There are four or five generals and admirals we know of who would resign if Bush ordered an attack on Iran,? a source with close ties to British intelligence said.

This is all you have, a source with close ties? What Generals? Petreaus maybe? Yes? No? Who?Please tell me you have more than this! This is just hearsay anti-American rhetoric and garners no reasonable attention. It simply has no substance. Show us some actual "EVIDENCE" please, not what a source with close ties supposedly says. By the way, Generals and Admirals resign all of the time, peacetime and wartime for various reasons, I can assure you it is not uncommon. Unless THEY(the Generals not a source close to Brit. Intel.) cite their reason for resigning as Bush going to war with Iran and them not agreeing with him, the liberal media in the UK and the US shouldn't put words into the mouths of people who probably don't exist. A source close to British intelligence, you have got to be kidding, right? You are buying this?