US Military Vs BushCo. Over War On Iran

Reality Of An American Military Coup Against BushCo. No Longer In The Realms Of 'Outrageous Conspiracy Theory'

'Revolt Of The Generals' Reaches The Most Senior Ranks Of US Military

If BushCo. and the NeoCons try to launch nuclear strikes on Iran, would the dissenting retired and serving generals of the US military intervene? Could it really be true that there is a movement within the US military to stop the War On Iran that BushCo. and the NeoCons seem so intent on starting?

The idea that there is a growing mutiny against the Bush administration within the American military has been kicking around the message boards of conspiracy. military and alternate news sites for more than two years. A lot of this speculation has come from the very real 'Revolt Of The Generals' - a grouping of multi-star retired generals who began speaking out against the War On Iraq in late 2004.

But what was once the domain of mostly anonymous gossip and conspiracy sites is now hitting the mainstream media. And it would appear the speculation may have not been all that far from the truth.

Blogger Glenn Greenwald points out that the very credible Dana Priest, of the Washington Post, recently had this to say during an online Q & A :

West Chester, Pa.: History seems to be repeating it self as the drumbeat for war with Iran, based on accusations not backed up by any facts, intensifies. Do you think the Bush administration will launch a war (perhaps sending only the bombers) against Iran and if they do what are the likely consequences for the Middle East?

Dana Priest: Frankly, I think the military would revolt and there would be no pilots to fly those missions. This is a little bit of hyperbole, but not much. Just look at what Gen. Casey, the Army chief, said yesterday. That the tempo of operations in Iraq would make it very hard for the military to respond to a major crisis elsewhere. Beside, it's not the "war" or "bombing" part that's difficult; it's the morning after and all the days after that. Haven't we learned that (again) from Iraq?

Greenwald says there has been a number of "extraordinary reports" on what he calls the "virtual refusal of senior military officials to permit a war on Iran." He's playing it safe. There is nothing virtual about it. The revolt within the US military against BushCo. and the NeoCons going to War On Iran is clearly a very real event, and all but unprecedented in more than a century of American history.

It's a shocking, and extremely sad, fact to soak up that one of the biggest stories of the new age of American war has barely been reported at all.

Greenwald also points out that CENTCOM Commander, Admiral William Fallon, was successful in his attempt to block efforts by Vice President Dick Cheney, and BushCo. NeoCons to move a third aircraft carrier into the Persian Gulf. Fallon found few mainstream media headlines for his historical show of dissent when he declared, privately, "there would be now war against Iran" as long as he was chief of CENTCOM :

At a mid-February meeting of top civilian officials over which Secretary of Defence Gates presided, there was an extensive discussion of a strategy of intimidating Tehran's leaders, according to an account by a Pentagon official who attended the meeting given to a source outside the Pentagon.

The plan involved a series of steps that would appear to Tehran to be preparations for war, in a manner similar to the run-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq. But Fallon, who was scheduled to become the CENTCOM chief Mar. 16, responded to the proposed plan by sending a strongly-worded message to the Defence Department in mid-February opposing any further U.S. naval buildup in the Persian Gulf as unwarranted.

"He asked why another aircraft carrier was needed in the Gulf and insisted there was no military requirement for it," says the source, who obtained the gist of Fallon's message from a Pentagon official who had read it.

Fallon's refusal to support a further naval buildup in the Gulf reflected his firm opposition to an attack on Iran and an apparent readiness to put his career on the line to prevent it. A source who met privately with Fallon around the time of his confirmation hearing and who insists on anonymity quoted Fallon as saying that an attack on Iran "will not happen on my watch".

Further, Army Chief of Staff, General George Casey, was recently quoted as saying that despite what BushCo. and the NeoCons desired, no new military conflicts would be possible, as the US Army had been dangerously depleted by six straight years of war in Iraq and Afghanistan :

The Army's top officer, General George Casey, told Congress yesterday that his branch of the military has been stretched so thin by the war in Iraq that it can not adequately respond to another conflict -- one of the strongest warnings yet from a military leader that repeated deployments to war zones in the Middle East have hamstrung the military's ability to deter future aggression.

In his first appearance as Army chief of staff, Casey told the House Armed Services Committee that the Army is "out of balance" and "the current demand for our forces exceeds the sustainable supply. We are consumed with meeting the demands of the current fight and are unable to provide ready forces as rapidly as necessary for other potential contingencies."

Officials said Casey, who appeared along with Army Secretary Pete Geren, personally requested the public hearing -- a highly unusual move that military analysts said underscores his growing concern about the health of the Army, America's primary fighting force.

It's a stunning admission. The top officer in the US Army says America's primary military force was so damaged and worn down that it could not respond to another conflict. No doubt it's true, but it's clear that by demanding the public hearing, Casey was making sure that BushCo. and the NeoCons would not be able to censor, or undermine, his revelations, before they went out on live TV.

The 'Revolt Of The Generals' is no longer a collection of retired generals, voicing their dissent on cable news shows.It has now become a very real revolt, and growing force of actionable dissent, within the most senior ranks of the American military.

As we said, a truly mind-blowing event in the history of American war, and in the history of the nation itself.

The American military is now fighting, if only by word and declaration for now, to stop itself from going to War On Iran.

There was a fairly popular conspiracy theory kicking around in early 2003 that BushCo. and the NeoCons wanted to go to War On Iraq, with the full knowledge that such an action would all but destroy, or at least, utterly degrade the fighting strength of the US Military. To destroy the American military by sending it into a war that it could not win. That it was never given a chance to win in the first place (by BushCo.'s refusal to follow overwhelming advice that 350,000 to 500,000 troops would be needed to actively, and successfully, secure Iraq).

It's a shocking state of affairs to now see so many wondering, and speculating, whether or not the above conspiracy might actually hold some truth. As horrible as that reality might be.

It's also interesting to speculate that if BushCo. ordered, as commander in chief, his forces to attack Iran and they outright refused to follow his orders - a reality some senior rankers already appear to be preparing for - would the majority of the American people oppose a military coup against the NeoCon-infested Bush administration?

Such strange and troubling times.


Some further reading on all this :

US Military Commanders Insist Striking Iran Would Be A Disaster

December 2006 : Join Chiefs Of Staff Tell Bush They Are "Unanamiously Opposed" To Air Strikes On Iran's Nuclear Faciltiies

Bush Now Has "Inherent Authority" Under Constitution To Attack Iran

"The Most Effective Anti-War Movement In America Is Inside The Walls Of The Pentagon"

US Military Orders 17,700 Roadside Bomb Proof Vehicles



If orders for military vehicles are anything to by, the US military is not planning on leaving Iraq, or the Middle East, any time soon.

From the day the first all-but-unarmoured Humvee was destroyed by a roadside bomb, only a few weeks into the Iraq War, the US military has been all too aware of just how vulnerable their vehicles were to improvised explosive devices, usually planted along roads and highways, and sometimes suspended beneath bridges and overpasses.

A story from the Washington Post goes into detail about how the US military is now trying to contract, build and then deploy more than 17,000 new vehicles, with its raised wheel base, and v-shaped chassis, designed to deflect IED impacts. The MRAPs - "mine-resistant, ambush-proof" - are a long time coming, and the first fleet deployed to Iraq are more than a year late.

But it is likely to take years to deploy most of 17,770 MRAPs the military are contracting to be built. The US is suffering not only a shortage of the premium-grade steel needed, each vehicle requires some four tons, but the industrial capacity to ramp up the production line turnout has been hampered by the closure of hundreds of American machine shops and associated car and vehicle building factories in the past decade.

What would have been possible during World War 2 may prove to be an impossibility for the American industrial sector to achieve, more than 60 years later.

17,770 roadside bomb proof vehicles? Surely they can't all be for Iraq. And they probably aren't. Clearly Al Qaeda, and militants across the world, have seen just how effective IEDs and shaped-charges can be in disabling even the latest generation of armour-heavy Abram tanks and triple-plated Humvees - M1114s. So effective, in fact, that it appears the US at least has all but given up on such vehicles for war-fighting in Iraq. At least, until an MRAP has cleared the road ahead for the more vulnerable vehicles to then follow.

The order for 17,770 MRAPs is more than three times estimates of two years ago. The Marine Corps alone says it needs 3700, with more than 500 for Fallujah, and the rest of the Anbar province, alone.

The MRAPs, however, are not invulnerable to attack. And presumably Iraqi insurgents are already working on new ways to disable the vehicles if they find their current arsenal doesn't do the job.

Each MRAP is expected to cost around $1 million. But the vehicles are said to be hard to maneuver on tight urban streets and back alleys. And they are so heavy, the Washington Post article notes, that they may all end up being abandoned, or destroyed, in Iraq, rather than shipped back home again :

The success of the vehicles has drawn praise from Congress, which added $4 billion to this year's defense authorization bill for the MRAP program, up from the $400 million the Pentagon had requested. And as Congress presses the Pentagon to speed deployment of the vehicles and defense contractors prepare for large orders, the rush has created a potential $20 billion program that could become one of the Pentagon's largest.

The Marine Corps has issued more than $1 billion in orders for the vehicle, including more than $450 million in contracts awarded last week to International Military and Government, Force Protection Industries and Rockville-based BAE Systems. When the vehicles will begin to arrive in Iraq in large numbers depends on how quickly the industry can ramp up, Delarosa said.

A Defense Contract Management Agency report recently found that contractors might have trouble obtaining thin-gauge armor steel plate, tires, axles and other crucial components, according to a Pentagon statement. Only few plants in North America are capable of making the 3/8 -inch steel needed for the vehicles, the statement said. In an effort to accelerate MRAP production to 1,200 vehicles a month, the Pentagon gave the program a "DX" rating, giving manufacturers special preference in getting access to raw materials.

BAE has received orders for 94 vehicles, which it expects to deliver this summer. But its version of the vehicle requires four to five tons of steel each. The steel usually must be ordered six months in advance, making it difficult to produce them quickly without significant planning, said Matt Riddle, vice president of survivability systems at BAE.

"You want 1,000 vehicles a month, but that's 4,000 tons of steel. The question is, do you have enough industrial capacity?" Riddle said.

Iraqi Prime Minister Angered By Deadly US Raid Into Baghdad Slum

Northern Iraq : 8 Kurdish Rebels Killed By Turkish Troops

Kurd Rebels Claim Assistance From US

Pentagon Thinks About Cutting Number Of Mental Health Specialists For Military In Iraq, So There Will Be Less PTSD Cases Identified

Investigation Into Possible Massacres, Crimes Committed By US Troops During The Deadly 2004 Battle For Fallujah

Sadr City Residents Flee In Fear Of US "Reprisals"

Iraq Football Team Looks To Unite Country

Monday In Iraq : 4 Americans, 95 Iraqis Killed - A Quiet Day

1000 American Iraq War Veterans Reportedly Commit Suicide Each Year

US Military In "Death Spiral"

Iraq War Has Left United States With No 'Ready' Brigade To Effectively Defend International Interests

The US Army and Marine Corps ares running out of trained troops and equipment at an unprecedented rate.

Some 40% of the US Army and Marine Corps. vehicles, weapons and general equipment has been consumed by the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and the only training now being undertaken is to deal with "the insurgencies at hand".

A stunning story from the Washington Post quotes 'officials' as claiming the US Army and Marine Corps is in a "death spiral".

The main points from the story :

* The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have left the US Army in a such a state of disrepair, it will take years and tens of billions of dollars for the Army and Marine Corps to get back up to pre-War on Terror levels of efficiency, maintenance and readiness.

* Senior officers of the US Military warn the risk to the United States is "serious and deepening."

* The US Military has been left with a gaping deficit of reserve ground troops required if they are to deal "quickly and decisively with potential foreign crisis", with Iran, Pakistan and North Korea cited as being of particular concern.

* The Bush-backed troop "surge" into Baghdad is believed to have left "critical Army overseas equipment stocks for use in another conflict...depleted."

* Keeping the troop "surge" at the levels demanded by President Bush beyond August this year - more than 32,000 extra combat troops - would become "a challenge".

* The US Army currently does not have one single brigade standing ready and equipped to immediately deploy to a foreign "hot spot" should hostilities break out that put at risk American interests.

From the Washington Post :

Equipment is also lacking among Army units in the United States, the vast majority of which are rated "not ready" by the Army, based on measures of available gear, training and personnel, according to senior military officers and government officials. Active-duty Army combat brigades in the United States face shortages of heavy, medium and light tactical vehicles such as Humvees; radios; night-vision goggles; and some weapons, Cody said.

The shortages have deepened as scarce equipment and personnel are funneled to those units next in line to deploy overseas, creating ever bigger holes in the units that will leave later. "It's like a hurricane drawing everything into the center of the eye," said a senior Army officer, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to reporters.

Under current Army and Marine Corps plans, it will take two to three years after the Iraq war ends and about $17 billion a year to restore their equipment levels. It will take five years and at least $75 billion for the Army to increase its active-duty ranks to 547,000 soldiers, up from the current 509,000, and for the Marine Corps to increase its numbers to 202,000, up from 180,000.

It's almost impossible to believe that the US Military, until recently internationally recognised as the most powerful and effective fighting force on the planet, has been so depleted by the Iraq War, particularly, that its interests internationally now stand all but defenceless, according to the on and off the record interviews cited in the Washington Post story.

It's almost impossible to believe that the US Military, until recently internationally recognised as the most powerful and effective fighting force on the planet, has become so utterly depleted and so thoroughly weakened by the Iraq War; that its interests internationally now stand all but effectively undefendable, short of air or naval support, according to the on and off the record interviews cited in the Washington Post story.

You may recall that Osama Bin Laden said, before the Iraq War began, that Al Qaeda's primary strategy to defeat the United States was to draw the US into war fighting on numerous fronts, where its military forces would then be worn down over years of fighting, while the costs of maintaining multiple wars would eat into the strength of the American economy, break down American homefront and military morale and deplete the resources of its fighting forces.

It's sickening to realise today, as the Coalition of the Willing enters the fifth year of the Iraq War that Osama Bin Laden's strategy to "destroy America" has been so completely embraced and so effectively played out by President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and former Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Osama Bin Laden must be marvelling at just how easy it was to draw the Bush administration into carrying out his long-term vision of destabilising the military and financial strength and global standing of the United States.

Iraq War Veteran : 10% Of Returned Soldiers Suffer Brain Injuries
War Protests Continue Across the US

Australian PM Prepares To Increase Troops To Iraq, Vows To Stay The Course

Terrorists Attack Iraqis With Chlorine Truck Bombs, Hundreds Sickened

7 Americans Troops Killed In One Day, Four Die In One IED Attack - Al Sadr Tells Muslims To Stop Killing Each Other

1/3 Of Iraq's Children Malnourished - 5000 Iraqis Leave Country Every Day

Iraq Poll - Only 18% Of Iraqis Trust, Have Faith, In US Soldiers - 86% Of Iraqis Live In Fear Of Family Member Being Killed