Posted on 02/15/2010 5:37:58 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld
U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Michael Mullen, attended a press conference after his arrival to Israel and made it clear that all options are on the table. “We would operate all our forces for Israel”
“Politically, it is prohibited in any way that Iran will have nuclear weapons”, said Mullen during a press conference convened on Sunday evening only hours after his arrival to Israel. “Right now, diplomatic efforts continue,” he explained, but did not rule out military option, “The option to attack Iran is still on the table, but we’re not there yet.”
“It is very difficult to expect the pace of the Iranian government, I am very concerned with their use of rhetoric and their uranium enrichment program,” said Mullen. “Iran undermines the stability of the region – also in Yemen and Afghanistan. The U.S. government has very serious intentions to impose harsh sanctions and I very much hope that it will end the conflict.”
Mullen also noted that according to the American assessment Iran could obtain a nuclear bomb from one year to three years. However, Mullen stressed that, “conflict with Iran would be a big problem for everyone. I worry about the unintended consequences of an attack. While every situation has limits, we’re not there yet. The diplomatic efforts must be exhausted until the end.”
(Excerpt) Read more at defpro.org ...
Ping
Not with Obama’s Rules of Engagement I hope
and you’ll get the same results that you got in December of 1941.
Talk talk talk and you’ll get the same results as you got in December of 1941.
You mean until just before they set off their fifth nuke?
Mullen is the “US Army Chief”?
While every situation has limits, we’re not there yet. The diplomatic efforts must be exhausted until the end.”
So in other words Obama is going to try and talk the Iranians to death. So how long will Obama “Chamberlin” try and deal with the Iranians? My guess is the best hope is the Israeli’s.....same as they did in Iraq.
Their error
Mullen is the “US Army Chief”?
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
And this is from a ‘supposed’ Military magazine...
Brought to you by the same editors/writers that ID LST’s as BATTLESHIPS, regularly call Marines Soldiers, show a picture of a backhoe and call it a bulldozer etc etc etc.
What happened to having some (ANY) inkling of WTF you are writing about?
In a sense,he is.As Chairman of the Joint Chiefs he's basically the "chief" of all the services.
Not at all. The Joint Chiefs exist in an advisory capacity to the POTUS and civilian leadership of the military. There is a Chief of Staff of the Army, but he only answers to the Chairman for matters pertaining to the Joint Chiefs. They are not in the chain-of-command, and deliberately so.
I don’t believe a thing he says.
Neither do I
BS
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.