Thursday, December 21, 2006

Generals oppose surging troops in Iraq

The Washington Post has been reporting that the Joint Chiefs of Staff are unanimous in opposing the idea of sending 15,000 to 30,000 more troops to Iraq because those proposing the surge have not come up with a clear mission for those troops.

Although I believe strongly in civilian control of the military I think generals should have the right to tell the President they will not follow orders they consider ill-conceived and misguided. I hope they remain resolute about not sending more soldiers to Iraq in the absence of a mission and clearly defined goals. I also hope that if President Bush orders them to bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities they would also refuse to do that.


WindingHills said...

Our current political system is shot.

I don't know if you caught Newt Gingrich on meet the press last Sunday, but he spoke of having Lincoln/Douglas type debates between the Dem & Rep presidential candidates. This sounds like a really good idea, but would it help to fix the current system of pointing fingers and no progress.

Dave Barrett said...

I think you are correct that Gingrich's proposal would do nothing to fix the biggest problems with our government, one of which is our Congressional elected officials, both Democrats and Republicans, serving money's interests rather than the people's.
Things have gotten to a sorry state when the only voices opposing escalating the war among those with the power to effect things belong to the Joints Chiefs of Staff.