Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

We are SO SCREWED: Defense Secretary replaces Joint Chiefs Chairman Pace

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 02:14 AM
Original message
We are SO SCREWED: Defense Secretary replaces Joint Chiefs Chairman Pace
Edited on Sat Jun-09-07 02:24 AM by autorank
Remember when * was yapping about the Iranian leadership shipping weapons to Iraq. That was the excuse for attacking them, it seemed. But General Peter Pace, Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, was interviewed overseas by Voice of America, of all people. He said that there was no reason to believe this story. The next day Bush had to eat his words and his excuse was gone. Now we have someone whose background shows "'a greater emphasis on countering Iranian power." Just great.

IMPEACHMENT NOW!


Defense Secretary replaces Joint Chiefs Chairman Pace


RawStory
Ron Brynaert and Michael Roston
Published: Friday June 8, 2007


Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announced that he would be replacing Joint Chiefs Chairman Peter Pace in an unexpected news conference Friday afternoon.

"Pentagon sources are telling NBC’s Jim Miklaszewski that Defense Secretary Gates has replaced Gen. Peter Pace as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff with Adm. Mike Mullen," MSNBC reported prior to the briefing. "He is currently the Navy’s chief naval officer.”

Think Progress notes that Mullen's selection "also marks the first time in 21 years that both the head of the Joint Chiefs and the CentCom Commander, Adm. William Fallon, have been Navy officers."

"When Fallon was appointed in January to lead CentCom, analysts noted the choice of a Navy officer reflected 'a greater emphasis on countering Iranian power, a mission that relies heavily on naval forces and combat airpower to project American influence in the Persian Gulf,'" Think Progress's Nico blogs. "In announcing the nomination of Mullen this afternoon, CNN Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr said that Mullen 'watches Iran closely.'"


See also: Brezinski Considers the Path to War with Iran 11 Feb 2007
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DFW Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 02:43 AM
Response to Original message
1. Which means that Iran will now watch US more closely
Which means that an incident involving US hostages, like the
one where they seized some British sailors a few months back,
becomes very possible. Cheney is most likely hoping for just
that, so that the so-far non-existant grounds for hostile action
against Iran are suddenly on page one.

I just hope that the Iranians are well aware of this and see through
the tactic. AhmadiNejad loves to play chicken, and Cheney is only
too willing a partner, and no one will win. If Iran can wait Cheney
out, then all his provocations will come to zip. If AhmadiNejad
wants to play macho man, then there will be trouble. If Cheney decides
on deliberate violations of Iranian territory, there will be trouble
no matter what.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 07:17 AM
Response to Reply #1
8. What an absurd situation. Just amazing. These guys are relentless.
Like Michael Meyers in Haloween...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 02:48 AM
Response to Original message
2. I take comfort in knowing that Iran and the rest of the world
has much saner leadership than we do.

Iran is winning this chess game so far. Imho, no matter what yes man Bush puts in, he'll just be a yes man and the world community will move to contain this insanity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donheld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 02:52 AM
Response to Original message
3. Why are you posting this? Don't you Paris Hilton is in jail? Where are your priorities?
:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 07:18 AM
Response to Reply #3
9. I'm starting an anti-elitist posting group (Paris) and shilling for NASCAR;)
How about this. No crybaby stuff....just metal and loud noises...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exiled in America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 07:22 AM
Response to Reply #3
12. This is an example of the stupidest post type on DU.
As if it is not possible to carry on more that one thought in one's mind at once. I believe people can both care about this and also care when a clear, immediate example of the subject of classism in the legal system rears its head.

I'll tell ya one thing I am getting sick of though, and that is elitist snobbery on DU and those who presume to judge everyone else's choice in discussion on a fucking internet forum.

Get a grip.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hubert Flottz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 08:13 AM
Response to Reply #12
18. George Bush is exactly what you get when you fail to...
discipline an insane, spoiled, out of control, Paris Hilton type, asshole. A freakin' outlaw BRAT, that is 60 freakin' years old and still a god damed titty baby!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DFW Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 02:53 AM
Response to Original message
4. Two problems with that:
One: Bush won't be selecting the yes-man. Cheney will.
That is a whole lot more dangerous.

Two: AhmadiNejad is shrewd, and a better chess player than
Cheney, but he doesn't seem very sane, and Cheney cheats. That
doesn't make for a very friendly match if one gets started.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 07:21 AM
Response to Reply #4
10. When AhmadNejad is more sane than any of our leaders...
...we're in real trouble. But that's a reason to Impeach them both right now. * and Cheney are both out of control and out of touch with reality. Outsmarted by a holocaust denier.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dEMOK Donating Member (833 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 03:03 AM
Response to Original message
5. Impeach Indeed, but Impeach Cheney first...
He's the PNAC puppet-master behind all the dark/paranoid/unAmerican initiatives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 07:21 AM
Response to Reply #5
11. Oh by all means...it has to happen very soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
izzie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 05:14 AM
Response to Original message
6. Is thia part of Bush and the blame some one else stuff?
Hard to keep up with who is gone now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cooley Hurd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 06:27 AM
Response to Original message
7. Replaced by a Navy admiral, just like at CENTCOM...
Mighty curious...:think:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 07:26 AM
Response to Reply #7
14. There might be some double tracking here too...Gates as tender for the neocons...
When they were shilling Iran with that Bush "evidence" of Iranian leaders selling weapons in Iraq, Gates trotted out the line in Europe, casually. He was challenged by an AP reporter who said that serial numbers on weapons couldn't tell anybody who sold them. Gates agreed, which was fascinating. He also wanted to quit a while ago.

"I think there's some serial numbers, there may be some markings on some of the projectile fragments that we found" that point to Iran, he said.

Gates' remarks left unclear how the U.S. knows the serial numbers are traceable to Iran and whether such weapons would have been sent to Iraq by the Iranian government or by private arms dealers.


We'll see but this stinks.

And you're right mighty curious!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
formercia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 07:22 AM
Response to Original message
13. I think some naval pilots are itching for live-fire
The Army and Marines have been getting most of the glory, along with a few Navy SEALS but the Carrier Navy is feeling left out. What's the point in having Carriers if you don't use them, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TacticalPeek Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 07:36 AM
Response to Reply #13
16. Don't forget the corpsmen.
They make up most of the 76 Navy fatalities in Iraq.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
formercia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 07:59 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. You're right
Edited on Sat Jun-09-07 07:59 AM by formercia
and they have some of the highest casualty rates.

I had a good friend in College that did 5 tours in 'Nam as a corpsman, all five assigned to Marine field units. He would have made a great trauma surgeon. He wanted so badly to go to med school but couldn't get in because of his test scores. he eventually was admitted to podiatry school.

I still think of all the lives he could have saved. What a loss.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
INdemo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 07:32 AM
Response to Original message
15. I'm missing somethng here or else.......
Is Gates pulling a fast one and somehow bypassing a Senate confirmation.I thought the Joints Chief Chairman had to be confirmed by the Senate..That is if one resigns then a new Chairman is nominated(by the President) and confirmed or denied by the Senate.How can Gates overstep his authority.
He admitted this is the reason appointed a new Chief is to skip any confirmation.
I guess anything goes in this administration but why aren't the Senators jumping on this constitutional waiver......
And by the way so far I havent seen any difference between Gates and Rumsfeld.none
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hubert Flottz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 08:21 AM
Response to Reply #15
19. I think Rummy is still pulling some serious strings.
Edited on Sat Jun-09-07 08:22 AM by Hubert Flottz
And the same Office of Special PNAC Plans crew are all still free to plunder loot and pillage at will too.

Edit...You know what?...I'm getting so I don't even trust what I see with my own eyes(on TV)anymore
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pberq Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 09:52 AM
Response to Original message
20. Pace Fired Because He Balked at Iran
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/6/8/154911/3350

Pace Fired Because He Balked at Iran
by leveymg
Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 01:16:41 PM PDT

This isn't good news.

THIS IS EXTREMELY OMINOUS

I’ve been writing for over a year now that the Joint Chiefs have been blocking the White House’s efforts to expand the war to Iran. No matter what you might think of Gen. Pete Pace, this really is TERRIFYING news, unless you crave a wider war in the Persian Gulf and South Asia.

Pace has been the most visible symbol of the push-back within the military against the Long War.

MORE below . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Strelnikov_ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-09-07 10:49 AM
Response to Original message
21. If Adm. Fallon suddenly is reassigned, then we probably are
(if his comments about action against Iran are true, that is. Could have just as easily been cover).

It is really hard to tell what is going on with this Pace deal. On the one hand, they could be making a play to get their 'Keitel' in place.

On the other hand:

I believe that homosexual acts between individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts. I do not believe the United States is well-served by a policy that says it is OK to be immoral in any way. - Gen. Pace in an interview with Chicago Tribune this past Spring.

Also:

Others writing on Libby's behalf included Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

A Shalikashvili or Shelton he is not.


Could be Larry Johnson's view is accurate. He has become a political liability.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-c-johnson/bye-bye-perfect-peter_b_51400.html


IMHO, hard to tell. Say one thing, though, not getting rid of my emergency diesel stockpile capacity anytime soon.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 12:47 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC