Empty sabre-rattling

[Lanya]

Just last week, the nation’s highest-ranking officer, Gen. Peter Pace, secretly upgraded to “significant” the risk the military faces this year in carrying out its full national security mission. He unwaveringly stated that the armed forces would succeed at any mission ordered by the president; the response would just be slower, less elegant, more dangerous.

[...]

“At the end of the day, strategy is the management of risk, whether personal or military strategy,” said Jeffrey D. McCausland, a retired Army colonel now a senior fellow at the Carnegie Council in New York. “The question is, how much risk are we willing to live with? We are taking a significant amount of strategic risk today because, if you look at our ground forces, we have pulled almost everything out of the box already. So if a major problem arises somewhere else, what do we turn to?”

As a consequence, he said, the United States has lost much of its historic military flexibility. “We know that,” he said. “So do our adversaries. To some degree, Iran and North Korea can play this round of poker more boldly.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/25/weekinreview/25shanker.html?_r=2&ref=weekinreview&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

[The_Professor]

This is undoubtedly true. After all, you can only be stretched so far...perhaps, and I'm sure UP agrees, a less imperialistic strategy might be appropriate?

[BT]

Carl Levin Calls for Attacks On Syria. Admits Al-Qaeda In Iraq & Troops Need to Stay
A Democrat Makes Sense Today.
By Erick Posted in Congress

UPDATE: The video is here.

http://www.redstate.com/stories/congress/carl_levin_in_his_own_words

 

“I think we ought to take action on all fronts including Syria.”
                  — Sen. Levin, today at an
                 Armed Services Committee
                 hearing.
Get ready for Carl Levin to get shot by Cindy Sheehan or some other angry lefty. I'm not sure what happened to him, but he's making sense right now. On Sunday's Meet The (De)Press(ed), he finally admitted that Al-Qaeda is in Iraq and American troops needed to stay there for "a counter-terrorism purpose."

Today, he got bolder and and called for escalation of the offensives against both Iran and Syria. Bravo. Speaking at a Senate Armed Services Committee meeting, Senator Levin said to John Michael McConnell, Director of National Intelligence,
I think we ought to take action on all fronts including Syria and any other source of weapons coming in, obviously Iran is the focus – but it shouldn’t be the sole focus.
Folks, did you get that? In addition to admitting we need to keep troops behind in Iraq, Carl Levin now says we need to go after Syria and Iran. In fact, in asking John McConnell about what steps were being taken to cut off weaponry coming in from Syria, Levin went so far as to ask this question:

I was just wondering, does the military have a plan to, if necessary, to go into Syria to go to the source of any weapons coming from Syria?

And he wasn't arguing against such a plan. My first quote from him came after that. After asking if there was a plan to go into Syria, Carl Levin, yes *that*

Carl Levin, said "I think we ought to take action on all fronts including Syria."

I'd like to congratulate Carl Levin for undercutting several of the major Democrat talking points and I'd like to thank Senator Levin for calling for mililtary action against Syria as well as Iraq.

The exchange with the DNI is below the fold . . .


SEN CARL LEVIN (D-MI): “Now, in terms of the weapons coming in from Syria, those weapons that you’ve described as coming in from Syria and perhaps other Sunni neighbors are killing our troops. Do we have a plan to address the Syrian weapon source -- of killings of our troops?”

JOHN MCCONNELL, Director of National Intelligence: “Sir, I know the military is working that border area to close it down from not only weapons but also jihadists coming in --”

LEVIN: “It’s more than just -- we’re trying to close down the Iranian border area too. The problem is that these weapons are coming from a state which is -- doesn't recognize Israel either, just like Iran doesn't. We’ve got to try to stop weapons coming into Iraq from any source that are killing our troops. I agree with the comments about trying to stop them coming in from Iran, I think we have to try stop them that are going to the Sunni insurgents as well as to the Shia. I was just wondering, does the military have a plan to, if necessary, to go into Syria to go to the source of any weapons coming from Syria? That are going to Sunni insurgents? That are killing our troops? … I think we ought to take action on all fronts including Syria and any other source of weapons coming in, obviously Iran is the focus – but it shouldn’t be the sole focus.” (Armed Services Committee, U.S. Senate, Hearing, 02/27/07)


http://www.redstate.com/stories/archived/carl_levin_calls_for_attacks_on_syria_admits_al_qaeda_in_iraq_troops_need_to_stay

[sirs]

Isn't Levin one of those who were mistaken, actually misled by Governor Bush into believing Saddam had WMD?  Perhaps Levin knew Saddam didn't have them either, but wants us to go to war anyways