[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

Remember you telling me how we could easily attack Iran, even
considering our current commitments? Let's see how (yet another) top
military officer agrees with me, and not you:

Top U.S. officer says would prefer no war on Iran

Reuters
Monday, May 5, 2008; 3:10 AM

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - U.S. military involvement in Afghanistan and
Iraq would make it difficult to mount any attack on Iran, the
Pentagon's top officer said in remarks broadcast on Monday, adding
that he would prefer to avoid a new regional war.

"I actually am very hopeful that we don't get into a position where we
have to get into a conflict," Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, told Israel's Channel Ten television when asked
if he might recommend that U.S. forces strike Iranian nuclear
facilities preemptively.

"It would be a very significant challenge for the United States right
now to get into a third conflict in that part of the world," Mullen
added, referring to the Bush administration's long-running military
commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?nav=hcmodule

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On May 11, 1:36*pm, ScottW wrote:
On May 10, 11:29*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:
Remember you telling me how we could easily attack Iran,

*Easily? *You're embellishing again.

even
considering our current commitments? Let's see how (yet another) top
military officer agrees with me, and not you:

Top U.S. officer says would prefer no war on Iran

Reuters
Monday, May 5, 2008; 3:10 AM

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - U.S. military involvement in Afghanistan and
Iraq would make it difficult to mount any attack on Iran, the
Pentagon's top officer said in remarks broadcast on Monday, adding
that he would prefer to avoid a new regional war.

"I actually am very hopeful that we don't get into a position where we
have to get into a conflict," Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, told Israel's Channel Ten television when asked
if he might recommend that U.S. forces strike Iranian nuclear
facilities preemptively.

"It would be a very significant challenge for the United States right
now to get into a third conflict in that part of the world," Mullen
added, referring to the Bush administration's long-running military
commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...08/05/05/AR200...

Of course it's a significant challenge. *All wars are.
But just 1 month ago he also said this:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2007878/posts

"He said conflict with Iran would be “extremely stressing” for
America’s overstretched forces, but added: “It would be a mistake to
think that we are out of combat capability.”

And what would you expect him to say, 2pid? LOL!

So there you have it. *Your problem is one of clarity and precision in
thinking.
When someone says difficult you hear impossible.

When I hear the top military commander even broach the topic it
concerns me, 2pid.

When I say possible you hear easy.

"Significant challenge" from the top military commander is the same as
saying "This would not be a good time", especially when you consider
all of the other things about military readiness being said in the
news.

This condition you have is commonly know as being full of ****.

LOL!

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On May 11, 11:06*pm, ScottW wrote:
On May 11, 5:23*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

"He said conflict with Iran would be “extremely stressing” for
America’s overstretched forces, but added: “It would be a mistake to
think that we are out of combat capability.”

And what would you expect him to say, 2pid? LOL!

*The truth which I believe he did.

Oh, sure, 2pid. As you pointed out earlier, all that has to happen is
the stroke of a pen to turn reservists into AD soldiers. LOL!

So there you have it. *Your problem is one of clarity and precision in
thinking.
When someone says difficult you hear impossible.

When I hear the top military commander even broach the topic it
concerns me, 2pid.

*It concerns me as well, but I'm not going to assume
he means more or less than what he said.

Then you have no clue how things work, 2pid. I already knew that, but
thanks for admitting it.

Now do you feel the same about any other politician, or any other
political appointee?

Why or why not?

When I say possible you hear easy.

"Significant challenge" from the top military commander is the same as
saying "This would not be a good time", especially when you consider
all of the other things about military readiness being said in the
news.

* Yes, I've heard all that. *I guess you think an assault on
Iran would have been easier with an unfriendly Saddam army
on one flank and the Taliban on the other?

That's still the case, 2pid, or don't you understand the news? LOL!

This condition you have is commonly know as being full of ****.

LOL!

* and a bit crazy.

I see.