{"id":67506,"date":"2006-04-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-04-29T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2006\/04\/29\/quelle-est-la-cible-de-la-revolte-des-generaux\/"},"modified":"2006-04-29T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2006-04-29T00:00:00","slug":"quelle-est-la-cible-de-la-revolte-des-generaux","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2006\/04\/29\/quelle-est-la-cible-de-la-revolte-des-generaux\/","title":{"rendered":"Quelle est la cible de \u00a0\u201cla r\u00e9volte des g\u00e9n\u00e9raux\u201d?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Quelle est la cible de \u00ab\u00a0la r\u00e9volte des g\u00e9n\u00e9raux\u00a0\u00bb?<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n

Diverses indications avancent l’id\u00e9e que \u00ab\u00a0la r\u00e9volte des g\u00e9n\u00e9raux\u00a0\u00bb est loin d’\u00eatre cantonn\u00e9e \u00e0 la situation irakienne et \u00e0 l’\u00e9ventuel destin de Rumsfeld. Il est aussi question de l’Iran et des projets futuristes de l’administration GW. C’est ce que nous dit Andrew Greely, du Chicago Sun Times<\/em>, dans les \u00e9ditions du 28 avril<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

Voici la conclusion de l’article : « The hubris and devotion to high technology and total ignorance of the enemy are not the problems of the officer corps or the troops. They are problems at the very top level of the country, from the president on down. Why have the generals spoken out now? Doubtless because they see the same group that created the mess in Iraq preparing to incite a war against Iran, using the same techniques of stirring up fear and pseudo-patriotism. They actually seem to believe they can carry it off again, despite their failures in Iraq. It is almost as though there is a Karl Rove scenario. As part of the War on Terrorism we begin to create shock and awe in Iran during October. The Republicans are the party of victory and patriotism. We must keep them in power to support our brave troops and our brave president, and to avenge the heroes of 9\/11.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

» As Vice President Dick Cheney is alleged to have argued to the president, \u00ab\u00a0If we don’t finish Iran now, no future administration will be able to finish them.\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> »<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

D’autre part, autre indication, de la Lettre d’Information de Executive Intelligence Review<\/em>, Strategic Alert OnLine<\/a> (acc\u00e8s payant), dans sa livraison du 27 avril. (Nous citons cet extrait pour les d\u00e9tails concernant l’action des g\u00e9n\u00e9raux, moins pour ce qui est dit de la possibilit\u00e9 d’une frappe contre l’Iran dans la p\u00e9riode d’ici la mi-mai. La chose nous paraît tr\u00e8s improbable, pour dire le moins.) : « While the criticisms of Rumsfeld by the ex-officers ostensibly focussed on Iraq, sources close to the Pentagon have confirmed that the outpouring of calls for Rumsfeld’s immediate ouster have more to do with Bush Administration plans for a preemptive military strike against Iran, possibly as early as late April through the middle of May.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

» Ex-military and intelligence sources report that a group of active duty generals and admirals have written to Gen. Peter Pace (USMC), Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, threatening to resign, if the White House orders military strikes against Iran. The generals and admirals, according to the sources, are particularly outraged that the White House has refused, ostentatiously, to rule out the use of tactical nuclear weapons against hardened targets inside Iran.<\/em> »<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

Mis en ligne le 29 avril 2006 \u00e0 10H48<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Quelle est la cible de \u00ab\u00a0la r\u00e9volte des g\u00e9n\u00e9raux\u00a0\u00bb? Diverses indications avancent l’id\u00e9e que \u00ab\u00a0la r\u00e9volte des g\u00e9n\u00e9raux\u00a0\u00bb est loin d’\u00eatre cantonn\u00e9e \u00e0 la situation irakienne et \u00e0 l’\u00e9ventuel destin de Rumsfeld. Il est aussi question de l’Iran et des projets futuristes de l’administration GW. C’est ce que nous dit Andrew Greely, du Chicago Sun… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[2604,4928,5160,2773,3856],"class_list":["post-67506","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-des","tag-eir","tag-generaux","tag-iran","tag-revolte"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67506","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=67506"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67506\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=67506"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=67506"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=67506"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}