{"id":69279,"date":"2007-10-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-10-02T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2007\/10\/02\/les-militaires-us-dernier-rempart-contre-la-guerre\/"},"modified":"2007-10-02T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2007-10-02T00:00:00","slug":"les-militaires-us-dernier-rempart-contre-la-guerre","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2007\/10\/02\/les-militaires-us-dernier-rempart-contre-la-guerre\/","title":{"rendered":"Les militaires US, dernier rempart contre la guerre?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Il appara\u00eet que la position des militaires US est le<\/strong> facteur le plus important aujourd’hui dans la crise pressante de la possible attaque US contre l’Iran. Glenn Greenwald , de Salon.com<\/em>, consacre son commentaire du 28 septembre<\/a> \u00e0 cette question. Il cite deux nouveaux \u00e9l\u00e9ments.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t D’une part, ce qu’il tient pour un avis significatif de l’une des journalistes les plus vers\u00e9es dans les questions militaires, Dana Priest du Washington Post<\/em>. Il s’agit d’une discussion de Priest avec des lecteurs en date du 27 septembre, retranscrite<\/a> sur le site du Post<\/em>. Greenwald retranscrit lui-m\u00eame cette question-r\u00e9ponse, avec la r\u00e9ponse de Priest qualifi\u00e9e de \u00abrather extraordinary observation<\/em>\u00bb:<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abWest Chester, Pa.:<\/em><\/strong> History seems to be repeating it self as the drumbeat for war with Iran, based on accusations not backed up by any facts, intensifies. Do you think the Bush administration will launch a war (perhaps sending only the bombers) against Iran and if they do what are the likely consequences for the Middle East?<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbDana Priest:<\/em><\/strong> Frankly, I think the military would revolt and there would be no pilots to fly those missions. This is a little bit of hyperbole, but not much. Just look at what Gen. Casey, the Army chief, said yesterday. That the tempo of operations in Iraq would make it very hard for the military to respond to a major crisis elsewhere. Beside, it’s not the \u00a0\u00bbwar\u00a0\u00bb or \u00a0\u00bbbombing\u00a0\u00bb part that’s difficult; it’s the morning after and all the days after that. Haven’t we learned that (again) from Iraq?<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t Le deuxi\u00e8me r\u00e9cent \u00e9l\u00e9ment que Greenwald met en \u00e9vidence est l’audition (le 26 septembre) du g\u00e9n\u00e9ral Casey au Congr\u00e8s, lui-m\u00eame cit\u00e9 par Priest. (Greenwald met en \u00e9vidence que cette audition a \u00e9t\u00e9 demand\u00e9e par Casey lui-m\u00eame, ce qui marque son intention d’avertir hautement et publiquement le Congr\u00e8s de l’\u00e9tat d’esprit de l’U.S. Army):<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abAnd, as Priest noted, the Army Chief of Staff, General George Casey, warned on Wednesday that the Army was so depleted by the endless Iraq War that no other conflicts were even possible:<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThe Army’s top officer, General George Casey, told Congress yesterday that his branch of the military has been stretched so thin by the war in Iraq that it can not adequately respond to another conflict one of the strongest warnings yet from a military leader that repeated deployments to war zones in the Middle East have hamstrung the military’s ability to deter future aggression.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbIn his first appearance as Army chief of staff, Casey told the House Armed Services Committee that the Army is out of balance and the current demand for our forces exceeds the sustainable supply. We are consumed with meeting the demands of the current fight and are unable to provide ready forces as rapidly as necessary for other potential contingencies.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbOfficials said Casey, who appeared along with Army Secretary Pete Geren, personally requested the public hearing a highly unusual move that military analysts said underscores his growing concern about the health of the Army, America’s primary fighting force.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tLisez l’article de Greenwald. Il cite \u00e9galement, bien entendu, l’attitude de l’U.S. Navy et pr\u00e9cis\u00e9ment de l’amiral Fallon<\/a>, qu’on conna\u00eet bien dans ces colonnes. Ces diverses indications confirment qu’aujourd’hui, \u00e0 Washington, \u00e0 l’heure o\u00f9 le pouvoir civil est entr\u00e9 dans un tourbillon d’impuissances r\u00e9ciproques, \u00e0 l’heure o\u00f9 il semble possible que des initiatives personnelles puissent d\u00e9clencher un conflit contre l’Iran, l’establishment<\/em> militaire s’affirme de plus en plus comme la principale et plus puissante force d’opposition contre la guerre.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tBien entendu, il s’agit d’une situation constitutionnelle (ou plut\u00f4t, anti-constitutionnelle) sans pr\u00e9c\u00e9dent. Elle ne fait que r\u00e9pondre \u00e0 l’exceptionnalit\u00e9 de la situation \u00e0 Washington.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tMis en ligne le 2 octobre 2007 \u00e0 06H01<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Il appara\u00eet que la position des militaires US est le facteur le plus important aujourd’hui dans la crise pressante de la possible attaque US contre l’Iran. Glenn Greenwald , de Salon.com, consacre son commentaire du 28 septembre \u00e0 cette question. Il cite deux nouveaux \u00e9l\u00e9ments. D’une part, ce qu’il tient pour un avis significatif de… <\/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":[4188,7097,6944,2773,3538,7096,3856,2671],"class_list":["post-69279","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-casey","tag-falon","tag-greenwald","tag-iran","tag-militaires","tag-priest","tag-revolte","tag-us"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69279","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=69279"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69279\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=69279"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=69279"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=69279"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}