Jonathan Guyer: Mike Mullen’s Options

-

mullen jonathan guyer.jpg(click image for larger version)
Jonathan Guyer is a program associate at the New America Foundation/Middle East Task Force and the official cartoonist of The Washington Note. He blogs at Mideast by Midwest.
Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen certainly caught our attention on the Sunday talkies. All options with regard to Iran “on the table.”
— Jonathan Guyer

Comments

15 comments on “Jonathan Guyer: Mike Mullen’s Options

  1. The Pessimist says:

    Finally, world leaders publicly speaking out against American hypocrisy and double standards.
    And the arrogant American official is so befuddled that all he can do is try to run away. What a pathetic display of statesmanship.
    I encourage all world leaders to follow this example and reject the impotent American rhetoric as loudly and as often as possible.

    Reply

  2. Marcus says:

    Carroll, I`ll chip-in to buy that cloak for you,if you promise to wear it 24/7.

    Reply

  3. Carroll says:

    OT but OT
    I just read that Duke Univ researchers have succeeded in creating an “invisibility cloak”…not kidding. Don’t have all details but is some material that bends light waves.
    I want one.
    Before they are outlawed and only the government allowed to use them.

    Reply

  4. Carroll says:

    Apropos…
    Wednesday, Aug 4, 2010 10:05 ET
    Crazy Muslim conspiracy theories
    By Glenn Greenwald
    Rashad Hussain Politico’s Laura Rozen points to this Times of India article, recounting how Rashad Hussain, the Obama administration’s envoy to the Muslim world, was angered and “shocked” yesterday when — as part of a tour of India to promote better relations with Muslims — “the head of a city-based Muslim institution [Akhtar Hasan Rizvi] slammed the US’ policies, not just in the Middle East, but towards Muslims everywhere”:
    Rizvi held America responsible for many woes in the Muslim world. “You supplied arms to Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war, then invaded Iraq in the name of searching for weapons of mass destruction. You created the Taliban with the help of Pakistan. You have been backing Israel ever since its creation. First, right the wrongs that you have created if you want to establish peace in the world,” said Rizvi to applause from the students.
    Shocked, Hussain who had earlier talked about the Obama administration’s resolve to partner with the Muslim world for winning hearts and minds, shot back: “I reject the conspiracy theories that are being floated” . . . . Hussain appeared so upset with Rizvi’s trenchant comments that he almost left the dais and wanted to walk out but the meeting’s conductor, Akhtar Chauhan, also director of the institute, requested him to stay back.
    Are any of the accusations voiced by Rizvi actually “conspiracy theories,” or are they just all basic, undisputed facts? It certainly appears to me to be the latter. One of the favorite tactics of American political and media elites is to disparage the Muslim world as wallowing in “conspiracy theories” whenever they describe American actions in their part of the world.’

    Reply

  5. erichwwk says:

    It does indeed seem the U.S.is running on the fumes of “perpetual war is a necessary condition for elitist governance”, much as was the case with the former Soviet Union.
    So is it insane to expect a different outcome?

    Reply

  6. Bart says:

    Because we have transitioned to a perpetual two-war
    posture, our leaving Iraq mandates beginning the
    next war in Iran.

    Reply

  7. Cee says:

    Is the report of the assassination attempt today one of those options?

    Reply

  8. JamesL says:

    Peace isn’t on the table. Peace isn’t an intention. Peace isn’t an option. Mullen want’s nothing to do with peace. Exactly what in the current American system of government is going to change that? Arrogance, ignorance, and power combined lead directly to failure.

    Reply

  9. JohnH says:

    Funny…I don’t see peace talks on the table.
    US policymakers are willing to entertain any option…as long as it doesn’t involve recognizing Iranian sovereignty.

    Reply

  10. The Pessimist says:

    The entire premise that US foreign policy is supported on a foundation of diplomacy first falls flat on its face when hypocritical statesmen refuse to even accept an invitation to open debate with other foreign representatives. What is Obama, or Emanuel, so afraid of? Public condemnation? Public exposure? What?
    The US federal government is hypocrisy personified.
    Who is REALLy calling the shots for US foreign policy? Cause it isn’t the scumbags in the White House.

    Reply

  11. erichwwk says:

    I like the cartoon, especially the display of the Kinzer book.
    Of course “all options are on the table” implies to the use “right of first strike use of a nuclear weapon” in political doublespeak.
    While some maintain that the U.S. has used nuclear weapons only twice, it has actually used nuclear weapons an additional 32 times, in the sense of threatening to “bomb you back to the stone age” to achieve resource or strategic objectives. It is the use of a gun that determines whether a robbery is armed, not whether it was fired.
    I that sense I am elated that Pincus reports in the WP that the vote on the new START treaty will be delayed until after the summer recess.
    If one has to chose between ratifying what is essentially a meaningless treaty, and agreeing to an unprecedented increase ($185 Billion)in “modernization” of nuclear weapons, it would be MUCH better NOT to approve that treaty.
    As Joe Gerson has written ( In listing 32 instances where the U.S. used nuclear weapons, beginning against Iran in 1946):
    http://www.epfwny.org/Convention/GersonChap1web.pdf
    “The political and technical steps needed to eliminate nuclear weapons have long been known.’
    The first three are:
    1. First, the United States must renounce its

    Reply

  12. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Oh, uh, Steve, just in case you’re wondering, I was referencing our Secretary Of State when I mentioned “Hillary”.
    “Clinton” is her last name if you’re thinking about googling her. I think she’s had a bit to do with bringing us to the point of having “all options on the table”. But don’t worry, I won’t tell anyone if you won’t. Mums the word.

    Reply

  13. PissedOffAmerican says:

    I see ‘ol Manmud Achtungainthebad challenged the balless one to a televised debate. Now THATS a debate I’d love to see. Of course, Manmud might just have a bit of a problem concentrating with Hillary sitting on the sidelines shooting spitwads at him. But it would be entertaining seeing how Obama would perform reading a teleprompter that scrolled the words in Hebrew.

    Reply

  14. Dan Kervick says:

    Yeah, stop your girly-man hyperventilation, Guyer. Mullin is only the Joint Chiefs Chairman.

    Reply

  15. jonst says:

    So is this an example Steve, of “hyperventilation”? Or is this politically correct concern, expressed in an appropriate manner? Just curious.

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *