It doesn't take a detective to understand why this didn't get much attention. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Michael Mullen, says diplomacy should be pursued before military action is taken. While incentives have been offered and rejected today by the Iranians, it's still worth considering his reasoning against striking them. Holding the highest rank in the nation and the repsonsibility of carrying out any orders, he knows what can and can't be done and the ramifications.

<link>

But Mullen appeared to be edging toward saying that military action, either by Israel or the United States, or both, would be catastrophic.

He also warned that the United States would be hard pressed to conduct operations against Iran, given the commitment of tens of thousands of U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“From the United States' perspective, the United States' military perspective, in particular, opening up a third front right now would be extremely stressful on us,” Mullen told reporters. “That doesn't mean we don't have capacity or reserve, but that would really be very challenging.”

And, he added, “The consequences of that (military action) sometimes are very difficult to predict.”

Mullen explained, “Just about every move in that part of the world is a high-risk move. And that's why I think it's so important that the international piece, the financial piece, the diplomatic piece, the economic piece be brought to bear with a level of intensity that resolves this.”

"The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Michael Mullen, says diplomacy should be pursued before military action is taken."

No shit! What kind of idiot would suggest the opposite...

Show me where McCain or Bush has said we don't use diplomacy first. Hell, show me where Israeli leaders aren't saying we don't use diplomacy first.

over a mere United States Senator, or Admiral Mullen needs to be Tried for Treason and Shot.

United States Constitution

Article II

Section 2. The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States

_________________________

Nothing in there about Junior United States Senators.

"He added pointedly, “we haven't had much of a dialogue with the Iranians for a long time,” seeming to imply that the Bush administration should be talking to the Iranian government."

GWB? McCain? Obama said he would speak to the Iranians and Republicans fell apart comparing him to Chamberlain. GWB didn't fully pursue diplomacy with Iraq before attacking.

He added pointedly, “we haven't had much of a dialogue with the Iranians for a long time,” seeming to imply that the Bush administration should be talking to the Iranian government.

That is from the article. GWB isn't talking to them. See my reply to Hst-Libertarian.

"Diplomacy" is not defined solely as the President flying over and taking tea with a dictator. There IS diplomacy going on now but yes, it could be better. Bush hasn't done anything right in his entire Presidency. I'm sure McCain would improve diplomacy vis a vis Iran, but that doesn't mean he has to personally sit down and make nice with the dirt bag who oversaw the US hostage taking episode 25 years ago...

what BO supporters DONT get

is that obama bashed clinton over the head for saying she would listen to the military on the ground when making decisions about withdrawal.....and NOW he is saying the exact same thing (how soon we forget huh?)

obama LIED to get the nomination

and its NOT just a little thing .....lying about his positions is unforgivable, especially when he presented himself as something other than a typical politician

Must I remind you of McCain's plan for Iran:

<link>

That doesn't indicate to me and probably the Iranians, McCain would put much effort into diplomacy.

That is an absurd notion. The very act of responding like that renders you "unserious" with respect to this issue...

HST-libertarian:

"The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Michael Mullen, says diplomacy should be pursued before military action is taken."

No shit! What kind of idiot would suggest the opposite...

Exactly, and Obama has been saying this all along, McCain and Bush call Obama an appeaser. You think now Mullen is an appeaser?

The act of singing about bombing another country while running for president of this country renders him dangerous.

If my response offends you, good. There is nothing more poignant than the man's own words. Many of us were greatly offended by McCain's actions.

It doesn't "offend" me - I said it renders you "unserious" - a bomb thrower with no desire to honestly debate policy...

That is your assumption. McCain is a serious candidate for president, why would my use of his "statement" render me "unserious"? Please explain why I shouldn't take it seriously and incorporate it into my arguments?

Link it!!!! or STFU