How Very Comforting

Wow, I really feel better now. The New York Times has assured all of us that a nuclear armed Iran is years away. They have experts and everything. So we can be sure there's nothing to worry about for years.

Three to be exact.

"There's still a lot they have to do," he said, to perfect the operation of the cascade of centrifuges. A report that he and his colleagues made public late last month suggested that Iran would need 6 to 12 months to master that process, and Mr. Albright said in an interview that he stood by that rough estimate as accurate.

His March report said Iran had parts for perhaps 1,000 or 2,000 centrifuges beyond the ones already in operation, and that Iran is not likely to produce enough highly enriched uranium to make a nuclear weapon until 2009 at the earliest.

So, let's not worry about that right now, shall we?

Creating A New Praetorian Guard

The Praetorian Guard was originally formed as a force to act as bodyguards to the Roman General commanding an army in the field. Eventually, of course, the Roman republic gave way to the Roman empire and the Praetorian Guard became the principle force protecting the emperor. In turn, the guard became very politicized and began exerting it's power to meddle in the affairs of the empire. Eventually, the guard killed emperors who did not do their bidding and selected replacements.

One thing that has for years amazed people from many other countries is how rigidly separated from politics the American Military is. It's astonishing how well the American system has worked through the years. Our elected officials have been in control of our military throughout the history of the United States. General officers serve at the pleasure of the president and can be fired at any time. Truman's firing of MacArthur for arguing and disagreeing with the president publicly is one famous example.

Lately, there have been several reports of retired generals calling for the removal of Donald Rumsfeld and publicly criticizing the administration. The press appears to be tracking down every single retired general officer they possibly can to interview as is apparent today in the Washington Post. The danger of this particular tactic should be evident to any thinking person. A long-standing rule is being broken here, a precedent is being set with dangerous implications for the future. Up until now generals have served with the approval of elected officials. What will happen when elected officials start serving only with the approval of the generals?

The media, in it's frenzy to get the president, is creating a new Praetorian guard. They're teaching lower ranked officers who will one day be generals how to meddle in the government to get what they want. How long until generals decide to demand what they want? The Post sticks this at the very end of the article:

"I think it flatly is a bad thing," said Richard H. Kohn, a military historian at the University of North Carolina who writes frequently on civilian-military relations. He said he worries that it could undermine civilian control of the military, especially by making civilian leaders feel that that they need to be careful about what they say around officers, for fear of being denounced as soon as they retire.

"How can you prosecute a war if the military and civilians don't trust each other?" Kohn asked.

Also, the generals themselves may be partly to blame for the situation in Iraq, along with Rumsfeld and the White House, said Michael Vickers, an analyst at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, a Washington think tank.

"It's just absurd to lay the blame on Don Rumsfeld alone," he said.

As I posted earlier, we're heading toward a bad place here, folks.