Friday's diary, Pace Fired Because He Balked at Iran" -- http://www.dailykos.com/... -- has been updated to respond to several comments that reflected an unawareness that Pace had made repeated statements directly contradicting the Administration on Iran and its "Long War" approach to the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT). The diary has been updated to reflect more recorded details of Pace's independence of thought on these issues.
Rather than repost that entire amended diary, I'll post below just the section that has been added this afternoon. In part, this is also to respond to Sen. Lieberman's grotesque statements reported today -- http://www.nytimes.com/... -- advocating a preemptive U.S. military strike against Iran.
Lieberman justifies his call for attack on the basis of accusations that "the Iranians have a base in Iran at which they are training Iraqis who are coming in and killing Americans. By some estimates, they have killed as many as 200 American soldiers," NYT, Ibid.
Lieberman said. ''Well, we can tell them we want them to stop that. But if there's any hope of the Iranians living according to the international rule of law and stopping, for instance, their nuclear weapons development, we can't just talk to them.''
He added, ''If they don't play by the rules, we've got to use our force, and to me, that would include taking military action to stop them from doing what they're doing."
On the other hand, Gen. Pace repeatedly stated that the evidence is not convincing that the Iranian government is directly responsible for any attacks on American forces inside Iraq. He also imtimated that he would not carry out orders that he believed were unlawful, and urged his troops to do the same.
As American casualties in Iraq mounted, a high percentage from roadside IEDs, the Bush Administration started blaming the Iranian government for these devices. That charge became a top reason for the sort of threats we've heard today from Senator Leiberman for going to war against Iran.
In November 2005, after he was reappointed to a second term as Chair of the JCS, Pace began to openly contradict the Administration on the issue of torture, saying it was the responsible of American troops to stop all abuses of prisoners, not merely to report them, as Rumsfeld had asserted during a Pentagon news conference.
Beginning in early 2006, almost the only voice from within the Pentagon publicly cautioning against the Iran IED accusations was Gen. Pace. On that subject, Pace directly contradicted Rumsfeld, Bush, and now, Lieberman. Notably, one of the few media that covered this was the Voice of America (hardly a left-wing blog). Here's how VOA reported it:
Top American General Disputes US Military Claim on Iran
By Al Pessin
Canberra, Australia
12 February 2007
The top American military officer, General Peter Pace, declined Monday to endorse the conclusions of U.S. military officers in Baghdad, who told reporters on Sunday that the Iranian government is providing high-powered roadside bombs to insurgents in Iraq. General Pace made his comments during a visit to Australia, and VOA's Al Pessin reports from Canberra.
General Pace said he was not aware of the Baghdad briefing, and that he could not, from his own knowledge, repeat the assertion made there that the elite Quds brigade of Iran's Republican Guard force is providing bomb-making kits to Iraqi Shiite insurgents.
"We know that the explosively formed projectiles are manufactured in Iran. What I would not say is that the Iranian government, per se [specifically], knows about this," he said. "It is clear that Iranians are involved, and it's clear that materials from Iran are involved, but I would not say by what I know that the Iranian government clearly knows or is complicit."
On Feb. 17, 2006, Pace was asked at the National Press Club, "Should people in the U.S. military disobey orders that they believe are illegal?" Pace's response: http://www.jcs.mil/...
"It is the absolute responsibility of everybody in uniform to disobey an order that is either illegal or immoral."
That statement, and similar ones he made, were not widely reported. This was, perhaps, for Pace's protection as it was for the Bush Administration's, at which it was so clearly directed. Here are more comments, which practically nobody heard, by the head of the Joint Chiefs. Pace is clearly a great believer in the constitutional and moral imperatives that limit the violence of the military. Unlike Admiral Michael Mullen, who is slated to replace Pace in October if confirmed, we do not hear Pace speaking of the GWOT in terms of a Long War between Good and Evil. Pace's conception of the Global War Against Terrorist is more akin to that of law enforcement, limited and managable by normal methods of western countries:
I am proud of what I do to protect the Constitution of the United States as a uniformed member of the armed forces, but I am very proud of what you all in the press do to protect our country. Your questions, some of which may make me feel uncomfortable today, are exactly what you should be doing, and I should be trying to answer you the best I can and I will. . .
SNIP
The long war refers to the fact that in all the terrorist campaigns that we have known about, the terrorist campaign has lasted 10, 20, 30 years, and therefore there is no reason to believe that these terrorists would have a time span in their minds of anything less.
That does not mean that we will be doing the kinds of things we're doing in Iraq for another 20 or 30 years or in Afghanistan for another 20, 30 years. It does mean that free peoples, free governments, are going to need to continue to be alert and proactive against terrorist cells.
If you would use the analogy of a police department in a city, it's not that the city itself is without crime, but that the police department itself is capable of keeping the crime level down at a level below which the society can function.
And that is what I believe will be the, quote, "end state" of the war on terror; not that all terrorists will no longer exist, but that, collectively, the community of nations will be able to keep the number of terrorist incidents down below the level at which all of our freedom-loving societies can function and provide the kinds of services that we want for our people.
***
Our Senators need to press Admiral Mullen on these and related issues, and if the Admiral fails to show at least Pace's level of commitment to constitutional norms and independent judgment, his nomination for Chair of the Joint Chiefs should be rejected. The Majority Leader should take the lead and immediately commence this inquiry.