Hints of a major Constitutional crisis in the wind:
CYNTHIA TUCKER, ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION:
"Look for a revolt from active-duty generals if September rolls around and the president is sticking with the surge into '08. We've already heard from retired generals. But my Atlanta Journal-Constitution colleague Jay Bookman has lots of sources among currently serving military officers who don't want to fall by the wayside like the generals in Vietnam did, kept pushing a war that they knew was lost." MediaBistro 11 May 2007 Preview of The Chris Matthews show
Jay Bookman is on the editorial board of the AJC. His latest opinion piece (May 9th) talks about the toll the war is taking on the troops:
The documented impact of repeated and lengthy deployments also worries military officials, given that Army deployments were recently extended, from a year to 15 months. According to military insiders, the Army will be forced to extend deployments again, to 18 months, in order to extend the current surge beyond the fall.
If true, this is one step away from a military coup and thus one of most serious crises possible for our Constitutional system, in which the military take their orders from the civilains. (I could call them politicians, but we all know the fallacy of Bush's critique of the Iraq Funding Bill, so it's not necessary to rehash that.)
We saw hints of this coming earlier, with stories of the military threatening to refuse an order to attack Iran:
"There are four or five generals and admirals we know of who would resign if Bush ordered an attack on Iran," a source with close ties to British intelligence said. "There is simply no stomach for it in the Pentagon, and a lot of people question whether such an attack would be effective or even possible." Timesonline (UK) 25 Feb 2007
There is also the increasing number of retired flag officers willing to speak out:
Most Americans suspect that something is fundamentally wrong with the President's management of the conflict in Iraq. And they are right. Lt Gen WIlliam Odom (ret), 28 Apr 2007 (Emphasis in original)
And of course, Maj Gen. John Batiste (ret) who retired rather than continue to follow orders he could not accept, and whose ad blasting Bush got him fired from CBS.
ThinkProgress picked this up (which is where I found this story), and reminds us that the JCS was against the surge from the beginning:
The Bush administration is split over the idea of a surge in troops to Iraq, with White House officials aggressively promoting the concept over the unanimous disagreement of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, according to U.S. officials familiar with the intense debate. (Emphasis added) Washington Post 19 Dec 2006
At least one active-duty high-ranking officer has also spoken out, Paul Yingling; he places more of the blame on the generals, but Bush comes in for his share:
Prior to the war, President Bush promised to give field commanders everything necessary for victory. Privately, many senior general officers both active and retired expressed serious misgivings about the insufficiency of forces for Iraq. Armed Forces Journal May 2007
I read all this, particularly the Tucker quote, as planted warnings from the military to the president. But Bush, who famously insists that he "listens to the generals," has shown time and time again that in fact he does not listen. (Maybe the "God's voice" in his head is drowning out all the other voices?")
Any reasonable leader/decider/commander guy would be looking for a face-saving way out at this point. But Bush is no more known for being reasonable than he is for listening.
The wild card in all this is Petraeus: Will he back the White House or will he back the military? If he parrots the White House line, his underofficers may start speaking out, thus disrupting the military chain of command. If he tells it like it is, Bush loses his last argument for staying the course. And his supporters will be faced with the choice of keeping their word and voting to stop the war, or going down to defeat in 2008.
I've never pushed for impeachment before, largely on the grounds that it is politically impossible. But now it's coming out into the open that Bush is bent on destroying the military, which is the one government institution that the hard-line right wingers worship (so long as they don't have to participate). And that might sway them into convicting Bush.
Unfortunately for the country, even if Bush were kicked out tomorrow, the damage is already done.