DoD Press Conference

[Avery Adams]

Following the Department of Defense Daily briefing, the Secretary of Defense fielded questions from the Press.

Q: Mr. Secretary, there has been a number of alarming items regarding Iran lately. Sir, could you tell us if the US is prepared to take action against that country?

A: First of all if we were to take any military action against any country such orders would come from the President and you would not receive a pre-announcement of such an event from me.

Secondly, the activities of Iran on a number of issues have concerned the United States and its friends for nearly three decades. They have been left behind, along with Syria, in the mid-east march towards democracy.

Q: But if you were ordered to take action, do we have the forces in the region to effectively strike Iran and plans to do so? What about protecting our forces and allies from retaliation? In particular, what about Iraq's Shi'ite population?

A: Well that is a particularly loaded question. I may have to reinstate my predecessor's 1-question rule. (laughter)

Obviously there is a good deal of American military presence in the region. Depending on the instructions of the president, this may or may not be the proper arraignment of forces for a given mission. The US military is quite capable of deploying additional forces if needed.

Central Command, all the regional Combatant Commands for that matter, along with the Joint Staff and my office are constantly reviewing contingencies for various scenarios and emergencies. So to ask if we have "plans" is short sighted, we have ALOT of plans...

As for protecting forces and allies, whenever we deploy forces abroad or into combat we take great pains to ensure both the host nations and ourselves are protected.

And the last part? oh yes, the Shi'ite in Iraq. While I am not an expert in their specific situation, I would say it is likely that some would be vested in maintaining a stable and unified Iraq, while others might be upset by actions against an ethnically or religiously similar country. It is hard to say, however many in Iraq have expressed their own security concerns regarding Iran to us.

Lets see, next...

Q: Mr. Secretary, what is the status of the Defense Appropriations bills?

A: We have submitted our request to the White House Office of Management and Budget, as well as posted it (in the DoD section) for congress to view in preparation for it to be forwarded. The three major components are Reorganization, Procurement, and Research & Development. I look forward to answering the questions congress might have on these proposals, and urge them to address what I believe are vital needs.

I would like to open the floor to any question...

(OOC: everybody please feel free to ask any "press" questions you would like)

[Ethan Hall (D-IA)]

Q: Mr. Secretary, James Glazer from the Des Moines Reporter. Do we have the forces to actually go to war in Iran and Syria, should the situation require it, as opposed to one or the other as the earlier question posed it?

[Avery Adams]

Q: Mr. Secretary, James Glazer from the Des Moines Reporter. Do we have the forces to actually go to war in Iran and Syria, should the situation require it, as opposed to one or the other as the earlier question posed it?

A: Though that is a hypothetical situation, the answer is yes, the United States does have the forces to deal with such contingencies. It may require certainly plans and priorities to be adjusted, however these are the things the Joint Staff and regional Combatant Commanders think about all the time. It is also important to remember that we would of course hope to cooperate with friends and allise in the region and around the globe, who's contribution would be very important.

[Cody Shea]

Q: Mr. Secretary, Penn Nom from the Raliegh News & Observer, if the Syrians are storing Iranian nuclear arms, what's to stop them from launching against the U.S., a NATO ally, or most likely the state of Israel, should the U.S. attack?

[Avery Adams]

wrotenbe said:

Q: Mr. Secretary, Penn Nom from the Raliegh News & Observer, if the Syrians are storing Iranian nuclear arms, what's to stop them from launching against the U.S., a NATO ally, or most likely the state of Israel, should the U.S. attack?

A: As many of you are well aware, the United States and a number of our allies have worked to develop missile defenses against such attacks, should they occur. Naturally, such weapons would also be a priority target if the National Command Authority should order a strike.

This leads to the problem of allowing rouge regimes to develop such weapons, while turning a blind eye to them. As it is, the two nations you have sited support terrorism against Israel and our efforts to support democracy in Iraq, not to mention Lebanon. If these nations, with hostile leadership, deploy these weapons, it would hang like a sword above our interests in the region, preventing us from acting when friends and allies are threatened.

The virtues of diplomacy are nullified if disingenuous actors use it to mask their efforts and intentions, and gain time to arm themselves with the most dangerous weapons. The "carrot" has been offered constantly and rejected, I fear the time to apply the "stick" may be approaching. Deterrence capability is useless, if the credibility that it may be used is not realized.