He's got about 200 more day to get it done. Really winding down the clock, isn't Georgie.
Calm down, 'FM', it's only one senior officer and they're always falling out with each other - think of King and MacArthur vs. the rest in WWII, and the latter and his president in Korea. As often as not it's personal pique and old resentments rather than grand strategy. You won't be able to believe anything in the media and nor should you - just wait 'til the history books are written! Barring something huge there's no chance Bush will rocket Iran - unfortunately!
Only a certifiable nut-case would bomb Iran under current circumstances. That, of course, implies that Bush/Cheney or McCain either one would do it in a minute.
Genuine security threats must be addressed in coordination with our international allies. Freelancing makes the U.S. into a rogue nation, with everything that implies. If at some point Iran becomes a nuclear threat to the U.S., I am certain many allies would join a legitimate international effort to thwart any intent by Iran to attack. As things stand, U.S. threats against Iran are the primary reason Iran feels a need to arm itself with <bush_speak> nu-ku-lar </bush_speak> weapons. No nation wants to be labeled part of an "axis of evil." It is the likely failure by the U.S. to engage in serious diplomacy that is evil.
I regret the retirement of Admiral Fallon. He was by all reports a straight arrow, a voice for sensible restraint, and an utterly apolitical actor... exactly what we need in these insanely overpoliticized times.
Too bad the public was never given an option over who should resign. By the time Bush leaves office, our economy will be in shambles, most of our bridges will have collapsed, we will have only one or two international friends left, and the people in Spin Central, aka the White House Press Office will not be able to tell you their parents names. They will have totally abandoned the truth.
David, granted Admiral Fallon was only one individual but he was Commander Central Command and had an important role in keeping the tensions between the U.S. and Iran in check. His refusal to allow a third carrier force to be deployed in the Persian Gulf certainly kept tensions lower and forced the Administration to look at other avenues. Never forget about the oil. The Bush/Cheney cabal want control over all the oil and will do anything they can in their twisted view of reality to get it. Iraq was about the oil and nothing more.
Steve,
It is a real shame that Admiral Fallon's distinguished career should end on such a sour note. This is especially true when you consider it is at the hands of a deserter and one "who had more important things to do" when duty called.
Welcome Roy,
I agree. It would have been very interesting to see the result if the public was given the choice of who would stay and who would go between Admiral Fallon and Shrub. I would be willing to bet good money, gold even, that the public would chose Fallon.
Oh, 'FM', not that old canard again - 'Iraq was all about oil'! If the USA/UK had agreed to lift UN sanctions (repeat *UN* sanctions), that is, if we had agreed to surrender to Saddam, we could have bought his oil at the then current price. Why spend zillions fighting for something which is likely to be, and indeed was, badly damaged by warfare when you could have bought it wholesale at market prices. (I write all that on the assumption - perhaps I'm wrong - that it is Iraqi oil to which you refer?)
As for your pet Admiral, you know as well as me, but not as well as some of your commenters, that there always was, is and will be, arguments over grand strategy because it is an art not a science. Judgement is required and honest, as well as dishonest, men will always debate. History remains as the final arbiter, but even there, if you put two historians in a room they will come out with three conclusions!
Anyone who does not see that "it's all about the oil" ... not only to Bush/Cheney but also to Osama bin Laden... should read some of the latter's available letters and statements before 9/11/2001. A good synopsis is available in BBC News reporter Greg Palast's book Armed Madhouse.
To this point, Iraq is the artificially chosen battleground over which The Oil President and his sidekick GeeDubya have chosen to spill blood in behalf of their "awl bidness" cronies... and UBL seems more than willing to let them do that. If they compound their error by invading Iran, especially if they use nu-ku-lar weapons, we will surely witness the beginning of the end of the great American nation... not a quick, violent demise, but a long, slow, excruciatingly painful economic decline into irrelevance and oblivion.
Whatever happens next, one thing is abundantly clear: The neocons and their tame president are not nearly as bright as they think they are.
Ah, that is why I added my rider. If you are talking about oil supplies in general (as opposed to Iraqi oil in particular), then there is a very good strategic reason for the US to have bases at the head of the Persian Gulf and I sincerely hope they will remain there with the blessing of which ever bunch of scallawags end up running Iraq for as long as possible. I am not suggesting that that is a *sufficient* reason to invade Iraq but it's a useful bonus! Do not doubt for a second that if and when Iran thinks it is powerful enough, using whatever means it can get away with, they will attempt to control the Gulf and all that sails through it. If you think your economy is going to the dogs now, wait until that happens and you will have something that puts 1929 and the early '30s into the shade.
"The neocons and their tame president are not nearly as bright as they think they are." Agreed!
David, as my grandfather used to say you are real "cat bird". I can see we will agree to disagree about the political and economic drivers that are currently turning the Middle East into a "world o' shit". Regardless of any "bonuses" that may derive from our invasion and occupation of Iraq none of it justifies the nearly 4000 American lives and 50,000 plus disabled soldiers that have resulted. Nothing justifies the displacement of nearly 4 million Iraqis and the continuing death and injury of hundreds of thousands more. Nothing justifies the thousands and thousands of young refugee Iraqi girls forced into prostitution in Syria and other places just to help provide some scraps for food for their families. I don't need to continue as there is nothing that justifies what we have done in Iraq. Nothing!
William M. Arkin has an interesting take on Fallon's departure. Some of it I knew; some was unexpected. Arkin opines that Fallon's pressured retirement implies a smaller, not greater, likelihood that the Bushists will invade Iran, because of the level of forces likely to be tied up in Iraq going forward.
Steve,
Interesting take on things by Arkin. I can see the possibility that he is correct on the amount of force necessary in Iraq means nothing will happen in Iran. Let's just hope that is the deal.
No idea what a "cat bird" is but it sounds rather a splendid creature so I'll take it as a compliment, 'FM'!
As an ordinary member of the public, I sympathise with your despair and sorrow but of course when you are a 'prince' (as in Machiavelli), or a president, or a prime minister, you cannot afford to indulge in such finer feelings. The justification, or not, for invading Iraq and its consequences will only become clear when it is over, which will be some considerable time yet. I'm not certain but *if* it makes possible the crucial task of keeping the Persian Gulf open it will have been worth it - *compared to the alternative*! (The alternative, you should clearly understand, could be the cutting of Saudi and Iraqi oil supplies causing a massive world-wide slump beyond anything experienced since the 1930s and the turning off of lights everywhere - including America. Similarly, you should not suppose that your frontiers lie on the east and west coasts of your continent. Such folly was widespread in the late '30's, early '40s, and very nearly cost you dear.)
There is no love lost between the Iraqis and the Iranians and the former will be exceedingly nervous of a nuclear-armed Iranian hegemony in the Gulf. Remember, the Iraqis are as keen as us that their oil should flow freely, not at the yea or nay of Tehran. So I hope that whoever ends up running Iraq they will permit American bases to remain.
If I may say so, you and your correspondents here do not recognise American strategic national interests, and I fear you will continue in this purblind state until you lose them, by which time it will be too late.
Commenting by HaloScan
