Admiral Fallon is a Navy man with 41 years of experience, who up until a
couple of days ago, had not decided to retire. So, you could assume something
happened to convience him. Not knowing the Admiral, I can only go with
what is written about him. Personally though, I am glad someone had the
balls to stand up to the Bush administration against yet more war. The
sad fact is Admiral Fallon surely saw something before he left that made him
sure his protests and suggestions were history, and that what he had stood
against was likely to happen.
So, the next question is when. Most of us think it will be Israel that will make
a strike against Syria and or Iran first. Then Bush will make his case for helping
Israel fight off this enemy, as well as "protect American interests in the Middle
East." In essence (oil and gas fields in Iran) and (oil and gas fields) in Iraq.
And will it be nuclear or just a type of modified "bunker buster"?
My question is, how will this keep America safer?
Fallon's Fall
Admiral William "Fox" (his flyboy nickname) Fallon, the head of the U.S. Central Command -- which covers most of the Middle East -- was given an unceremonious boot out of the Pentagon today even though for public attribution it was he who submitted his resignation.
Once again, this White House has seen to it that another senior level military commander has been censored with a loss of command for daring to challenge the Bush-Cheney "unconventional wisdom" regarding the Middle East. This was George Bush's going away present to his Vice President on the eve of Cheney's tour of the Middle East... Cheney just did not want this "Fox" around his Middle East henhouse. When assessing the troubled, turbulent Middle East, there is just no seat in the Situation Room for anyone, least of all the likes of an Adm. Fallon, who dares to speak his mind. So much for Bush's willingness to defer to the judgment of his commanders in the field.
Admittedly, Fallon cleared his throat in public often enough, perhaps too much. It was at once refreshing to read/hear what he had to say, but as you carefully read his many statements during his trips around the Middle East, you just had to wonder whether what he was saying or hinting in public was best, for his own career's sake, said in private. Our history is replete with examples of presidents who don't look kindly upon talkative military subordinates. My Pentagon sources who have no dog in this fight tell me that Fallon was warned on more than one prior occasion by SecDef Gates to keep his controversial advice within the proper command channels. That is the dilemma of military officers in this administration. So many knew that "Generals" Bush and Cheney were ill-equipped to overrule common sense military advice on Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan. Yet, most decided not to buck their superiors despite their disagreements with the White House and Rumsfeld, just follow orders, and finish out their tours before discarding their uniforms and their inhibitions.
Fallon was different. He expressed unconventional views both privately and publicly that challenged the wisdom of Gen. Petraeus' surge strategy in Iraq, and more than once dismissively contested a policy that promoted conflict over engagement with Iran. He considered his mission to look beyond the immediacy of these crises to provide a more strategic assessment of America's global military challenges and options. Fallon's views also represented inconvenient truths to the presumptive Republican nominee, John McCain. Could be that McCain himself made it clear to Bush the other day when they met that he needed Fallon out before Fallon embarrased McCain, given Fallon's positions that were 180 degrees contrary to McCain's -- but that is only my intuition.
I met Fallon in the Middle East a few weeks ago. It was a brief encounter in Qatar. Fallon had been touring the region (CENTCOM is actually based in Tampa, FL). He had been meeting with Qatar's leaders, who share his skepticism that a military solution was the only way to resolve the nuclear stand-off with Iran. As a roving regional military commander, whose empire extended from Pakistan in the east to Egypt and East Africa in the west, and all of the firestorms in between (iraq, Afghanistan, Iran) "Fox" Fallon was an exceptionally credible contrarian who believed that it would be unwise for the U.S. resort to force against Iran just as the White House war drums were beating forcefully before being silencd by the National Intelligence Estimate.
Gen. Petreaeus (who reported through Fallon to the Pentagon) will soon be returning in April to report to Congress and provide his assessment and his recommendations regarding the situation in Iraq. There is little doubt that when he is called to testify, Petreaus will be asked where he and Fallon specifically broke rank on Iraq. The American people deserve to know what Fallon would have recommended, given the stakes for our troops and Petreaus' likely position to call for a time out to any further troop reductions/rotations.
Fallon's coup de grace was a "death wish" interview for Esquire magazine. It is a fascinating read, and Fallon's take on the Middle East mess constitutes an important unclassified read for our two Democratic presidential candidates, one of whom hopefully will have the opportunity, yes, the opportunity, to begin reversing many of the policies that got Fallon into such hot water with his superiors.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
An average citizen is unable to comment on things he or she cannot know. My only difficulty is why the U.S. generals, Gen. Fallon included, did not recommend a Military Protectorate soon after the invasion, in lieu of the Shiite government which is still presiding over bloodshed? As I say, we the ordinary citizens have intelligent ideas, but the generals, the CIA, and the President decide. I have advocated a Protectorate since early on, knowing that Iraq wasn't ready for democracy when Saddam was toppled! I knew that you do not let a baby loose without its mother, until it can provide for itself. But our "enlightened" think tanks apparently didn't know! We ordinary citizens are starving because of the economic mess our "intellectual elites" got us into. They do not starve on their billionaire budgets! They should at least consider our ideas, the ordinary people's ideas, before they act!
Lately the term "Hero" has been thrown about by those wishing to salve their own conciences, especially those Chicken Hawk cowards in our Government. When I think of heros I like to remind myself of people like Nathan Hale or Patrick Henry. I think a hero might not necessarily be a soldier, sailor, airman or Marine, but can also be someone who bucks the status quo when all others think that Patriotism is about following the masses. Should one jump off of a bridge just because everyone else does it. I think not. I believe that Fallon qualifies on that score, not because of his service to America as an Admiral, but because he dares risk being an American who speaks the truth regardless of what it might mean in the way of reprisal. Does one risk reprisal to stand for what is right or does one cower to tyranny. Sometimes being a true Patriot means standing up as an American and speaking ones own mind, being an individual, a truly free individual. I think of late we have been fooled into accepting the Republican leaderships concepts of Freedom, Democracy and whatever other Propaganda they would have us believe.
The German People also once let themselves accept that path, hook , line and sinker. Look what it got them.
Fallon was right to oppose the surge and the president's dangerous and destructive obsession with Iraq-which is starting to show consequences in the emerging credibility gap in the Middle East. Fallon however was wrong in giving priority to Afghanistan and Pakistan over Iran the principle enemy in the war on terror whose evil star is rising in the region as our influence, power and prestige declines.
Fallon's departure could very well signal that after years of declining regional influence due to US weakness in facing Iran the President is now bent on restoring confidence in American power and is planning military action against Iran to decimate their nuclear facilities.If the mullahs survive until Election Day expect Bush to strike thereafter.
However, I warn the president that anything short of a full scale military operation, ground, air and sea, aimed at wiping out the mullahs would be a dangerous half measure that he will live to regret.
Go to Townhall.com - ApolloSpeaks and read my essay: The Rise of Nuclear Iran
ApolloSpeaks,
One question;
If Iran and Syria become the target and let's say Israel and the Us
succeed, does Russia and China just sit by and watch? They both
have oil and natural gas interests. Russia has helped build one
of Iran's biggest reactors, as well as supplying fuel for it.
Or do we suddenly find ourselves in WW III?
Emerging credibility gap? I think gaping might have been a better choice.
Most of the terrorists came from Saudi Arabia. Since they are bitter enemies of Iran, how does Iran now become our biggest threat? It seems the Bushies are willing to fight anyone but the the bad guys - their friends the Saudis.
I am sympathetic to the need for the top military leaders to not criticize the President in public but that must be based on the president actually basing his military policy on the advice of the commanders on the ground. He talks a good game on this, but he never does it.
If Cheney comes back from this trip deciding to attack Iran, the entire military should stage a coup. Refuse to take orders from the President until a new one is selected.
A coup wouldn't be in anyones best interest. A simple refusal to obey orders on everyones part would though. Unfortunately as in most countries you have the warmongers and those who would strive for peace. I believe that applies to us as well. Petraeus strikes me as a warmonger. I speak from experience since I met that type in Vietnam as well.
It's time to republish "GENERAL BETRAYUS"
Another voice of reason bites the dust.
Helloooooo IRAN!
I listen to my senior military leaders as long as they say what I tell them to say.
Have you noticed the administration is saying very little about how well the surge is working? That's because they know it is only working because Muqtada al Sadr has called a moratorium on violence. I predict that it will resume after the election even if he does get McCain elected.
Honor and integrity come with a price that Bush and his bunch have no intention of paying!
Impeachment is not political! Impeachment was designed into the workings of our government to protect the constitution. Our ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES, have taken an oath of office to uphold and protect the constitution. Impeachment is the tool that was provided to use when it is clear that the laws of this country are broken and reasonable attempts to correct the situation have failed. Many constitutional scholars have seen more than enough reason to investigate this administration for its utter disregard of this nation"s laws.
Although it has not been declared, we are living under martial law and this administrations interpretation of the 'war powers act' have put the citizens of this country in such a perilous predicament that it is against the law to demonstrate and demand the return of out rights that have been guaranteed by the constitution and usurped by this administration with the complicity of congress. I am much more afraid of our government than any terrorists.
The following paragraph was taken off the Amnesty International human rights violations report!
"Policies of the US government have become increasing focused on tracking and persecuting individuals expressing their right to free expression, disregarding longstanding US and international law guaranteeing that right."
Its called civilian control of the military. A philosophy we as a republic hold in high esteem.
Of course you need civilian control of the public. Otherwise you end up in situations like Pakistan and Thailand find themselves in more often than not. However, the main point here is that this could mean war with Iran is approaching. Everyone needs to start mobilizing against this disastrous possibility. If you do nothing else, please write to your congressmen and senators to push some political pressure on the white house not to take these steps....
Works just fine when the civilians are sane and /or at least reasonable!
Amb. Ginsberg,
Thank ls for a most ijsightful piece of writing.
Now we all know who the next Dem president, if there is one, the Pope permitting, or will he topple another Dem prez candidate like he did to Sen. Kerry. I am a Catholic but not the Pope's kind of Catholic fundamentalist, as are Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Tim Russert, Chris Matthews, Joe Scarborough, Peggy Noonan etc. etc. Anyway my point being the next Dem prez has a ready list of people to choose from for a great variety of government posts. Also a list of people to NOT choose for inclusion in his/her government.
People to choose are thos who place their oath of office or military service to the USA and their dedication to the truth and the Constitution before their politics/political leanings or religious leanings.
People to include should be Adm. Fallon, Amb. Ginsburg, Amb. Joe Wilson, Valerie Plame Wilson, Ray McGovern, lawyers who were fired or threatened by the Booshies(Bushies) possibly even Sen. Chuck Hagel, Rep. Ron Dellums who cares about all the damage done to Haiti by the Rethug party, Amy Goodman, Molly Ivins(posthumonous) and about a thousand others like the aforementioned who are dedicated to the TRUTH.
People that must not be given government jobs include anyone even remotely associated with the Bush administration for their dedication to the Repub Party 'Culture of Death' and the death for profits agenda of the Bush administration/Republican party. Also all religious nutcases whofront for the Republican Party. Also to be left out or pushed out(Rove/DeLay strategy of vicious government). These would include lawyers from the Ave Maria Law School and the Jerry Falwell Liberty U. Law School. Any religious fundamentalists be they the Popes Catholic religious fundies(not all Catholics, not me) or their brethren the evangelical fundies(not all evangelicals).
I admire Adm Fallon very much, but let's make no mistakes about how he left. He didn't decide to step down and walk away. I spent over 20 years in the Navy, and, believe me, no one submits a retirement request and leaves that quickly, unless he/she is being pushed out the door by powerful forces. I'm sure Adm fallon would have stayed around and continued to try to do something positive in the sea of incompentence in which he found himself. Of course, Darth and dubya just couldn't allow that.
The Bush administration is putting US national security at risk with its continuing, fantastically expensive adventure in Iraq. Fallon did the right thing and deserves full points.
Why has Huffpost not shown my under 350 word, well-documented post informing readers why Fallon called his likely successor, Petraeus, "an ass-kissing little chickenshit." -
http://tailrank.com/2642502/U-S-IRAQ-Fallon-Derided-Petraeus-Opposed-the-Surge
I'm not a fan of Huffpost's policy of reviewing posts either. What are they afraid of.? However, I used to post on Air America and I once got a call from them asking me to stop posting the IP addresses of other posters (I was actually making it up), but anyway, they almost got a class action lawsuit because of it.
Anyhoo, your article is dead on and I'm sorry to hear Fallon leaving. I was surprised when I first learned that a Navy man was taking over General Abizaid's role (remember him) and at first everyone thought that a 3rd Carrier group (from Fallon's Pacific Command) would be ordered into the Gulf. But apparently Fallon, after taking the position, refused to allow it.
Can you imagine?!!! Not only did we take our eye off the ball on Afghanistan and divert all our resources to Iraq, but now the Administration wants to divert even MORE resources away from the Pacific and take our eye off the ball on ----- China and North Korea.
Bush doesn't think strategically or tactically: only politically. Petraeus doesn't think strategically, only tactically as it supports his commander's political agenda. Fallon was the only one looking out for America's strategic interests.
God help us now.
This Fallon story has many of us really worried. Truly we don't actually know exactly what is going on.
We find it hard to believe that the Bush-Cheney gang will await quietly the end of their term and just pass on to the next government the unholy mess they have created. Rest assured they are pipe dreaming up some stupidity to build up the public's fear and they can no longer use the "fear more years" argument. It would certainly seem that in their minds that have to get rid of all the Fallons and clear thinkers.
Fallon fell???
No, it seems to me, that he walked away with his head held high!
At least he was not "resigned" the way that the Soviets and Nazis "resigned" the generals who disagreed with Stalin and Hitler. Now he can write his memoirs.
To my knowledge, Admiral Fallon is the first officer
to resign in protest of the Bush war policies.
The others waited until they retired
before they publicly opposed the Bush war strategy.
Admiral Fallon is to be commended for his action.
Hopefully, others will follow.
Our military has been devastated
by multiple, 15-month combat tours.
If we really, REALLY want to fight
our foreign wars against the Muslims
for the next 100-years,
we need military conscription & taxes
in order to have enough troops & equipment.
Or, we need to re-think our strategy to deal
with the global Muslim insurrection:
"There is no way to peace, peace is the way" A.J.Muste
"Love your enemies" Jesus
Col (ret.) Ann Wright, indeed, was the first officer to resign in protest of Bush's Iraq policy--just as the international crime was about to go down.
I must emphatically note that Army Lt. Ehren Watada was the first officer to refuse deployment to Iraq, citing the fact that it is an illegal war, and that his duty was not to the commander in chief, but to the Constitution of the United States--thus he could not obey an illegal order.
To whatever degree each chooses to dissent and/or resist, each should make the most of their choices to bring this illegal war and occupation to an end.
I pray that Adm. Fallon will make the most and best use of his voice to help bring this nation to its senses. He has my support, along with the other military voices of conscience.
Exactly.
Arguably, our best course after 9/11 was forgiveness. Military action has been singulary unsucessful and spectacularly expensive. American freedoms have been curtailed by our own government and we are bankrupting our future with failed polices. We have played directly into the terrorist scenario.
Time to change the rules of the game.
I don't expect this informative post on Fallon and Petraeus to appear in Huffpost, but I will submit it anyway .
Admiral William Fallon is a brave American patriot, a good man, and an extremely capable military leader..
His successor as chief of the Central Command (CENTCOM) will likely be the infamous Gen. Petraeus, who Fallon rightly called "an ass-kissing little chickenshit."
http://tailrank.com/2642502/U-S-IRAQ-Fallon-Derided-Petraeus-Opposed-the-Surge
Petraeus is nothing more than a hack for George W. Bush,. a documented Deserter, who has never had the right to be President or Commander-in-Chief of US Military Forces - http://prorev.com/bush5.htm
Petraeus should have been Court Marshalled under US Military Codes of Law not only for lying to Congress about Iraq, but for obeying Bush"s illegal order to use radio-active Depleted Uranium WMDs in Iraq "in violation of the Geneva Convention, UN laws and the US Constitution.
http://freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=52151&Disp=12&Trace=on
http://www.hereinreality.com/carlyle.html
http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showPerson.php?id=145&name=Carlyle-Group
Most Americans don"t know that Petraeus also serves the interests of the Monsanto Corporation, (aka GD Searle" owned and run by CEO Donald Rumsfeld) which has made billions on the production and sale of bio-chemical WMDs in Iraq and Afganistan, and the illegal use of experimental vaccines on our soldiers.
http://freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=52151&Disp=12&Trace=on
http://www.hereinreality.com/carlyle.html
And that Petraeus"s was involved in the murder of one of his own men, US Col. Theodore Westhusing. A MUST READ¦
http://www.austinchronicle.com/gyrobase/ReaderComments/?ContainerID=46914
There is no way that Ted would have killed himself. He loved his wife and children more than his own life. He was murdered. Pure and simple.
Repost of comment by imhotep
"Fallon was "resigned" because he challenged the Israeli's not because he ran afoul of bush. Read the article yourself and don't allow Mr. Ginsberg to get away with giving you "his" take. Peace"
Thanks Imhotep.....
Here is a link to the Esquire "Fox" Fallon article to read yourself........
http://www.esquire.com/features/fox-fallon
Putting aside all of the "don't worry" comments regarding an attack on Iran, my worry alarm just shot up like a rocket. People talk as if logic were going to rule here particularly because our military is stretched too thin, the fall-out is too unpredictable, etc. and so no attack on Iran will occur.
You can hope that is true, but the neocon blueprint includes attacking Iran and the US economy is in dire straits. An attack on Iran may be a last attempt at saving the Bush legacy.
So I suggest that you all start worrying. Don't be caught whistling a happy tune when the bombing starts.
Arleang,
In Milton Friedman Capitalism, there is either natural "shock & awe" as in
earthquake, flood ect. or war related as in make turmoil and destroy the current
way of life. Then offer a better life, but take away the voice of the people, take
away employment, take away all government run entities and privatize them,
and destroy all opposition to the plan. Bring in big business to control product
and leave the people to fend the best way they can. Oh, and to maintain control
use torture, threats, and disappearances.
It works in countries like Costa Rica, Columbia and Chile because of the collapse
of economy and dictatorship. It can work in America too. You just have to make
a bigger shock. WW III would mean a pretty big shock.
it does sound as though cheney is getting ready to start another war . . hence his visit to the Middle East . . .
As long as our policy towards Iran is regime change (and it is) the Iranians have no incentive to talk to us. They're not going to negotiate themselves out of existence.
Link to the Fallon article in Esquire: http://www.esquire.com/features/fox-fallon
It's a fascinating look at the Admiral's thoughts and activities in the Middle East. His departure is a loss not only to CENTCOM but to the United States. The White House, either President Bush or Vice-President Cheney can be expected to insist on a replacement who will do and say exactly what they demand. If there is pushback from Secretary Gates, one can reasonably predict his early "resignation."
It's seems crystal clear that President Bush intends a military strike on Iran this year, likely timed to have what the White House calculates will be the greatest impact on the November election. From the point of view of those who think a shooting war with Iran is a bad idea, House Speaker Pelosi's placing impeachment off the table is more and more looking to be one of the greatest political blunders in recent history.
jesus, perhaps the last standing people believing in democratic institutions in the usa is, paradoxically, senior members of the military. Perhaps like minded generals could perform a surgical strike & end this madness since congress won't. I'm wondering if that is our only "hope".
Posted March 11, 2008 | 11:14 PM (EST)