Is Fallon a message on Iran?
I want to mention again that putting Admiral Fallon in charge of Centcom in the middle of two ground wars only makes sense in a few scenarios.
1) This Navy man really is brilliant and the best qualified to turn around two losing ground wars.
2) He was the top guy who was willing to tow the Bush line.
Or, 3) The coming focus is not on the ground wars, but instead on using naval and air power to attack/influence Iran and to protect the oil supply. (Task Iraq to Petraeus and let Fallon focus on "regional issues?")
Just putting it out there.
1) This Navy man really is brilliant and the best qualified to turn around two losing ground wars.
2) He was the top guy who was willing to tow the Bush line.
Or, 3) The coming focus is not on the ground wars, but instead on using naval and air power to attack/influence Iran and to protect the oil supply. (Task Iraq to Petraeus and let Fallon focus on "regional issues?")
Just putting it out there.
posted by mikevotes at
1:29 PM
3 Comments:
We are drawing nearer to the date we attack Iran, according to my prediction, in your contest.
By
Lew Scannon, at 8:48 PM
My White House sources tell me that putting a Navy man in overall control of the Iraq war effort is an absolutely essential part of the Decider's new war plans - he's going to flood the place. Hell, nothing else has worked.
By
Anonymous, at 10:23 PM
Lew, I was way early in my guess. I haven't even looked at it in awhile.
Abi, As good an idea as any.
I'm thinking more and more that the idea is to task Iraq tto Petreaus, which means this mornings NYTimes story is even bigger.
Mike
By
mikevotes, at 6:54 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home