A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day…so check back often….

The question is: Will rank insubordination on a scale arguably not seen in a military commander since MacArthur faded away nearly six decades ago be rewarded by still higher office? Will Democratic politicians, so anxious to demean George Bush’s presidency and seek partisan advantage by pandering to the American people’s penchant for ignoring, rather than confronting emerging threats, resist the temptation to embrace Fox Fallon? Or will they seek to burnish their own, woefully inadequate national-security credentials by enlisting this arrogant, short-sighted, and insubordinate officer in a new, and probably even more problematic, political career?

I dunno… Comparing Fallon to MacArthur is overstating Fallon’s public popularity & warfighter cred. More apt would be comparing him to Wesley Clark – both “fired” for insubordination and undue cockiness — offhand, ironic that they both gravitated to donk politics.

Put another way, sorta like cHillary fancying herself as POTUS & Ubambi as her VP required the willing suspension of disbelief even as she trails him on all the vital numbers. Yet, that either Bozos would consider either Clark or Fallon as potential VP or high level Cabinet, ie SoS or SoD, as a way of gaining votes in Nov is equally ludicrous.

Hmmm, we should do more to encourage this delusion. Bwahaha…

When he was PACOM Commander, he invited top Chinese military brass to swarm all over the insides of Pacific Fleet Navy ships on which most US citizens will never set foot.

Fallon kept the Chinese Navy checked at every turn, quietly reasserting our relationships with other Navy’s keeping them out of Chinas pocket. The Chinese saw the same crap you see when the public goes onboard a ship during Fleet week.

Michael Savage called out Fallon in a big way on his talk show while Fallon was still PACOM Commander — and before he was anointed as CentCom Commander — a position he never should have been given.

The fact that you listen to that gasbag and take him seriously says alot.

I pray that either a soldier or a Marine is appointed the new CentCom commander: as Iraq and Afghanistan are pre-eminently ground wars —

Fallon was in that post for Iran, a war that will most sertainly be pre-eminently Naval, if it happens.

and the only Navy pilot we need in that job is one that is ITCHING to strike Iran (something precisely that Fallon is not)

Yeah because thats what you want in a military commander, someone itching to attack. That is the LAST thing you want, you want a measured and considered commander that will act when necessary and make good decisions.

Michael Savage called out Fallon in a big way on his talk show while Fallon was still PACOM Commander — and before he was anointed as CentCom Commander — a position he never should have been given.

Now, after Fallon showed his willful ways, publicly expressing Democratic talking points in open defiance of his Commander-in-Chief, he has been — thank the LORD — been unceremoniously canned.

I pray that either a soldier or a Marine is appointed the new CentCom commander: as Iraq and Afghanistan are pre-eminently ground wars — and the only Navy pilot we need in that job is one that is ITCHING to strike Iran (something precisely that Fallon is not).

From Comments in the link above to the Petraeus article (January 2008):

I’m still rooting for Petraeus to emerge as the GOP nominee from a brokered convention this year.

sigh…

pseudonominus on March 12, 2008 at 3:33 PM

Since there is no proof (nor should there be) the Petraus is a Republican, than this would be a risky proposition, no.

Remember how Stormin Norman became a horrid RINO when he endorsed McCain. What about Powell (gasp) a moderate.

And there is no question he hates Bush with a passion and I imagine he doesn’t think much of McCain either.

Can’t swallow the CIC’s regursatation of mucus…!

Nothing but respect for the man and his service. But the role of the military is to carry out the policy of the elected civilian government.

upinak, u go grl. thanks

A Pentagon official said Gates is “very concerned about all of our energy” being devoted to Iraq, an “overcommitment that is consuming and distracting us from everything else. On the other hand, he knows there can’t be another Saigon. There’s this balance.

He was not the only skeptic. More than half a dozen retired
four-star generals turned down Hadley in his search for a “war czar” who could knock heads and make sure requests from the field survived the Washington bureaucracy.
- 9 Sep 2007

MB4 on March 12, 2008 at 4:59 PM

…Petraeus, who’s more reluctant to draw down in Iraq prematurely…

Because he is winning? Maybe?

Kinda silly for Petraeus to want to quite while he is winning. IMHO.

He brought it all upon himself. by AP

Yeah, just like Spitzer – can’t blame Bush or Cheney or Rush. He just “F”ed up himself, like a bird shitting in his own nest…

He was not the only skeptic. More than half a dozen retired
four-star generals turned down Hadley in his search for a “war czar” who could knock heads and make sure requests from the field survived the Washington bureaucracy.
- 9 Sep 2007

On a blog Yingling maintains at the Web site of Small Wars Journal, an independent journal of military theory, he has acknowledged these dilemmas, but he hasn’t disentangled them. For example, if generals do speak up, and the president ignores their advice, what should they do then — salute and follow orders, resign en masse or criticize the president publicly?
- Fred Kaplan, August 26, 2007
MB4 on March 12, 2008 at 4:21 PM

This leaves CENTCOM open for Patraeus who can hopefully help Afghanistan back on track.
BohicaTwentyTwo on March 12, 2008 at 3:06 PM

…be Jesus, my fine feathered B22, the good “General Pet” has his hands full in Iraq…?

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylonbeyond/2008/03/middle-east-fal.html

“No d[e]fferences emplied; however differences indeed…!

Would you reccomend a promotion…?

MB4 on March 12, 2008 at 4:21 PM

Resigning en masse is great if you are not alone, otherwise you look like a lone nut.

resign if you believe it’s the wrong course of action.

NoDonkey on March 12, 2008 at 4:28 PM

HUAH! And after you’ve resigned, then make a very public stink of why you resigned.

upinak on March 12, 2008 at 4:28 PM

Please, keep us informed, and even comment form overseas, if possible…

The problem with the (at the time, horrifically outdated) tanks was that they didn’t have A/C at all. We’re now leasing slightly more modern Leopard II’s from Germany. They have A/C… maybe even a cup-holder :D

If you’re heart is not into a course of action and you are in charge of that action, be it a war or be it introducing the Double-Cheezy Dorito chip at Nabisco, resign your position.

You’re at the top. Yeah, the middle managers, etc., soldier on, but seems to me that if you’re in charge of something huge, you resign if you believe it’s the wrong course of action.

Actually the air conditioning likes to go out a lot… I don’t think it matters what armoured vehicle you drive.

F.T. and dmann, thanks for supporting. It is people like yourselves who make us proud! I won’t be leaving right away… few months down the line due to getting squared away. All my guys are excited and I have already lost some friends. But it was time. This summer is going to fly by.

On a blog Yingling maintains at the Web site of Small Wars Journal, an independent journal of military theory, he has acknowledged these dilemmas, but he hasn’t disentangled them. For example, if generals do speak up, and the president ignores their advice, what should they do then — salute and follow orders, resign en masse or criticize the president publicly?
- Fred Kaplan, August 26, 2007

upinak on March 12, 2008 at 4:01 PM

Like dmann said, God bless, be smart and a great big Thank you!

At least you’ll be (barely) warmer. Unless you arrive in the summer, in which case you have my apologies. I heard that the first Canadian armoured unit that served there had Leopard tanks without Air conditioning. Nasty!

Meanwhile, Kaplan ends with a question I asked yesterday myself: If this is all about bomb bomb bomb, bomb bombing Iran, why hasn’t Gates been pushed out too?

Whether it is about Iran or not, I don’t think that Gates would be pushed out. Rumsfeld’s exit was such a big event for the administration’s opponents that if Bush pulled another switch it could cripple his ability to act despite lame duck status. He’s been pretty powerful thus far, but combine a Gates shakeup and that NIE… that equals no action against Iran.