I expect that there will be no war (with Iran), and that is what we ought to be working for. We ought to try to do our utmost to create different conditions.
Admiral William J. Fallon
Just as Fallon took over Centcom last spring, the White House was putting itself on a war footing with Iran. Almost instantly, Fallon began to calmly push back against what he saw as an ill-advised action. Over the course of 2007, Fallon's statements in the press grew increasingly dismissive of the possibility of war, creating serious friction with the White House.
Last December, when the National Intelligence Estimate downgraded the immediate nuclear threat from Iran, it seemed as if Fallon's caution was justified. But still, well-placed observers now say that it will come as no surprise if Fallon is relieved of his command before his time is up next spring, maybe as early as this summer, in favor of a commander the White House considers to be more pliable. If that were to happen, it may well mean that the president and vice-president intend to take military action against Iran before the end of this year and don't want a commander standing in their way.
Thomas P.M. Barnett
[Former Naval War College professor]
Prosecute a politican and a prostitute to take attention away from a war with...
Iran!
That's the ticket.
Shakespeare's pen would have a field day with the intrigues and machinations of the
Gray
House
of
Bush.
An iron curtain of censorship prevents the public from knowing all of this.
I suppose it has always been the case in any country's central government.
Whether it be England, Spain, France, Germany, Russia etc.
The geopolitical chess boards have players and moves that do not see the light of day in sound-proof basements of secrecy.
I do not wish for there to be any more war.
I believe that diplomacy would achieve much more than more war would.
Fallon, who did not want to talk about war with Iran, nor be a part of its planning, did not just leave gently into the night.
Bush's Neo Con masters made the Decider
GET
RID
OF
Fallon.
(Or maybe it is now only Bush's own brain...
but the "MASTERS" are pleased nonetheless)
No wussies!
No pacifists!
ONLY FIGHTERS TO THE DEATH FOR THE STATE'S CORPORATE MASTERS!
GOTTA
GIVE
THE OWNERS
OF
AMERICA
AND
ISRAEL
ANOTHER
HORSE
SHOT
IN THE ARM!
Israel's airstrike deep in Syria last October was reported to have targeted a nuclear-related facility, but details have remained sketchy and some experts have been skeptical that Syria had a covert nuclear program. An alternative scenario floating in Israel and Lebanon is that the real purpose of the strike was to force Syria to switch on the targeting electronics for newly received Russian anti-aircraft defenses. The location of the strike is seen as on a likely flight path to Iran (also crossing the friendly Kurdish-controlled Northern Iraq), and knowing the electronic signatures of the defensive systems is necessary to reduce the risks for warplanes heading to targets in Iran.
Two U.S. warships took up positions off Lebanon earlier this month, replacing the USS Cole. The deployment was said to signal U.S. concern over the political stalemate in Lebanon and the influence of Syria in that country. But the United States also would want its warships in the eastern Mediterranean in the event of military action against Iran to keep Iranian ally Syria in check and to help provide air cover to Israel against Iranian missile reprisals. One of the newly deployed ships, the USS Ross, is an Aegis guided missile destroyer, a top system for defense against air attacks.
["From Are We Closer to War?" By Dan Froomkin
Special to washingtonpost.com
Wednesday, March 12, 2008]
P.S.
Today I received James Thurber's The Last Flower
A Parable in Pictures.
On the bottom of the front cover are these words:
"A melancholy argument against annihilation. The Last Flower is on the short list of books worth clutching to your chest as the world is destroyed."
---David Rees, author of Get Your War On
IT'S THE OIL STUPID!
No comments:
Post a Comment