Comments on: Paging Senator Bomb-Bomb: Admiral Fallon Retiring

By: prostratedragon

prostratedragon — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 04:52:35 +0000

Wow, getting on-line late —channelled EW by accident.

By: prostratedragon

prostratedragon — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 04:49:43 +0000

I’m sure he thinks so. It will be interesting to see whether the unchanged economic realities, in which the U.S. is a bit of net supplicant over there, have a bigger effect.

By: SouthernDragon

SouthernDragon — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 00:40:01 +0000

We’ll still be here and there might be peace in the world. Plus we get all their stuff and the banks go bust cuz all of a sudden they’re stuck with an even bigger shitpile than they’ve got now. All that consumer credit, doncha know. It’ll be rapturous.

By: bobschacht

bobschacht — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 00:36:14 +0000

So, the way things are trending, what are the odds that Bush will use the Lieberman Resolution that Hillary Clinton voted for as justification for war with Iran, even though she claims that the resolution does not justify that?

Will that then throw the nomination into Obama’s lap?

And will McCain then beat up Obama for not having the background and training to lead a nation at war?

I think our Naomis (Klein and Wolf) called it already.

Bob in HI

By: bobschacht

bobschacht — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 00:30:59 +0000

From EW’s place next door– Check this out:

THE PENTAGON’S NEW MAP

Watch Thomas P.M. Barnett interviewed by Rep. Tom Feeney (R-FL)
on “After Words”

IT EXPLAINS WHY WE’RE GOING TO WAR,
AND WHY WE’LL KEEP GOING TO WAR.

Follow this link, folks, especially in the context of ditching Fallon and Cheney’s trip to the Middle East.

I think we may have in Cheney and Bush the archetypes of “war mongers.” I can’t remember any other presidency that has been so obsessed with war, war, and more war. Having started two wars already, and with our military forces stretched to the limit, that is not enough. They want MORE WAR!

Is this insanity, or what?

Bob in HI

By: RonD

RonD — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 23:46:02 +0000

I think it needs more pepping up in terms of what could happen in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, the rest of the Moslem world, the non-Moslem world, and what it would do to our and the world’s economy.

The Nightmare Scenario, Part 3

By: Hugh

Hugh — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 23:44:26 +0000

The Esquire article purportedly has Fallon as the lone military person against bombing Iran.

I don’t know about Mullen but the Joint Chiefs in general want a drastic reduction in Iraq because they see the Army as broken. A war with Iran at this point would likely do to the other services what has already happened to the Army and tie us down into a series of no win endless dispersed low level conflicts from the Strait of Gibraltar to the Philippines.

By: kirk murphy

kirk murphy — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 23:39:39 +0000

oh, poo:

“somehow I don’t think Gates, Bush and Cheyney share this priority”

By: kirk murphy

kirk murphy — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 23:37:13 +0000

ekunin, upon assuming CentCom one of Fallon’s first questions was “how can we help the army?” (unless I confused him with the chief of JCS re this).

somehow i don’t think share that priority….

By: Hugh

Hugh — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 23:37:00 +0000

Much of that is plausible, thanks. But I think it needs more pepping up in terms of what could happen in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, the rest of the Moslem world, the non-Moslem world, and what it would do to our and the world’s economy.