You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Go to Page...
Thank you for crosschecking our sponsors!
About This Page: This is a discussion on Politics within the LetsGoKings.com forums, at Los Angeles Kings Hockey Fan Forum. I realize it's not as sexy as prostitutes servicing politicians, but this might be the most important development of the day.
Sign Up
Fallon was a skeptic of the surge
Fallon was a skeptic of the surge (rightfully so) and counseled against aggression with Iran. He was a moderate. The word is that civilians at the Pentagon are glad he's out, while military advisers at the Pentagon are upset.
I imagine if McCain wins the White House, we'll be at war with Iran by Fall of 2009.
This is troublesome to me. From everything I've read and the people I've talked to, Fallon is a capable commander, regardless of whether he's a water-carrier for the Bush Admin or not. I'm one of those people who believe you need commanders who aren't afraid to voice their opinions to the administration, but the Bush Administration doesn't seem to tolerate dissent within its ranks.
The word is that civilians at the Pentagon are glad he's out, while military advisers at the Pentagon are upset.
My guess here is that there are a load of neo-conservatives still in the defense department....most of which are civilians (who probably haven't fought in any wars either).
Quote:
I imagine if McCain wins the White House, we'll be at war with Iran by Fall of 2009.
Actually, I don't believe this to be true. I don't see the neocon element having much sway with him...I could be wrong though. It's one of the things I have to weigh when it comes time to vote in November....especially if Hillary gets the nom.
If war with Iran was going to happen it would have been last fall. A number of things went against that (including the Israeli loss in Lebanon in 2006) so I'm not sure if it's gonna happen at all. If the next President as any brains he/she will drop this hostile act toward Iran and realize they should be our best buddies.
jom
__________________ Old men's room wall saying: Flush hard, it's a long way to Washington
This is troublesome to me. From everything I've read and the people I've talked to, Fallon is a capable commander, regardless of whether he's a water-carrier for the Bush Admin or not. I'm one of those people who believe you need commanders who aren't afraid to voice their opinions to the administration, but the Bush Administration doesn't seem to tolerate dissent within its ranks.
Fair winds and following seas to ADM Fallon.
The job of the military is to do what the Commander in Chief tells them to do, not to voice their own opinion.
__________________ "America didn't become the greatest nation on earth by redistributing wealth; we became the greatest nation by creating new wealth."
If war with Iran was going to happen it would have been last fall. A number of things went against that (including the Israeli loss in Lebanon in 2006) so I'm not sure if it's gonna happen at all. If the next President as any brains he/she will drop this hostile act toward Iran and realize they should be our best buddies.
Many felt it was a loss....Olmert hasn't exactly had it easy since. I guess I meant they didn't accomplish their goal.
The present day politics in Iran isn't terrific but we've been in bed with leaders FAR WORSE.
We may noy like their present leadership but at one point only a few years ago there was a progressive govt there. There's no reason it can't move back that direction. It's not exactly a democracy there with those religious leaders but there are certainly farther ahead that Iraq, Afganistan, Pakistan, Egypt, SA or any of our other "friends" in the region.
The present day politics in Iran isn't terrific but we've been in bed with leaders FAR WORSE.
We may noy like their present leadership but at one point only a few years ago there was a progressive govt there. There's no reason it can't move back that direction. It's not exactly a democracy there with those religious leaders but there are certainly farther ahead that Iraq, Afganistan, Pakistan, Egypt, SA or any of our other "friends" in the region.
Oh, my posting of the article wasn't to counter your claims. I just found it interesting.
But once again, the military does not get to have a dissenting opinion when it comes to the Commander in Chief.
Yes, they do. You seem unable to differentiate between dissent and disobedience. Ultimately he makes the final decision, but it's not in anyone's best interests to have a bunch of Yes-Men, especially those that know the military better than he does.
The job of the military is to do what the Commander in Chief tells them to do, not to voice their own opinion.
Actually, that's EXACTLY the job of senior commanders. To point out problem areas in implementing the political and strategic decisions that the President makes, the JCS and the various Theater Commanders must be free express their opinions without fear of retribution.
I take it you believe that the military's senior leadership should be made up of Harriet Myers types?
The ranks of senior officers are already filled with a bunch of ass-kissing group-think advocates who wouldn't know good leadership if it bit them on the ass. I don't know what kind of leader ADM Fallon is personally, but it speaks well of him that he's not afraid to voice a dissenting opinion in an administration not known for tolerating deviance from the party line. To have him suddenly resigns makes me question even further the direction our senior political and military "leaders" are taking this country.
Actually, that's EXACTLY the job of senior commanders. To point out problem areas in implementing the political and strategic decisions that the President makes, the JCS and the various Theater Commanders must be free express their opinions without fear of retribution.
I take it you believe that the military's senior leadership should be made up of Harriet Myers types?
The ranks of senior officers are already filled with a bunch of ass-kissing group-think advocates who wouldn't know good leadership if it bit them on the ass. I don't know what kind of leader ADM Fallon is personally, but it speaks well of him that he's not afraid to voice a dissenting opinion in an administration not known for tolerating deviance from the party line. To have him suddenly resigns makes me question even further the direction our senior political and military "leaders" are taking this country.
Fallon was brought in to head Centcom because the Bush neo-cons were contemplating a big role for the Navy in an attack on Iran. The Bush Pentagon neo-cons are always surprised when they bump into yet another top military guy who is professional, smart and principled. Their belief that officers should be automatons reveals their own low opinion of, and ignorance of, the officer corp.
__________________
"For if once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." Thomas DeQuincey, 1700's
Fallon out as CentCom chief 
Mr. Irreverent
