Top U.S. Middle East Commander Resigns, Citing Esquire Article

From ABC News:

Admiral William Fallon, the top U.S. military commander for the Middle East, is resigning, citing a magazine article in which (he) appeared to criticize President George W. Bush's policy toward Iran.

So the top military commander in the most volatile region in the world resigns because a magazine article? I'm guessing there is something more substantive going on here.

For background, see Esquire: Concern Bush May Ax Admiral 'Fox' Fallon. Fallon said attack on Iran 'will not happen on my watch'.

See also Breaking: CentCom Chief Admiral Fallon Resigns.

See also National Security Network: Adm. Fallon's Dissenting Voice: Views on Iraq Strategy More in Line With American Mainstream than Bush Administration.

CENTCOM Chief Adm. Fallon: Gen. Petraeus Is ‘An Ass-Kissing, Little Chickensh*t ... I Hate People Like That’

Via ThinkProgress:

During the Iraq war, the Central Command (CENTCOM) head — who leads U.S. operations in the entire Middle East region — and the Multinational Force Commander (MNF) have regularly testified together about the course of the war in Iraq.

Former-MNF Commander Gen. George Casey and his CENTCOM Commander Gen. John Abizaid constantly briefed Congress about the situation in Iraq and its regional effects.

In January, President Bush replaced Abizaid and Casey, who were “surge” skeptics, with Adm. William Fallon and Gen. David Petraeus. This week, Petraeus — first public hearings since taking on his new role — delivered his Iraq assessment to great media fanfare. But where was his boss, Admiral Fallon?

Inter-Press Service suggests animosity between the two might be one reason for Fallon’s absence:

Fallon told Petraeus [in March] that he considered him to be “an ass-kissing little chickensh*t” and added, “I hate people like that”, the sources say. That remark reportedly came after Petraeus began the meeting by making remarks that Fallon interpreted as trying to ingratiate himself with a superior.

The Washington Post reported this weekend on the internal military debate, described as “Armageddon,” occurring between Petraeus and Fallon because the two men have “profoundly different views of the U.S. role in Iraq.”

Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) announced today that he will be asking Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) to call Fallon to testify on “his views on the region.” Webb decried the lack of independence in Petraeus’s reporting, observing that there are “a lot of control factors going on that haven’t been visible” from the one-sided testimony of Petraeus:

WEBB: And there’s something of a kabuki going on right now. You know, the Petraeus report was brought in. On the one hand they’re calling it independent; on the other, General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker, from my understanding, gave a one-hour exclusive interview to Fox News after their first day of testimony. […]

So it was a very narrow and focused two days of hearings…we need to hear from people like Admiral Fallon and others to get a sense of how the region is in play. … He was, by many accounts, questioning keeping these troop levels this high. […]

So I’m going to be recommending to Senator Levin that we get Admiral Fallon in and get his views on the region.
###

Top Admiral Who Said Attacking Iran 'Will Not Happen on my Watch,' Splits with Bush on Occupying Iraq

As the current policy desires of the American people bear no weight with George W. Bush, the hope of millions of Americans is the spectacular emergence of an unimpeachable administration insider blowing the lid off the Bush scam in Iraq so convincingly that another war with Iran is halted and Democrats in congress are infused with a spinal column on the existing war with Iraq—the human embodiment of the Pentagon Papers, Daniel Ellsberg, Joe Wilson and the retired Generals who have blasted the administration all rolled into one.

This hope is naïve of-course; no one is unimpeachable to the amoral Bush administration, and the career inducements for going along with Bush’s insane ploys prove irresistible for war planners and for those who simply know better.

But human decisions matter, no matter the anti-democratic ethos of the Bush administration and indeed the entire Republican Party.

The Washington Post fronts a report this morning chronicling a split in the administration involving Adm. William J. Fallon, chief of the U.S. Central Command overseeing Middle East operations, and the administration’s newest frontman, Gen. David H. Petraeus, whose White House-authored report delivered to Congress can be expected to be, if not laughed out of Washington, met with great skepticism and ridicule, though this incredulity won’t lead to much congressional action to halt the policy so disbelieved.

The page one, 3,639-word Post piece quotes on very deep background one administration official’s description of the schism between General Petraeus and Adm. Fallon as follows:

"Bad relations?" said a senior civilian official with a laugh. "That's the understatement of the century. . . . If you think Armageddon was a riot, that's one way of looking at it."

As the administration attempts another bald-faced, lying PR campaign to continue the Iraq occupation and apparently plans for a military engagement with Iran, it’s worth noting Adm. Fallon’s reported words this February on striking the politically and militarily powerful Iran: An attack on Iran "will not happen on my watch".

Could Fallon be the ultimate insider that millions of Americans wish for who would blow the lid off the administration’s lies?

Maybe Colin Powell will discover that moral courage over career is the honorable course.

One can hope.

###