Posted on 03/14/2008 6:01:55 PM PDT by Kaslin
The abrupt resignation of Adm. William Fallon as head of Central Command almost got lost amid the breaking news of Barack Obama's victory in the Mississippi primary and Eliot Spitzer's resignation as governor of New York.
But it's a much more consequential development — in the foreign and military policy of the Bush administration in its final year in office and in the relations between civilian commanders and military officers in the long run of American history.
Though everyone involved denies it, Fallon was kicked out for insubordination, or something very close to it. His conduct became impossible to overlook after the publication of a jauntily written article in Esquire by Thomas P.M. Barnett, author of "The Pentagon's New Map."
Barnett paints Fallon as a seasoned officer who coolly and wisely has been frustrating George W. Bush's desire to invade Iran. He points out that Fallon opposed the surge in Iraq ordered by Bush in January 2007 and that he has tried to rein in Gen. David Petraeus, whose leadership of the surge has produced such impressive results.
Barnett seems to take it for granted that readers will applaud Fallon for opposing a move that converted likely defeat to a high chance of success.
(Excerpt) Read more at ibdeditorials.com ...
I am glad that guy is history.
just like the media: bury the good news.
——I am beginning to appreciate Napoleon’s solution for loser generals—
Admiral Fallon — arrogant, insubordinate, and worst of all, extremely vain. I’ve worked for folks like him before. They are a royal pain in the butt to everyone around them, and they actually enjoy it, wielding their power, arrogance and vanity to anyone and everyone in sight.
He liked to go public with his disagreements with Patraeus, Bush, Gates, and, like Bill Clinton, thought he was above reproach. The speed of his firing gives it away.
Where did the military get such a man, and why wasn’t he weeded out long ago?
Now it took Lincoln a while to finally discover Grant after several failed incompetents and defeatists such as McClellan, Hooker, and Burnside.
The Peter Principle, maybe? Got promoted to his highest level of incompetence?
It is difficult to find leaders with the capacity to appear politically correct anymore. Fallon’s vanity overrode his duty and responsibility - a fault difficult to overcome in the best of men. In the military it is deadly.
Insubordination can never be countenanced.
I’m glad Fallon is out of there.
How the hell did he get appointed in the first place and why wasn’t he canned sooner
In too many ways, Bush is a weak Commander-in-Chief. He keeps lame military commanders like Fallon long past their expiration date, appoints assclowns like Donald Winter as Secretary of the Navy, and throws the terrific Peter Pace under the bus so he can replace him with homo-friendly, Democrat milquetoast Mullen. To top it all off, Bush has placed the conduct of the war in Iraq firmly in the hands of the scumbag ACLUers of JAG.
Combine these actions with Bush's inability or unwillingness to clean up the communist State Department and its partner, the rogue CIA, and what you end up with is a pathetic oaf of a CiC. Hurry up January, 2008 - - I truly hope McCain has the stones to do a better job.
....But no, I'm not counting on it.
save
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.