I'm referring to Admiral William Fallon chief of Central Command who has described general Patraeus as "an ass-kissing little chickenshit." This was comforting to learn.
And then there was president Bush's national TV appearance last night and I could sense through the internet a national tenseness surge. Oh, the power of the man!
Talking to his Iraq troops like a class of fifth graders, the president assured them the better they are at accomplishing his mission, the more he would reward them with his principle of "return on success."
But he also told them not to expect to come home before their tours were over. Calling for an "enduring relationship" with Iraq, Bush reiterated his plan to salvage the legacy of his presidency; to avoid being a war-time leader loser. Instead, he will pass the troops in Iraq along with his fiasco war-plan off on the next president.
"While thousands more of you will die for seemingly no reason at all, know you are in fact preserving this presidency as historically significant in the war on terror," Bush seemed to be saying.
But in order to salvage our sanity as a nation, it might be well to take last night's speech in it's proper context, i.e.,
10 comments:
What's really interesting in the Fallon comments besides the obvious is that Petraeus reports to Fallon in the chain of command. Fallon in turn reports to the CNO in the Pentagon and on up to Secretary of Defense, Gates. Why was Bush and the Congress getting Petraeus' reports without going through the chain of command? Also, Crocker reports to the Secretary of State, Rice. Why was Bush and the Congress getting Crocker's report without the Secretary of State being there, too. James Webb, Senator from VA, has requested Fallon appear before a Senate Committee to see what he has to say about Iraq and the entire region inasmuch as Fallon oversees Iraq and the region from the Central Command.
As far as bringing troops home, what a crock(er) of shit that is. I recently gained thirty pounds so I could lose twenty and feel better about my weight. Not really, but the idea is the same. And, worse, a huge majority of the MSM is blaring headlines, "Troops to Come Home." BushCo is the very best at double speak. Orwell would be proud of him!
I get all the news I need on Dada's Daily. Thanks for another well-crafted post. Love that "enduring relationship" concept as in "military outposts in Iraq until the 22nd century." Thanks, eprof2, for the interesting tidbits. Think I'll gain some weight so that I feel better when I lose a little of it.
OMG, your sign is absolutely the best thing I've seen in long while! Thanks for picking up my sagging spirits.
You know, that phrase "return on success" has to be some kind of orwell newspeak. It's been bugging me. sounds like an investment strategy. oh but, the return on investment is the earnings, not a return of original principal. so I guess the return bush speaks of is return of the surge, but NEVER falling below the pre-surge level. and that's only if they have success. what a master stratego he is, huh.
Thanks for the Fallon link. I had no idea. He seems to know whereof he speaks (or more accurately, the source who knows his thinking speaks). I do get the sinking feeling that his critisms are more about preserving troop strength for iran, rather than calling out Petty or Bushwipe's policy. But what do I know?
eprof has the best diet plan I've heard in a long time, even better than the 100% meat diet, so you slowly starve your body of nutrition while elevating your cholesterol.
ps, check your email for a harry reid laugh. ~~ D.K.
eprof: By jove, I think you may be on to something. Seems there's so little to get excited about; to feel good about.
Maybe I'll start smoking! I'll work up to two pks./day, then cut back to one! Man, will I feel good, huh? Just like we're all supposed to with Bush's troop cuts.
BTW, you're absolutely right -- today's headline, front page, was "Troop cuts to begin!" (sic)I credited it to lazy journalism, i.e., they ran with the headline that came with the story. I'm sure the paper's far too busy and far too short-handed to have someone take 30 seconds to change those four words. Or, like most of the MSM, they're just too damn conservative to tell us the truth.
Re that violation of the chain of command: Do you suppose maybe it's the result of Bush's Texas Air Guard military service and that's why it's all screwed up (again)?
And now for a little secret. As I assembled this blog this morning, looking for just the right graphic, I thought of Border Explorer, who hasn't commented here in several months.
Why did I think of Border Explorer? Well, as coincidence would have it, she and her husband happened to be manning the barricades the day this photo was taken. And I hope I don't violate her privacy, but that's her, Border Explorer, in the photo standing on my immediate left!
border explorer: What a nice surprise! Hope you don't mind having your picture posted again.
Thanks for the kind words but, sadly, this incredible leadership has sapped so much of my blogging enjoyment. You should see backstage...it's literally littered with 10's upon 10's of blogs started, half done, and abandoned. No way to keep up with the outrages.
Reminds me of Tetris or something ... where at first you think you're really master of the game, but the blocks keep falling at faster and faster speeds until, inevitably, I'm always buried. Sadly, those faster than me, better at the game, will eventually get buried too.
Probably the best among us all will collapse beneath the weight of blocks the day the bombs start falling on Iran. (Which I now read somewhere won't be for another 8-12 mos. in order to have maximum impact on next Nov's election.)
But I digress. Your comment was a wonderful surprise. So, it's almost autumn. When you two returning to El Paso??!! Huh? Huh?
deke: I suspect you're right. Fallon speaks from the lips of a true military leader whose concern is probably more strategic, and it's for his troops, and his equipment, and outcomes of military actions once begun instead of political posturing and opportunism.
I don't know how wise it would be for us to engage Iran if we enjoy our global naval superiority. The Gulf is a duck pond and could be a shooting gallery for the Iranians. I hear they have some "talented" missiles/torpedoes, suplied by our former friends, the Russians, or is it from our creditors, the Chinese?
But I'm sure with Cheney's years of military background as secretary of defense and draft deferments, he's on top of it.
It's just so exciting to watch an empire collapse in my very own lifetime. (I was too young to catch Japan's.)
p.s. to all: To those who may recall seeing today's graphic before, I apolgize. I try to keep repetition to a minimum, but this one just seemed sooo appropriate. (And who knows, it may have prompted that kind comment from border explorer!)
I am so relieved Fallon has integrity. When we was first appointed to command CENTCOM some speculated Bush wanted a Navy guy there to help direct the bombing of Iran via Aircraft carriers.
But Fallon later came out and said there would be no attack on Iran on his watch.
I wonder how pissed Bush is about that.
Oh hell, Polishifter. That's great news re Fallon, but obviously he'll be retiring before we blow the shit outta Iran.
Well, I would hope that's not the case. I have this fantasy scenario that the order comes down from Cheney to the Gulf fleet to launch their planes and missiles against Iran, but the naval commander refuses, which is the cue for the Pentagon renegades to overthrow the Bush command generals. By nightfall, Bush and Cheney are locked up tightly in an underground bunker deep in the bowels of D.C.
That's as far as I get. I'm so giddy at that point I can't stop laughing.
I love this sign and seeing you ....yay....
Post a Comment