The road to Tehran runs through Sadr City?

[bushmeister0]

W.'s speech last night was pretty depressing, wasn't it? He basically said 'I'm escalating the war because I can and the rest you can be damned.' He doesn't care about what the generals are telling him, what members of his own party are telling him -- never mind the Democratic majority in Congress -- or give a damn that he's lost the support of the American people for his personal war of choice. He's the Decider. He's the commander in chief. And that's pretty much all he's got going for him. Some in Congress are questioning whether the constitution gives them the legal authority to stop him through the power of the purse. I'd say they'd better look into it, because I don't think he's going to quit when he gets to Sadr City. Something tells me, his estimation of what success means in the "ideological struggle of our time" includes eliminating the regime in Tehran as a threat to Israel.

What stood out to me was him saying: "Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and to our enemies in Iraq." It can only be a matter of time before he decides that strikes inside Iran are necessary to destroy those "networks." That little troll from FOX News who asked General Pace this morning if we would attack Iran - and if not, why -- may have had a point. W. says Iran is providing weapons that kill Americans. There's only one logical response to a provocation like that.

For folks who are still wondering why he chose Admiral William J. Fallon to run CENTCOM, you need look no further than the deployment of another carrier battle group to the "Arab Gulf." He's not there to oversee the ground war in Anbar Province. As I pointed out previously, you don't need two carriers worth of fixed wing fighter aircraft to conduct neighborhood by neighborhood clearing operations. That kind of high altitude fire power would kill as many of our guys as it would theirs. No. Those carriers are there to do a job. And it's not to send a message to Tehran, either. You don't expend that kind of money and equipment to merely convince the Iranians to sit down at the negotiating table.

While the pundocracy battles it out over the relative merits of 21,000 troops making a difference in the Dora neighborhood and whether we'll finally start going after the Shiites, W. and Cheney have got the ball rolling for a much larger escalation. When it happens, whatever the trumped up rationale is, what will Congress do?

Think the entire notion is far fetched? Whose New Way Forward plan did W. go for? The bipartisan ISG recommended talks with Iran and Syria and a pullout of US troops by 2008. He didn't give it a second's thought. Former general Jack Keane and neocon true believer Frederick Kagan recommended escalation. Their plan he went with. It has no chance of working, because it's more of the same (but with higher casualties) but it's very appealing to someone like W..

Since he distains nuance and regards bipartisanship as weakness, this go-it-alone strategy leaves him free to do whatever he feels like doing. Attack Iran? Who's going to stop him? He doesn't have to run for re-election and the Democrats are too wimpy to dare impeach him. But even if they tried, by the time they were able to do anything, the American people would see the wisdom of his actions. So many things have gone so wrong he's due for a little luck, right?

Maybe, a little shock and awe over Tehran is all that's needed to bring Ahmadinejad and the mullahs down. The again, maybe Iranians unite behind the mullahs to repel the infidel invaders and they send waves of troops into Iraq and also manage to block the Strait of Hormuz. That sends the Western economies into a tailspin, which brings on a world-wide depression.

And so what if it does? W. will just retire back to back to Crawford, clear some brush and wait for history to vindicate him. And even if it doesn't, who cares? As he said, we'll all be dead anyway.

[MADem]

1. I don't think that is why he chose Fallon

Fallon was on the short list for JCS. He just missed the cut. He's been on several short lists. He got several promotions under Clinton, too.

We'll see if the guy sells his soul....

[bushmeister0]

3. Maybe, but

my point is that he's not a ground commander. If you're going to bet the farm on winning an urban war, you don't pick an admiral to do it.

If you're interested in conducting an air assault while at the same time keeping a major shipping lane protected, you do.

[MADem]

5. Don't take this the wrong way, please, but that is such a 20th Century impression

You don't make 0-4 (major/lieutenant commander) never mind even ONE STAR without joint training. The ability of any flag or general officer to prosecute ANY type of warfare, land, sea or air, isn't in question. The joint training is continuous from field grade on.

Fallon is PACOM, FWIW...this means he is responsible for 20 percent of ALL forces--Army, Navy, USAF, and USMC...in uniform today. He's not "a NAVY guy" anymore, and hasn't been for a long time.

Finally, keep in mind that the Navy has always had loads of experience working with ground forces--they're called the Marines...and they report to the Secretary of the Navy.

[RaleighNCDUer]

7. Nevertheless, that doesn't address why a naval airpower guy

was put in charge of a new plan which is supposed to be ground troops doing house to house fighting.

Things that make you go "Hmmm??"

[MADem]

8. Please see my post above. Fallon has been responsible for 20% of ALL the Armed Forces since he was

assigned as PACOM. That's all of the forces of all of the Services. See, PACOM is a joint assignment.

The old paradigms of how the military leads are just inaccurate, and have been for the last twenty years. Jointness isn't a nice-to-have thing, it's mandated training if you want to be promoted, and if you don't do joint tours on top of your training, you don't move up the ladder.

For the record, the Army has more seagoing vessels than the Navy, and the Navy has more aircraft than the Air Force. Things aren't always what they seem.

[jwirr]

2. Whenever I see the words Sadr City the one thing I remember most

is that it is basically the poor who live there. Depressing - Yes.

[bushmeister0]

4. W. says, 'eat the poor!'

Not really, but what better place to conduct all-out urban warefare?

Just think of it as urban renewal. Once all those shabby aold buildings are leveled, we can really get some reconstruction teams in there!

[MADem]

6. And they follow their own version of a Dubya, only his name is Muqtada

And he views them as cannon fodder, too.