ABC reports that "Fallon, who is in the Navy, is currently head of Pacific Command; he will be overseeing two ground wars, so the appointment is highly unusual."I think ABC is missing the point.It seems highly unusual for a navy admiral to take charge of CENTCOM until you consider two interrelated things.
First is that Bush needs a senior four-star in the CENTCOM job who hasn't gone on record as opposing additional troops in Iraq. Second is that Fallon's CENTCOM area of responsibility will include Iran. A conflict with Iran would be a naval and air operation. Fallon is a naval flight officer. He flew combat missions in Vietnam, commanded an A-6 Intruder squadron, a carrier air wing and an aircraft carrier. As a three-star, he commanded Second Fleet and Strike Force Atlantic. He resently heads U.S. Pacific Command. His resume also includes duty in numerous joint and Navy staff billets, including Deputy Director for Operations with Joint Task Force Southwest Asia in Riyahd, Saudi Arabia. If anybody knows how to run a maritime
and air operation against Iran, it's "Fox" Fallon.
The recurrent reports that Bush is planning to attack Iran have always had a certain unrealistic cast to them, for me.
To do so, with no particular justification or reason, in the face of a country, of whom nearly three-quarters now question the wisdom of Iraq, would be to invite the biggest political storm since the Civil War. Jeff Huber, it should be noted, bemoans the fact that there is "little" that Congress could do to prevent such an attack. True enough. But, he overlooks the poignant reality that there is little that the Congress could not do, to punish Bush and the Generals for such a blunder. After a few days or, perhaps a week or two, of a stumbling patriotism, the country would turn on Bush with a ferocity, which we, in this moment, can scarcely imagine.