Centcom commander thwarted Iran attack?

Interesting story on IPS. It claims that last February Admiral (and then Centcom Commander designate) William Fallon sank a White House plan for agressive deployment of three carriers in the Gulf. Gates and Fallon seem to have contributed some much needed brain-power to this administration. Adrian II thinks this is a good thing. When the politicians lose their faith (or nerves), the experts take over, and in this case the expert is the real thing.

Clicky

Rejoice.

Oh, and discuss. :mellow:

Heh, CentCom already has two wars and he didn't want to fight a third.

Interesting article. The article sticks with the theme that a 3rd deployment was for intimidation purposes which I find hard to believe. Mobilization and deployment of a carrier strike force is no small matter, having 2 there now should suffice for intimidation, a 3rd, without the pretense of a military action is just a matter of logic (in my opinion).

I dont dismiss the article out of hand, but it seemed to portray the admiral as a maverick of somekind for bucking the will of the admin. He wasnt ordered to do anything, he gave an opinion contrary to that of the "hawks", that in itself is news worthy but hardly a redirection of policy of intimidation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

Interesting article. The article sticks with the theme that a 3rd deployment was for intimidation purposes which I find hard to believe. Mobilization and deployment of a carrier strike force is no small matter, having 2 there now should suffice for intimidation, a 3rd, without the pretense of a military action is just a matter of logic (in my opinion).

I dont dismiss the article out of hand, but it seemed to portray the admiral as a maverick of somekind for bucking the will of the admin. He wasnt ordered to do anything, he gave an opinion contrary to that of the "hawks", that in itself is news worthy but hardly a redirection of policy of intimidation.

---

Well, our deployments commonly include two nearby -- a fact known to the Iranians. Deploying the third would be more of a saber-rattling move therefore, so the "intimidation" angle is a possibility.

If CENTCOM was telling NCA that "if you do this you had better not do it half-assed and this would be" then CENTCOM was probably providing sage advice.

I very much hope that SECDEF and CENTCOM both pressure NCA to:

a) avoid violence unless absolutely essential, and

b) if decided that it is essential, then use it in a decisive fashion.


Point B may, or may not, be possible given the overall goal set and the forces available to the USA at current deployment conditions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

Well, our deployments commonly include two nearby -- a fact known to the Iranians. Deploying the third would be more of a saber-rattling move therefore, so the "intimidation" angle is a possibility.

If CENTCOM was telling NCA that "if you do this you had better not do it half-assed and this would be" then CENTCOM was probably providing sage advice.

I very much hope that SECDEF and CENTCOM both pressure NCA to:

a) avoid violence unless absolutely essential, and

b) if decided that it is essential, then use it in a decisive fashion.


Point B may, or may not, be possible given the overall goal set and the forces available to the USA at current deployment conditions.

---

I agree Seamus with 95% of your post,with the exception of the 3rd deployment. I just dont see it being a decisive intimidator given that 2 are there now, along with 150k+ ground troops in the adjoining countries.

Apparantly centcom thought the same thing.

Level heads? In the Bush command? Who'lds a thunk it.

Rattling sabers at a perceived enemy is a time honored method of demonstrating a willingness to use military force, and to attempt to bring political power (diplomacy) into an equation with the imagined foe.

The over use of this method depleates its effectiveness and reduces the credibility of the party using it.

There is a very thin line between military presence and provocation. We were on that line. By sending additional warship flotillas we signaled an intent, we had already sent a warning. By not sending more, we may crack open the door for diplomacy, in the future (post-Bush). Regardless, diplomacy is the key - not another ill advised conflict.

Naming an Axis-of-Evil certainly hasn't been a boon to our ability to negotiate with those we have made our adversaries (or that were). Maybe, by showing restraint we can revise the Bush-Rumsfeld Doctrine of pre-emptive war to a negotiate first, second and last. Or, until all political resources have been expended, or we are actually attacked (militarily).

Then again, maybe not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

I agree Seamus with 95% of your post,with the exception of the 3rd deployment. I just dont see it being a decisive intimidator given that 2 are there now, along with 150k+ ground troops in the adjoining countries.

Apparantly centcom thought the same thing.

---

Then we are fully agreed.

I was saying the thinking ran:


Advisors of NCA: We normally have 2 and the Iranians know this so lets send 3 and make them sweat.

CENTCOM: Wouldn't make enough of a difference to matter, the saber next door is either big enough or it isn't...unless you truly want to lauch an attack, in which case we'd probably want a bunch more forces and not just one carrier to do the job properly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

Then we are fully agreed.

I was saying the thinking ran:


Advisors of NCA: We normally have 2 and the Iranians know this so lets send 3 and make them sweat.

CENTCOM: Wouldn't make enough of a difference to matter, the saber next door is either big enough or it isn't...unless you truly want to lauch an attack, in which case we'd probably want a bunch more forces and not just one carrier to do the job properly.

---

Then i misunderstood your post, fair enough.

A brave man, this William Fallon, and a man after my own heart. He is appearently one who is willing to stand against his Commander and Chief while still on the active duty list (he speaks out before retirement). I wonder at how soon he will get the ax from Vice President Cheney?

Quote:

---

Honesty and knowledge are sharp edged weapons, and like the word of the Lord, rightly dividing the soul and spirit asunder. Rotorgun

---