The Political Inquirer

A top military commander for the Middle East resigned today after much opposition to the Bush administration’s policy toward Iran.

Fallon was the subject of an article published last week in Esquire magazine that portrayed him as opposed to President Bush’s Iran policy. It described Fallon as a lone voice against taking military action to stop the Iranian nuclear program.

Robert Gates mentions something disturbing in the article,

Gates described as “ridiculous” any notion that Fallon’s departure signals the United States is planning to go to war with Iran. And he said “there is a misperception” that Fallon disagrees with the administration’s approach to Iran.

“I don’t think there were differences at all,” Gates added.

Almost feels like a movie from the 1940’s where a guy quits after finding out his group of friends wants to rob a bank or kill someone, and then when asked about it the friends say “I don’t know what you’re talking about”. There have been reports about military commanders threatening to quit if military action is taken up against Iran. From a London Times article a year ago:

“There are four or five generals and admirals we know of who would resign if Bush ordered an attack on Iran,” a source with close ties to British intelligence said. “There is simply no stomach for it in the Pentagon, and a lot of people question whether such an attack would be effective or even possible.”

After the Iraq debacle it looks like some people are unwilling to be dragged down into the mud if a second war broke out–especially if it results in our “needing” to occupy Iran for any length of time. It’s virtually impossible for a second ground invasion right now, but if a major terror attack provided an excuse for the Bush administration to war with Iran, a draft might be likely.

The months after September 11, 2001, a draft could have been implemented with little opposition, I’m sad to say. If an attack bigger than 9/11 happened, who knows how people would react?