- Jul 17, 2006
Now, that's not exactly a ringing endorsement of whatever policy is being discussed, and one could argue that he is simply being politic, but if that's the case, why the leading headlines?"Recent press reports suggesting a disconnect between my views and the president's policy objectives have become a distraction at a critical time and hamper efforts in the Centcom region," Fallon, who is traveling in Iraq, said in a statement issued by his U.S. headquarters in Tampa
"And although I don't believe there have ever been any differences about the objectives of our policy in the Central Command area of responsibility, the simple perception that there is makes it difficult for me to effectively serve America's interests there," he said.
The following statement is an example of the violation to which he was referring. Fallon was ‘playing’ to the press:Peter D. Feaver, a former staff member of Bush's National Security Council, said that the public nature of Fallon's remarks made it necessary for the admiral to step down. "There is ample room for military leaders to debate administration policy behind closed doors," said Feaver, a political scientist at Duke University. "However, taking such arguments into the media would violate basic democratic norms of civil-military relations."
The possibility of such results which he mentions below should have caused him to reconsider the interview in the first place. Again from the WP:The article quotes Fallon as saying one day in Cairo that "I'm in hot water again" with the White House, apparently for telling Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak that the United States would not attack Iran.
Lastly, another statement to which I take issue.Asked about the article yesterday, Fallon called it "poison pen stuff" that is "really disrespectful and ugly."
Fallon is not a Naval Aviator. He is a Naval Flight Officer. Huge difference. See the Naval Aviator vs Naval Flight Officer section of the following link:Fallon, a career naval aviator
Am I the first one this morning to think of the possible devastation of an Obama-Fallon ticket to the McCain camp? We are talking about probably the number one expert in both Middle East and Far East policy?
Not to belittle Admiral Stockdale, but his Naval career does not hold a candle to Admiral Fallon. He was selected as Perot’s Vice Presidential candidate because he was a brilliant war hero. He also should have had Public Speaking 101 before being unleashed on the press. Admiral Fallon is totally different. Between CincPac, dealing with the Chinese and North Koreans, and CentCom, dealing with the Middle East, he is an expert without parallel. Even though he might properly be called a ‘grumpy old man’, his knowledge is paramount. If Obama doesn’t woo him, he will definitely be on the short list for a cabinet position with whoever might be elected President.Luigi59 said:I think presidential candidates are wary of choosing a career Navy admiral as a running mate again after the performance of Jim Stockdale during the 92 debates.
Despite his brilliance and heroic military career, the media portrayed him as a buffoon.
If they can do it to a man like him, they can do it to anyone.
Here is Fallon's official DoD bio:Fallon is not a Naval Aviator. He is a Naval Flight Officer.
http://webb.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=294614One of the lessons of the build up to the Iraq War is that the advice of our most senior military officers was too often ignored by the civilian leadership within the Bush administration. In the coming days and weeks, I hope that we can call on Admiral Fallon to more directly share his thoughts and concerns with the American people.”
The previous two bios I saw of him in prior billets omitted the following phrase which is in the one you linked:Antoinette said:He was never a Naval Aviator in the official Navy definition of the term.
Maybe the Stolen Valor Law is working.and was designated a naval flight officer upon completion of flight training in December 1967
Gates said he did not think it was the Esquire article alone that prompted Fallon to quit. Rather, Gates thought it was "a cumulative kind of thing" that he and Fallon had failed to put "behind us." He also dismissed as "ridiculous" any notion that Fallon's departure signals the United States is planning to go to war with Iran. ....