Political: Fallon resigns, more confrontation with Iran?

[krakknisse]

Fallon's resignation came after publication of an article in Esquire magazine, written by Thomas P.M. Barnett, a former professor at the Naval War College in Newport, Rhode Island, that portrayed the admiral as the bulwark against a U.S. offensive against Iran.
``If, in the dying light of the Bush administration, we go to war with Iran, it'll come down to one man,'' Barnett wrote. ``If we do not go to war with Iran, it'll come down to the same man. He is that rarest of creatures in the Bush universe: the good cop on Iran, and a man of strategic brilliance.'

Original story here: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...LaU&refer=home

Just out of curiosity, I checked Google Trends. Googling for Admiral Fallon was suddenly very popular yesterday in Washington, DC (and nowhere else).
http://www.google.com/trends?q=admiral+fallon
Popular enough that it also showed up as #2 on Google "Hot Trends"
http://www.google.com/trends

Maybe it is just policy wonks checking out rumors. But it doesn't just seem likely your run of the mill administrative resignation ("I want to do more gardening").

Check out the Google Trends for "Iran" limited to Washington, DC:
http://www.google.com/trends?q=iran+...ate=all&sort=0
Somewhere around 2005 it popped out of the radar in DC. No spike yet, but perhaps it could be worth watching Google Trends in DC for a spike indicating a "heads up" before an invasion?

Invasion = good for gold? Bad for everything else...

[GRG55]

Re: political: Fallon resigns, more confrontation with Iran?

Original story here: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...LaU&refer=home

Just out of curiosity, I checked Google Trends. Googling for Admiral Fallon was suddenly very popular yesterday in Washington, DC (and nowhere else).
http://www.google.com/trends?q=admiral+fallon
Popular enough that it also showed up as #2 on Google "Hot Trends"
http://www.google.com/trends

Maybe it is just policy wonks checking out rumors. But it doesn't just seem likely your run of the mill administrative resignation ("I want to do more gardening").

Check out the Google Trends for "Iran" limited to Washington, DC:
http://www.google.com/trends?q=iran+...ate=all&sort=0
Somewhere around 2005 it popped out of the radar in DC. No spike yet, but perhaps it could be worth watching Google Trends in DC for a spike indicating a "heads up" before an invasion?

Invasion = good for gold? Bad for everything else...

My security contacts here are telling me that Fallon is far from alone in the US military establishment in opposing military action against Iran.

The Arab Gulf states don't want it either, but they have even less influence over this than they did over what happened in Iraq.

[Mega]

Re: political: Fallon resigns, more confrontation with Iran?

Is-real DOES!
So, it will happen, unless China acts?
Mike

[Slimprofits]

Re: political: Fallon resigns, more confrontation with Iran?

My security contacts here are telling me that Fallon is far from alone in the US military establishment in opposing military action against Iran.

That is good to hear, but this is still a loss for Team Sanity.

[GRG55]

Re: political: Fallon resigns, more confrontation with Iran?

That is good to hear, but this is still a loss for Team Sanity.

Absolutely. Had dinner last night with one of my Washington based partners who was in town. Fallon's resignation not a surprise to anyone close to the information loop in DC, but universally seen as a worrying development nevertheless.

Consensus view remains that the military will not support "an invasion" primarily because there is no specific objective (e.g. Go in, Accomplish the clearly defined military objective, Get out). But a military altercation can take many forms short of an "invasion".

This is what I meant when I earlier posted that oil is the most politically priced commodity on earth - and that is why I have never had the courage to short it, no matter how tempting the set up.

The mood in the Magic Kingdom is much less buoyant than it was 6-12 months ago. Just an aside: Despite all those petrodollars sloshing around, there is continued slowing in parts of the local economy. The clubs and restaurants and many malls here are no where near as busy as they were a year ago. A friend who runs the local jazz club told me his wine and spirits supplier is upping prices 35%. The currency peg with the US$ is really starting to bite into people's lifestyles. Even though there is no unemployment concern around here, there's also very limited wage/salary improvement room for most people. That means those earning US$ or local currency (the majority) are experiencing a cut in real incomes. An expat friend of mine just got headhunted by an American company to head their opertions here, and managed to write pay in Euros into his contract. The really wealthy are still doing their thing (consumption in some cases as crazily conspicuous as ever) but even here they aren't enough to keep the whole local economy going.

[GRG55]

Re: political: Fallon resigns, more confrontation with Iran?

Is-real DOES!
So, it will happen, unless China acts?
Mike

What exactly were you expecting China to do? They have supplied Iran with some the most advanced missiles in its inventory. Beyond that, and some military technical advisors, they won't get in the middle of this bun fight.

[c1ue]

Re: political: Fallon resigns, more confrontation with Iran?

The really wealthy are still doing their thing (consumption in some cases as crazily conspicuous as ever) but even here they aren't enough to keep the whole local economy going.

GRG,

Are you talking about there or here :rolleyes:

As for Iran, doesn't an election year with a lame duck president seem like a terrible time to start a conflict?

Especially given the divisiveness of Iraq - much less that that 'front' is not resolved and won't be for years?

The only way I can see it is if Bush really thinks Clinton/Obama will win, and want to stick it to them now and force a choice between 'supporting the troops' and 'getting out of Iraq/Iran'.

[touchring]

Re: political: Fallon resigns, more confrontation with Iran?

The credit crisis makes any new war impossible. This talk is ridiculous. But if it does happen, my gold will soar. :p

[GRG55]

Re: political: Fallon resigns, more confrontation with Iran?

The credit crisis makes any new war impossible. This talk is ridiculous. But if it does happen, my gold will soar. :p

Spend a little time in the part of the world where I am and you won't think it is so ridiculous. Fallon's resignation has yellow lights flashing around here. There is genuine concern about the intentions of the US administration, and how far the Iranians may decide to push as the year goes on given the "lame duck" status of the President. And this region has more military hardware per acre than anywhere else on the globe. It only takes one match. Or a carelessly discarded butt. And suddenly there's missiles being launched.

[touchring]

Re: political: Fallon resigns, more confrontation with Iran?

Or a carelessly discarded butt. And suddenly there's missiles being launched.

If it goes off "by accident", well then, that's another matter. :p

[touchring]

Re: political: Fallon resigns, more confrontation with Iran?

Or a carelessly discarded butt. And suddenly there's missiles being launched.

If it goes off "by accident", well then, that's another matter. :p

In the even of war, i'm fully hedged, but i'm not depending on a war for my pm buys. ;)

[BiscayneSunrise]

Re: political: Fallon resigns, more confrontation with Iran?

GRG,

Inflation is running amuck in the GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council) I just saw a news piece on Euro news reporting 20% inflation in Iran with Ahmadinejad lowering interest rates below inflation. Coupled with runaway government spending and a glut of petrodollars, the entire region stinks of the excesses of colonial Spain; living off the windfall of New World gold. Works great in the short term but without a strategic plan for the long term, the result is decline.

The same news report said that it is likely that Iran will no longer be a net exporter of oil in ten years. The Iranian leadership knows this, which I believe the real reason for their nuclear program: to power the country internally.

As for responding to the Iranian threat (real or imagined), I believe the best strategy is one of containment. Let them fester in their own mess and the underlying securlarism of the Iranian people will displace the current government.

If a pre-emptive attack on Iranian nuclear facilities becomes absolutely necessary, an interesting blurb in a recent Arab times, published reported that an unnamed Kuwaiti minister would feel more comfortable if the Israelis were to act as the surrogates in an Iraqi attack rather than the US. Probably for two reasons: US hegemony (while welcomed against Saddam) is probably getting a little uncomfortable now and second, it is easier to renounce an Israeli action to the Arab street.

[GRG55]

Re: political: Fallon resigns, more confrontation with Iran?

GRG,

Inflation is running amuck in the GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council) I just saw a news piece on Euro news reporting 20% inflation in Iran with Ahmadinejad lowering interest rates below inflation. Coupled with runaway government spending and a glut of petrodollars, the entire region stinks of the excesses of colonial Spain; living off the windfall of New World gold. Works great in the short term but without a strategic plan for the long term, the result is decline.

The same news report said that it is likely that Iran will no longer be a net exporter of oil in ten years. The Iranian leadership knows this, which I believe the real reason for their nuclear program: to power the country internally.

As for responding to the Iranian threat (real or imagined), I believe the best strategy is one of containment. Let them fester in their own mess and the underlying securlarism of the Iranian people will displace the current government.

If a pre-emptive attack on Iranian nuclear facilities becomes absolutely necessary, an interesting blurb in a recent Arab times, published reported that an unnamed Kuwaiti minister would feel more comfortable if the Israelis were to act as the surrogates in an Iraqi attack rather than the US. Probably for two reasons: US hegemony (while welcomed against Saddam) is probably getting a little uncomfortable now and second, it is easier to renounce an Israeli action to the Arab street.

• Iran represents no real physical threat to the USA (nor did Iraq);
• The Israelis have always been concerned about the potential threat from Saddam and now Iran;
• The Arab Gulf States used to be fearful of Saddam's army - even before he used it to invade Kuwait;
• Now that threat has been removed, Iran is the big dog on the block;
• Iran actually has real military capability (well trained officers, a strong command structure, advanced missile capability courtesy of the Chinese and Russians), unlike Saddam;
• The Israelis cannot strike Iran without passing through Arab airspace;
• Whichever Arab nation allows that airspace corridor (as the Saudi's did for the strike on the Iraq reactor) will create for itself a diplomatic problem with Iran that could last for generations;
• That is the biggest impediment to recruiting the Israelis to do the deed;
• Iran could help diffuse this situation by muzzling their President. They appear to have heeded that message, given we have heard few really silly comments from him lately.
• Fallon's resignation caused a great deal of concern about the situation within the US Administration. Bush and Cheney said "Just watch us" in the run up to Gulf War v.2. Nobody here doubts they are capable of behaving the same way again should they choose.
• Let's hope more is being read into this resignation than warrants.
• Pakistan remains, IMO, the real nuclear threat in this region.

[touchring]

Re: political: Fallon resigns, more confrontation with Iran?

• Pakistan remains, IMO, the real nuclear threat in this region.

pak is too far away from the west.

[BiscayneSunrise]

Re: political: Fallon resigns, more confrontation with Iran?

GRG,

I agree with all of your points. Just a small quibble on point 1. Iran and Iraq pose no real direct threat to the US, just an indirect threat to our allies and interests (read oil supply chain) I guess that's why you said no real threat.

As for the US invasion of Iraq, my guess is that it was intended mostly to restore Iraq to its historic place as a geopolitical counterweight to Iran. Saddam sort of served that purpose but he got too big for his britches.

Interesting take on the Saudi's precarious position on allowing transit of their airspace. Maybe this time the Israeli's could use one of their ballistic subs to do the job. I'm not sure if a sub borne weapon could do the job, though. Any military experts out there?

As for an actual invasion of Iran, what would be the end game? Not that Bush has shown he needs to have one. The end goal in Iraq is far way and murky,but somewhat defined. Afghanistan has no endgame. An Iranian invasion would certainly be a bridge too far.

I'm adding in the post after this one an excellent review of the war in Afghanistan by George Friedman which reached me via a John Maudlin email.

Greg