Time to turn off the spin cycle, once again.

NONE of these so called interviews or statements indicates or even states dissent within the ranks.

Also, a third aircraft carrier group IS being deployed to that region- the U.S.S. Ronald Reagan.


Guess CENTCOM commander Admiral Fallon has no balls or is certainly not showing or vowing disssent or mutiny as this weak tabloid story suggests.

"Lt. Gen. Wright, in charge of US forces in Japan, told AP last week that the Iraq war had weakened American forces in the face of any potential conflict with China. He was quoted as saying, "Are we in trouble? It d[b]...

Time to turn off the spin cycle, once again.

NONE of these so called interviews or statements indicates or even states dissent within the ranks.

Also, a third aircraft carrier group IS being deployed to that region- the U.S.S. Ronald Reagan.


Guess CENTCOM commander Admiral Fallon has no balls or is certainly not showing or vowing disssent or mutiny as this weak tabloid story suggests.

"Lt. Gen. Wright, in charge of US forces in Japan, told AP last week that the Iraq war had weakened American forces in the face of any potential conflict with China. He was quoted as saying, "Are we in trouble? It depends on the scenario. But you have to be concerned about the small number of our forces and the age of our forces."

...Spiegel

Mutiny in the ranks - at the top!!!



If you call that mutiny you'd better head over to dictionary.com again. You seem to have a difficult time with this military jargon.

If the order is given, they will obey it, period. Don't expect any type of rebellion by the Pentagon.

Of course, as it should be Ratifar, YOU are correct, but it may give pause to Bush about ordering an illegal attack on Iran. Does Congress still have its veto on declaring war. Maybe this time they'll discover a backbone.

Putin's visit may do more to hold back the dogs of war for now. TG our other commentator predicts war for that means we'll have peace.

More from Spiegel ...

KOLKO: All the significant economic journals (Financial Times, Wall Street Journal, etc.) recognize that the American and European economies are now in a crisis, and...

If the order is given, they will obey it, period. Don't expect any type of rebellion by the Pentagon.

Of course, as it should be Ratifar, YOU are correct, but it may give pause to Bush about ordering an illegal attack on Iran. Does Congress still have its veto on declaring war. Maybe this time they'll discover a backbone.

Putin's visit may do more to hold back the dogs of war for now. TG our other commentator predicts war for that means we'll have peace.

More from Spiegel ...

KOLKO: All the significant economic journals (Financial Times, Wall Street Journal, etc.) recognize that the American and European economies are now in a crisis, and it may be protracted. The dollar is falling; Gulf States and others may abandon it (as an investment currency). A war with Iran would produce economic chaos because oil would be scarce. There are states which the United States wishes to isolate, like Russia and Venezuela, who can develop great influence through their ability to sell oil in such a crisis. The balance of world economic power is involved, and that is a great issue.

Kolko: The Gulf States do not like Shia Iran, but they export oil, which makes them rich. They are dependent on peace, not war. ...

Hence, the report that Cheney is trying to use Israel, if it is true,
shows that he's confused and quite mad -- but also unusually isolated.

...Spiegel

Talk about spin cycles. Napster flubs it again. The article he cites is itself speculation and never mentions three carrier groups off Iraq. It mentions either the Reagan or the Stinnis finally being there. He's article is from January. Righthand's article is from yesterday.

I found this on the International Herald Tribune in July. Looks like FALLON HAS BIG BALLS! TAKE THAT CHENEY!

The U.S. has maintained two carriers in the region since February to patrol in the Persian Gulf, Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean with 15,000 sailors and marines between them.

U.S. officials have said that main...

read more»

Talk about spin cycles. Napster flubs it again. The article he cites is itself speculation and never mentions three carrier groups off Iraq. It mentions either the Reagan or the Stinnis finally being there. He's article is from January. Righthand's article is from yesterday.

I found this on the International Herald Tribune in July. Looks like FALLON HAS BIG BALLS! TAKE THAT CHENEY!

The U.S. has maintained two carriers in the region since February to patrol in the Persian Gulf, Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean with 15,000 sailors and marines between them.

U.S. officials have said that maintaining two carrier battle groups here and twice holding major exercises in the Gulf was partly muscle-flexing toward Iran.

But the force could be reduced to one carrier in the coming weeks unless one now here is ordered to stay beyond its planned homecoming, or another is rescheduled to go there early, three U.S. defense officials said Tuesday.

@Bobby Rutan-

Yep MY bad- I posted the wrong link. Here is the one I meant to reference: (Notice the date of the article) Sept, 18th, 2007



The comments Fallon purportedly made were made back in MAY 2007. Spiegel is reporting OLD information, just because they chose to insert old information does not make it current.


Two US carrier-strike groups are bound for Persian Gulf region, bringing number back to three

September 18, 2007, 4:18 PM (GMT+02:00)

USS Truman Strike Group heading for Gulf

DEBKAfile’s military sources report that from the third week of July, the only America...

@Bobby Rutan-

Yep MY bad- I posted the wrong link. Here is the one I meant to reference: (Notice the date of the article) Sept, 18th, 2007



The comments Fallon purportedly made were made back in MAY 2007. Spiegel is reporting OLD information, just because they chose to insert old information does not make it current.


Two US carrier-strike groups are bound for Persian Gulf region, bringing number back to three

September 18, 2007, 4:18 PM (GMT+02:00)

USS Truman Strike Group heading for Gulf

DEBKAfile’s military sources report that from the third week of July, the only American strike force- carrier in the Persian Gulf-Arabian Sea region was the USS Enterprise. By the end of September, it will be joined by the USS Nimitz and the USS Truman Strike Groups. Our sources note that with their arrival, three American naval, air and marine forces will again confront Iranian shores at a time of crisis in the military and civilian leadership of Iran - signaled by the abrupt change of Revolutionary Guards Corps commanders, rising Israel-Syrian tensions and a troubled situation in Lebanon.

So there will be, in FACT three carrier groups in the gulf region at one time. Also the article you mention has a caveat, the words- COULD BE are not an absoulte are they.

"But the force could be reduced to one carrier in the coming weeks unless one now here is ordered to stay beyond its planned homecoming, or another is rescheduled to go there early, three U.S. defense officials said Tuesday."

Sure, could be, was a caveat but the numbers in my article would have equaled 1 or 2 with the caveat so it's not important.

Now, you have finally posted a relevant article that matches your statements. That's good. However, it still does not determine whether in between May and September, CENTCOM commander Fallon rebuffed Cheney. Wheter he did initially and now conditions have changed we don't know.

As others have pointed out in the long run it won't matter as our military will execute Cheney's orders (isn't W still on vacation chasing armadillos in Crawford?).

However, it is evident that Fallon maintains a position of greater independence than his predecessor and that the military is bec...

Sure, could be, was a caveat but the numbers in my article would have equaled 1 or 2 with the caveat so it's not important.

Now, you have finally posted a relevant article that matches your statements. That's good. However, it still does not determine whether in between May and September, CENTCOM commander Fallon rebuffed Cheney. Wheter he did initially and now conditions have changed we don't know.

As others have pointed out in the long run it won't matter as our military will execute Cheney's orders (isn't W still on vacation chasing armadillos in Crawford?).

However, it is evident that Fallon maintains a position of greater independence than his predecessor and that the military is becoming more outspoken about its opinion of the use of the military and Bush and Cheney's goals (Fallon's comments about Petraeus being an ass-kissing suck up). I don't believe the military views itself as nation builders (there is a lot of evidence to support that) and that is what they are being asked to do under this current administration.

Bush envisions a long term troop commitment in Iraq similar to South Korea. The only problem is that the troops in South Korea have not been confronted on a daily basis with insurgent attacks for 50 years. No military commander is going to support a war of attrition for 50 years (although they may not state that in public).

Wheter he did initially and now conditions have changed we don't know.

But now you do know. The three carriers groups in the Gulf indicates that Fallon was alot of talk and he will do his job regardless of personal opinions. He was awarded the 'job' in January after his predecessor was 'releived' of command and not awarded a fourth star. Fast forward to May 2007 where Fallon shoots off his mouth. Now fast forward to Tuesday July 10, 2007


Another US Navy aircraft carrier is heading towards the Middle East, boosting the number of the giant warships in the region to three, the navy said in a statement on Tuesday.

The nuclear-powered USS Enterprise and its strike gr...

Wheter he did initially and now conditions have changed we don't know.

But now you do know. The three carriers groups in the Gulf indicates that Fallon was alot of talk and he will do his job regardless of personal opinions. He was awarded the 'job' in January after his predecessor was 'releived' of command and not awarded a fourth star. Fast forward to May 2007 where Fallon shoots off his mouth. Now fast forward to Tuesday July 10, 2007


Another US Navy aircraft carrier is heading towards the Middle East, boosting the number of the giant warships in the region to three, the navy said in a statement on Tuesday.

The nuclear-powered USS Enterprise and its strike group will join the USS John C. Stennis and USS Nimitz in the navy's Fifth Fleet area of operation, which includes Gulf waters off Iran.

"The Enterprise is heading to Fifth Fleet waters and is not replacing any other ships in the area," a US Navy spokesperson told AFP without elaborating.

So, one can conjecture and elaborate all they want. The facts presented here say otherwise.

Dear Ratifar & Others: Although you might be right you also might be wrong.

The realist here are wise to note the number of aircraft carriers and how talk, talk, talk, doesn't mean as much as guns, guns, guns when it comes to raw power.

There are also reports leaked (aka: emailed) from sailers in the Persian Gulf that these aircraft carriers are stocked with weapons to the Max. Armed to the teeth.

BUT -- Latest polls show Bush has a 24% approval rating! This is one of the lowest in USA recorded history, only matched by Richard Nixon.

Leaders in USA Congress, just in the last week, have gone to the White House & to the press and said as clear as can be: No War in Iran without specific Con...

Dear Ratifar & Others: Although you might be right you also might be wrong.

The realist here are wise to note the number of aircraft carriers and how talk, talk, talk, doesn't mean as much as guns, guns, guns when it comes to raw power.

There are also reports leaked (aka: emailed) from sailers in the Persian Gulf that these aircraft carriers are stocked with weapons to the Max. Armed to the teeth.

BUT -- Latest polls show Bush has a 24% approval rating! This is one of the lowest in USA recorded history, only matched by Richard Nixon.

Leaders in USA Congress, just in the last week, have gone to the White House & to the press and said as clear as can be: No War in Iran without specific Congressional approval.

Despite efforts to spin and disparage, Russia's Putin is standing up to Bushheads in an emphatic way that is shocking to many. For so long these neo-con warmongers could think they could talk and talk and threaten anything AND...and specifically say things implying no one, no other nation made a difference.
Putin is now seen as the 'John Wayne,' in this scenaro clearly saying: No missile base in Poland ("We will neutralize it") and resuming nuclear armed airplane flights on the USA Alaska border (i.e. this is not just talk, talk talk).

Turkey, too, has not only clearly said, watch out, we're going to maked attacks and armed 'incursions,' into northern Iraq BUT has also made threats to stop helping the USA war by no longer allow airplane flights landing and shipping war supplies through it's country. (this also is not just talk, talk, talk). And, as previously said, while the USA acts like no other counry makes a difference suddenly for the first time political leaders were says AND acting in a way that said: "We can't piss off Turkey."

So-called "surgical air strikes," may happen. The recent Israeli air strike in Syria showed the way,warmongers claim.

Although no help to the victims; an Iran attack would politically kill Bush and neo-cons, to the Max.

Sorry guys I didn't have time to read all the comments but here's my ten cents.

Isn't it quite unrealistic even think attacking Iran? Iraq has 15 million people, Hussein had no modern army, the country is devided in many ways and long term economical sanctions had done their damage.

Iran is TOTALLY different thing! There are more than 80million people in that country, they're young and Islam is in completely different leven as a religion. Southern part of the Iran is mountains and Teheran is very well protected over 10million people megacity. Almost every country around Iran is anti-american and Kaspian see is very important also for Russia. Russia also makes investments to Iran and that'...

Sorry guys I didn't have time to read all the comments but here's my ten cents.

Isn't it quite unrealistic even think attacking Iran? Iraq has 15 million people, Hussein had no modern army, the country is devided in many ways and long term economical sanctions had done their damage.

Iran is TOTALLY different thing! There are more than 80million people in that country, they're young and Islam is in completely different leven as a religion. Southern part of the Iran is mountains and Teheran is very well protected over 10million people megacity. Almost every country around Iran is anti-american and Kaspian see is very important also for Russia. Russia also makes investments to Iran and that's one of the reason USA is so anti-Iran. Iran has working and modern army. To make it short - War with Iran is almost the same you'd attact to Germany! It's political, economical and humane suicide!

War on Iran talks just reflect the ignorance and arrogance of Bush regime and some American people. Justification for that kind of war does not exist. Freedom has nothing to do with that. It's always everything about natural resources, political power, religious hegemony etc. Don't turn into modern "Nazi Germany"!

All very true, Viitaja. Americans have just no idea as to the consequence of attacking Iran. Short of nucking every Iranian then say good bye to every US soldier in the Middle East. Those in Iraq are effectively hostages against a US attack on Iran. An Israeli attack probably means the same.

In the last USA war against Iran with Iraq as its proxy, there was a wipe out of the best tanks the US had then. How they achieved this has been in the main hidden from Americans. This is horrific but true...

Quote..
“In the past,” wrote the semi-official Iranian daily Ettela’at, [i]“we had child-volunteers: 14-, 15-, and 16-year-olds. They went into the mine fields. ...

All very true, Viitaja. Americans have just no idea as to the consequence of attacking Iran. Short of nucking every Iranian then say good bye to every US soldier in the Middle East. Those in Iraq are effectively hostages against a US attack on Iran. An Israeli attack probably means the same.

In the last USA war against Iran with Iraq as its proxy, there was a wipe out of the best tanks the US had then. How they achieved this has been in the main hidden from Americans. This is horrific but true...

Quote..
“In the past,” wrote the semi-official Iranian daily Ettela’at, “we had child-volunteers: 14-, 15-, and 16-year-olds. They went into the mine fields. Their eyes saw nothing. Their ears heard nothing. And then, a few moments later, one saw clouds of dust. When the dust had settled again, there was nothing more to be seen of them. Somewhere, widely scattered in the landscape, there lay scraps of burnt flesh and pieces of bone.” Such scenes could henceforth be avoided, Ettela’at assured its readers. “Before entering the mine fields, the children wrap themselves in blankets and they roll on the ground, so that their body parts stay together after the explosion of the mines and one can carry them to the graves.”

"The children who thus rolled to their deaths formed part of the mass “Basiji” movement that was called into being by the Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979. The Basiji Mostazafan – the “mobilization of the oppressed” – consisted of short-term volunteer militias. Most of the Basiji members were not yet 18. They went enthusiastically and by the thousands to their own destruction. “The young men cleared the mines with their own bodies,” a veteran of the Iran-Iraq War has recalled, “It was sometimes like a race. Even without the commander’s orders, everyone wanted to be first.”

"The western media showed little interest for the Basiji – perhaps because journalists cou

...
"The western media showed little interest for the Basiji – perhaps because journalists could not be present during the hostilities or perhaps because they did not believe the reports. Such disinterest has persisted to this day. The 5000 dead of Saddam Hussein’s poison gas attack on the Kurds of Halabja have remained in our memory. History has forgotten the children of the minefields.

"Today, however, Ahmadinejad appears in public in his Basiji uniform. During the war, he served as one of the Basiji instructors who turned children into martyrs. The generation that fought in the Iran-Iraq War has come to power along with Ahmadinejad. He owed his elect[b]...

...
"The western media showed little interest for the Basiji – perhaps because journalists could not be present during the hostilities or perhaps because they did not believe the reports. Such disinterest has persisted to this day. The 5000 dead of Saddam Hussein’s poison gas attack on the Kurds of Halabja have remained in our memory. History has forgotten the children of the minefields.

"Today, however, Ahmadinejad appears in public in his Basiji uniform. During the war, he served as one of the Basiji instructors who turned children into martyrs. The generation that fought in the Iran-Iraq War has come to power along with Ahmadinejad. He owed his election in Summer 2005 to the contemporary Basiji movement.

"In Fall, he announced a “Basiji Week.” According to a report in the newspaper Kayan, some 9 million Basiji heeded the call, “forming a human chain some 8,700 kilometers long… . In Tehran alone, some 1,250,000 people turned out.” In his speeches, Ahmadinejad praises the “Basiji culture” and the “Basiji power” with which “Iran today makes its presence felt on the international and diplomatic stage.” Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, Chair of the Guardian Council, goes so far as to describe the very existence of Iran’s nuclear program as a triumph of those Iranians who “serve the Basiji movement and possess the Basiji-psyche and Basiji-culture.”

"Far from being the subject of criticism, the sacrifice
made of the Basiji in the war against Iraq is celebrated nowadays more than ever before."

Attacking Iran is unrealistic, as far as a land invasion that would last for any amount of time. I have posted the following information on clipmarks before but here goes again.

Successful nation building efforts, historically have called for a troop to citizen ratio of 20 per 1000 population (or 1 per 50 if you prefer). Link to Rand Study source.

Iraq requires 550,000 troops on the ground for successful nation building . We aren't even close. Same is true for Afghanistan.

Considering the ratio (using Wikipedia info for Iran's population 70,472,000) we would need to have 1,400,000 troops on the ground to ...

Attacking Iran is unrealistic, as far as a land invasion that would last for any amount of time. I have posted the following information on clipmarks before but here goes again.

Successful nation building efforts, historically have called for a troop to citizen ratio of 20 per 1000 population (or 1 per 50 if you prefer). Link to Rand Study source.

Iraq requires 550,000 troops on the ground for successful nation building . We aren't even close. Same is true for Afghanistan.

Considering the ratio (using Wikipedia info for Iran's population 70,472,000) we would need to have 1,400,000 troops on the ground to provide security and stability.

That's not going to happen. But there is nothing to stop the crazoid neo-cons from launching air and missile strikes. Remember Bush launches invasions when God tells him to.

One note of historical accuracy. Even though the US has a long history of supporting the Batthist coup in Iraq, and propping up Saddam to make sure he didn't lose the Iraq-Iran war (including precursor chemical weapon development and satellite information on Iranian troop movements), the Iraqi's used Soviet tanks.

Remember Bush launches invasions when God tells him to.

haha, I just wonder why he didn't get a message from God to attack Saudi Arabia for axample. They gave the money to Osama Bin Laden for 9/11 and it's way more fundamental country than Iran. Women can't drive car in Saudi Arabia if they don't have license from their husband. They'd kill all Americans if they could, that's for sure.

Something that crossed my mind it was CIA and BIA that actualized the present Iranian administration. In 1953 they arranged revoliton (for oil) that took down the prime minister Muhammad Mossadeq. That ended up to Islamist revolition in 1970s.

What are they going to do in Iran if they get t...

Remember Bush launches invasions when God tells him to.

haha, I just wonder why he didn't get a message from God to attack Saudi Arabia for axample. They gave the money to Osama Bin Laden for 9/11 and it's way more fundamental country than Iran. Women can't drive car in Saudi Arabia if they don't have license from their husband. They'd kill all Americans if they could, that's for sure.

Something that crossed my mind it was CIA and BIA that actualized the present Iranian administration. In 1953 they arranged revoliton (for oil) that took down the prime minister Muhammad Mossadeq. That ended up to Islamist revolition in 1970s.

What are they going to do in Iran if they get there anyway? Find weapons of mass destruction? Don't they think they've got enough nukes of their own.

That child rolling on minefield thing is sick but it mirrors very well who're you dealing with in Iran. They've been there for 6000 years so I doubt they're very glad if white man tries to tell them what to do and how to live.