The top U. S. military commander of the Middle East resigned, amid speculation, of White House problems, magazine articles, and not getting along with other top officials. Admiral William J. Fallon asked for permission to retire, and Defense Secretary Robert Gates obliged him. Fallon, who was the top military person, in charge of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Iran, has served in the military for over forty years. However, he has been overshadowed by other people, in the fray, like General Petreas (in Iraq), of "the surge strategy."
In a recent Esquire article, Fallon was characterized as a man, who not only disagreed with the strategy (possible armed incursion) in Iran, but also struggled and boiled over with the White House on other issues, as well. President Bush did not give a press conference, rather accepting his resignation and putting out a written press release. Although, Secretary Gates did field questions, and tried to squelch the press' questions, on Fallon's resignation over "White House issues."
When a top Admiral gives an interview with a world wide magazine and is characterized, or characterizes himself, as a maverick (who is against national defense policy, the White House, or the "chain of command"), it is time for him to go. There is a reason why, the military has vertical reasoning, orders (by "chain of command"), and overlapping discretion in the armed forces, and it is to keep order, not have every man/woman in uniform giving personal dialogue about national orders and/or programs, and finally to keep everyone in uniform in check. When in boot camp, to the top of the national defense department (in military uniform), cohesion, a general propulsion forward, and knowing the "chain of command" is in place for the best interest of the United States. However, when men/women in uniform, forget and/or decide to go ahead, letting personal agendas, ideologies, and other things to interfere with national security, or making our countries leaders look incompetent, it is time for them to go. Admiral Fallon made his choice, to resign, long before he put his name on the line. He resigned when his job title, responsibilities, and national security took a back seat, to personal choices and magazine articles.
In a recent Esquire article, Fallon was characterized as a man, who not only disagreed with the strategy (possible armed incursion) in Iran, but also struggled and boiled over with the White House on other issues, as well. President Bush did not give a press conference, rather accepting his resignation and putting out a written press release. Although, Secretary Gates did field questions, and tried to squelch the press' questions, on Fallon's resignation over "White House issues."
When a top Admiral gives an interview with a world wide magazine and is characterized, or characterizes himself, as a maverick (who is against national defense policy, the White House, or the "chain of command"), it is time for him to go. There is a reason why, the military has vertical reasoning, orders (by "chain of command"), and overlapping discretion in the armed forces, and it is to keep order, not have every man/woman in uniform giving personal dialogue about national orders and/or programs, and finally to keep everyone in uniform in check. When in boot camp, to the top of the national defense department (in military uniform), cohesion, a general propulsion forward, and knowing the "chain of command" is in place for the best interest of the United States. However, when men/women in uniform, forget and/or decide to go ahead, letting personal agendas, ideologies, and other things to interfere with national security, or making our countries leaders look incompetent, it is time for them to go. Admiral Fallon made his choice, to resign, long before he put his name on the line. He resigned when his job title, responsibilities, and national security took a back seat, to personal choices and magazine articles.
