The Pentagon attributes the resignation of its top special operations policy maker to “fallout” from a major reorganization of Rumsfeld’s top advisors. Thomas W. O’Connell gave his several month notice, staying until the November elections.
While reading the blurb, a thought came to mind. This sounded like a bunch of hooey. In the business world people never give the real reason for their resignation, unless they’ve reached retirement. Usually a divisive relationship or issue caused the move.
My question arose around the use of “fallout” in the description. A possible issue of division could be the dropping nuclear weapons on Iran post elections. Israeli foreign secretary Tivi Livni said in a weekend interview, only months remained before Iran achieved critical nuclear enrichment capabilities.
King Abdullah screams for an immediate return of all parties for Middle East peace. His cries fall on deaf ears. Does the U.S. and its proxy, Israel (from George Bush’s words) not want to be at the bargaining table when the nukes fall on Iran’s nuclear facilities? That would be truly bad form.
Only General O’Connell knows the real reason for his resignation and he ain’t talking past fluff. Time will show whether fallout foreshadows anything or not. But if Bush Co. bombs Iran’s nuclear facilities look for it to be just after the election or post New Year.
The question is whether George wants to risk $100 a barrel oil right before Thanksgiving and Christmas. Probably not, but what if Tivi’s right and there are only months? 2007 is looking like it might be a very bad year. Human rage driven storm clouds are organized and strengthening as I write.
No comments:
Post a Comment