Drumbeats 0

There was a lot speculation in Left Blogosphere that Admiral Fallon’s resignation was a prelude to more war from the Bushie War Machine.

(Interestingly enough, many of the same Left Blogospheristas speculated, when the good Admiral was appointed, that his appointment signaled preparations for carrier-based air assaults on Iran, since he was an Admiral of the Navy, rather than a General of the Army. Here is one such speculation.)

Dan Froomkin has a thorough analysis of the situation and the possibilities and reaches the following conclusion on the fourth page of his post today:

The conventional wisdom in Washington is that, ever since December’s National Intelligence Estimate threw cold water on Bush and Cheney’s insistence that Iran was on the brink of nuclear weapons development, a preventative attack on Iran was no longer in the cards. But Bush has repeatedly brushed off the NIE’s findings. Administration pronouncements blaming Iran for fomenting attacks in Iraq are on the upswing again. And now Cheney’s on his way to Israel.

It’s still not really beyond Bush and Cheney to order a full-scale preemptive attack on Iran. But the more likely scenario is that there will be an asymmetrical U.S. response to a (possibly trumped up) Iranian provocation. And the most likely scenario is that the U.S. will encourage (or certainly not oppose) an Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear facilities — which in turn would lead the U.S. to come to Israel’s defense should Iran strike back.

I suspect he nailed it. The War Mongers in the Current Federal Administration know that they can’t market another war. So, if they have the opportunity, they will happily resort to trickery.

Because they like war.

(And, I suspect that, since none of them have been personally touched by it, they think it’s more like this than like this. It’s something that happens to other people. Like my son.)

Just as they like torture.

Sing we all together now: “Gulf of Tonkin.”

Here is William Arkin’s take on the situation.