Bush to sack generals – must be all their fault that we are losing

WASHINGTON (AP – … Bush, meanwhile, announced more changes in his team of military and diplomatic advisers.

He said Gen. John Abizaid (left), the top U.S. commander overseeing the theater that includes Iraq, will be succeeded by Adm. William Fallon, now Abizaid's counterpart in the Pacific. Army Lt. Gen. David Petraeus is the president's choice to be the new chief commander in Iraq, replacing Gen. George Casey (right). The nominations must be approved by the Senate.

Petraeus led the 101st Airborne Division during the 2003 Iraq invasion and later headed the effort to train Iraqi security forces.

Both Abizaid and Casey already had been expected to rotate out of their jobs. Both also had publicly expressed skepticism about a troop increase, and when Bush began devising a new Iraq plan their timetable appeared to move up.

Chris in Paris: Another classic by Bush... shoot the messenger. Yes, the problem is the military and not the US political leadership who orchestrated the fiasco in Iraq. The only new start for the US in that region would be ditching Bush, but he still thinks that he is right and that the American public just doesn't get it. We do though, which is why the GOP was routed in November. American wants real change and not more window dressing and games with the safety of the US troops in Iraq.

Let's stick a fork in yet another Bush myth, that he allows the military decide what they need to succeed in Iraq. The guy has some bizarre secret world up in his head where he thinks he is doing the US, Iraq and the Middle East a big favor and only he has the master plan. The more he tinkers with this the worse it gets and adding another 20,000 US troops will not solve the problem. Someone needs to tell Junior to quit playing with matches.

NYTimes: ''It's the policy that's at fault here, not the personnel,'' said Tony McPeak, Air Force chief of staff during the administration of George H.W. [“41”] Bush. Switching people without a good new plan will only be like putting ''old wine in new bottles,'' he said.

And something you may have missed in all of the transition news, William J. Fallon: Wrong Man For The Job

Lawrence Korb and Max Bergmann: At a time when the United States is engaged in protracted ground wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, one of the worst moves the Bush administration could make is to appoint someone with no background in land warfare to oversee these operations. In another baffling move, President Bush has decided to do just that, by replacing retiring Army General John Abizaid, the current head of Central Command, with Navy Admiral William J. Fallon.

Since its inception, Central Command, which oversees the Middle East and South Central Asia, has been led only by a Army or Marine Corps General. The Navy has been largely on the sidelines while the Army and the Marine Corps have borne the brunt of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; both are starting to crack under the strain.

Admiral Fallon is a fine officer and by all accounts has done a good job as head of the Pacific Command, the Navy’s traditional area of responsibility. But with little background in the Middle East or land warfare, his appointment appears to be based more on diffusing opposition to the military escalation in Iraq than on what is best for the soldiers and Marines on the ground and the country.

Set to make the disastrous decision to escalate our presence in Iraq, the President is in need of a military commander to support his decision. While General Abizaid publicly opposed the surge in troop levels in Iraq, it would be surprising if Admiral Fallon is not more agreeable.