WASHINGTON, March 28, 2008
Dempsey To Head Up Central Command
Iraq-Savvy Lt. Gen. Martin Dempsey Will Fill Key Role, At Least For Now, As Fallon Leaves
-
Army Lt. Gen. Martin Dempsey, Commander of the Multi-National Security Transition Command in Iraq, testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington in this June 12, 2007 file photo. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
-
Interactive Iraq: 5 Years At War Five years after the U.S.-led invasion, the war wears on.
-
Interactive Rebuilding Afghanistan Learn about the nation's geography, history and people and find out what is being done to rebuild.
In a ceremony Friday at MacDill Air Force Base, Florida, Lt. Gen. Martin Dempsey is to assume command of U.S. Central Command from Navy Adm. William J. Fallon, who announced unexpectedly on March 11 that he was quitting. Fallon cited press reports that he was at odds with President Bush over Iran policy.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who has denied that Fallon was out of step on Iran, and Navy Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, are scheduled to attend the ceremony.
Dempsey, whose field experience in the early stages of his 34-year Army career was largely in Europe, has been deputy commander at Central Command since August 2007. He will serve as the acting commander until Mr. Bush chooses a permanent replacement and gets that person confirmed by the Senate.
Fallon was the first Navy officer to head Central Command since it was created in 1983. It typically has been commanded by an Army general - John Abizaid prior to Fallon, and Tommy Franks before Abizaid.
Dempsey takes charge at a particularly sensitive time, not only because of heightened concern about relations with Iran and the uncertain outlook for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also because of the approach of the November elections and the prospect of policy shifts by a new president.
One of Fallon's final acts was to advise Mr. Bush and Gates on how to proceed in Iraq after July, when the last of the troop reinforcements that Bush ordered in 2007 are to have returned home. At points during his 13 months in charge at Central Command, Fallon was perceived as being at odds with Army Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, on how soon to end the troop surge.
Dempsey has extensive experience in Iraq. He earned high marks as commander of the 1st Armored Division in Iraq in 2003-2004. For nearly two years prior to taking the Central Command job he served in Baghdad as head of the command that is training and equipping Iraqi security forces.
Mr. Bush is not expected to nominate a successor to Fallon until after Petraeus reports to Congress April 8-9 on his assessment of conditions in Iraq and his recommendations for how to proceed.
It is possible that Dempsey could get the job, but there are several other candidates, including Petraeus.
When Gates disclosed Fallon's decision to quit he noted that Dempsey would fill in on an interim basis but named no candidates to be the permanent successor. Gates said Fallon's departure would "leave a hole" but he denied an Esquire magazine report that if Fallon were to leave prematurely it would mean Mr. Bush was going to war against Iran. The magazine said Fallon had fallen out of favor with the White House for public comments suggesting that war should not be an option in Iran.
Andrew Bacevich, a professor of international relations at Boston University, said he does not foresee significant changes in U.S. policy toward Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan or Pakistan as a result of Fallon's departure.
"Those who believe that Fallon was the only person preventing the administration from going to war against Iran are wrong, in my view," Bacevich wrote in an e-mail exchange. "When Secretary Gates describes the prospect of such a war as 'ridiculous,' we should take him at his word."
The job of Central Command commander is part war fighter, part strategist and part diplomat. The commander answers to the secretary of defense and is responsible for U.S. military relations with countries stretching from the Horn of Africa, through the Middle East and across Central Asia. That region is at the center of the administration's war on terrorism.
In addition to his years in Iraq, Dempsey headed a U.S. program in Saudi Arabia to modernize the kingdom's National Guard, which is an elite force designed to protect the royal family, from September 2001 to June 2003.
Dempsey graduated from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point and attended the National War College in 1995-1996.
© MMVIII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
More From U.S.
Add a Comment See all 26 Comments
- peace and good will to all
- Reply to this comment
- Why don''t all you nay-sayers give the general a chance to warm his new chair before you start lambasting him? Jumping to conclusions and assuming his lack of leadership capabilities before Gen. Dempsey takes command of CentCom shows that you are biased against ANY decision Bush makes, no matter how qualified the individual is for the job. Why don''t you wait a few months and give the guy a chance to do his job before you ridicule him?
- Reply to this comment
...flag in one hand, map of IRAN in the other...- Reply to this comment
- nHOW EASILY YOU MAKE MY POINT ABOUT YOU AND YOUR STATEMENT - But like Gen.Petraeus, this man, Gen.Dempsey looks like he''''''''''''''''ll step up to the mike and read any report or make any statement he''''''''''''''''s told to make---as if, it were his! If he doesn''''''''''''''''t, HE''''''''''''''''LL be replaced, too! THIS IS EXACTLY WHY YOU ARE THE HYPOCRITE. AND I WAS WONDERING HOW YOUR RESPONSE ABOVE WAS INTELLIGENT. EXACTLY WHY I SAID GET OFF OF YOUR HIGH HORSE. YOUR LACK OF KINOWLEDGE OF THE SITUATION IS CLEAR AND IT IS BEST THAT YOU QUIT AND GIVE UP BY NAME CALLING. VERY NICE.
Posted by JERSupporter at 02:13 PM : Mar 28, 2008
My response:
First, from your writing it''s clear that either you didn''t pay attention in class and were a poor student or your school system is very deficient! That''s your tough luck!
Second, because your writing is so unintelligible, it necessarily limits my response.
Third, if your going to quote my writing, quote the section(s) your citing completely or enough so that it is apparent to any other posters what you are referring to! Your obscuring my writing to twist it!
Shame on you, Einstein!
Fourth, if you can''t ''take it'', than you sure as heck ought to stop ''dishing it out''!
Finally, see you later Einstein! Have a good Friday! - Reply to this comment
- No, you and your ilk, do nothing but employ logical fallacies, choose to be negative, and show everybody else your personal deficiencies! Yeah, I bet you''''re real proud of yourself, aren''''t you?! :(
Well---just continue being stupid, my friend---and hope that I and the others on this forum don''''t start spending our time pointing out your stupidity! Posted by stn_sage
-----------------------------
HOW EASILY YOU MAKE MY POINT ABOUT YOU AND YOUR STATEMENT - But like Gen.Petraeus, this man, Gen.Dempsey looks like he''''''''ll step up to the mike and read any report or make any statement he''''''''s told to make---as if, it were his! If he doesn''''''''t, HE''''''''LL be replaced, too! THIS IS EXACTLY WHY YOU ARE THE HYPOCRITE. AND I WAS WONDERING HOW YOUR RESPONSE ABOVE WAS INTELLIGENT. EXACTLY WHY I SAID GET OFF OF YOUR HIGH HORSE. YOUR LACK OF KINOWLEDGE OF THE SITUATION IS CLEAR AND IT IS BEST THAT YOU QUIT AND GIVE UP BY NAME CALLING. VERY NICE. - Reply to this comment
- ekucrew - that''''s great that you have a relative that served under LGen. Dempsey and he speaks most highly of him! And, if you wish to take your relatives'''' word as ''''gospel'''' you''''re entitled to! The rest of us---are under no such requirement! I praise your relatives'''' military duty---I served four years myself. But, I also know from experience, officers tend to publicly vociferously support their superiors so as avoid the label ''''disloyal'''' being attached to them! Again, your relatives'''' opinion of Dempsey is his---I and the rest of us---are entitled to ours, too! Take care. Posted by stn_sage
-----------------------------------
So I guess the question to you would be - who''s word are you taking as Gospel in reference to your statement about Gen Petraeus and Gen Dempsey? And please note your I fully understand your negative perception of officers - that was obviously stated clearly above. - Reply to this comment
- But like Gen.Petraeus, this man, Gen.Dempsey looks like he''''ll step up to the mike and read any report or make any statement he''''s told to make---as if, it were his! If he doesn''''t, HE''''LL be replaced, too! POSTED BY stn_sage
So please explain how you came up with this statement after never serving with either one of them? Is that a simple question? Or is it because you came to this determination after reading stories and message boards? Your statement above would appear to be purely speculative. - Reply to this comment
- JERSupporter - Yeah, I''ve seen how you thoughtlessly, biligerently, stupidly attack posters who are trying to voice their legitimate concerns. Most of whom have excellent ideas and opinions to share with others. I suspected it would only be a matter of time until you got around to me! :)
Only you and few others choose not to listen, not to try ---and try is the operative term here---to understand, and not to respond in a meaningful way!
No, you and your ilk, do nothing but employ logical fallacies, choose to be negative, and show everybody else your personal deficiencies! Yeah, I bet you''re real proud of yourself, aren''t you?! :(
Well---just continue being stupid, my friend---and hope that I and the others on this forum don''t start spending our time pointing out your stupidity! - Reply to this comment
- My response:
When you''''''''re dealing with an idiot like you, JERSupporter! The only way TO WIN, is to quit!
GOTCHA, idiotboy! Posted by stn_sage
---------------------
Exactly my point - so next time keep your idiotic and uninformed comments to yourself. LMAO Bye Quitter.
Posted by JERSupporter at 12:37 PM : Mar 28, 2008
My response: Your last comment is an example of accusing the other person of exactly what you---yourself---are guilty!
And, you''re wrong! I could spend all day exposing for the idiot you are as long as you continue to make stupid comments! And, you know what?! Sooner or later everyone on this forum site won''t waste their time interacting with you! And you''ll have to go somewhere else to exercise your deficient ego! - Reply to this comment
- My response:
When you''''re dealing with an idiot like you, JERSupporter! The only way TO WIN, is to quit!
GOTCHA, idiotboy! Posted by stn_sage
---------------------
Exactly my point - so next time keep your idiotic and uninformed comments to yourself. LMAO Bye Quitter. - Reply to this comment
- So, good ''''''''bye fool! Posted by stn_sage
---------------------------------
You continue to prove my point that quitters will always be quitters. Nice talk, thanks. LOL
Posted by JERSupporter at 12:27 PM : Mar 28, 2008
My response:
When you''re dealing with an idiot like you, JERSupporter! The only way TO WIN, is to quit!
GOTCHA, idiotboy! - Reply to this comment
- So, good ''''bye fool! Posted by stn_sage
---------------------------------
You continue to prove my point that quitters will always be quitters. Nice talk, thanks. LOL - Reply to this comment
That was rich - your stereotyping of officers is hilarious - no wonder you only served four years. LMAO
Posted by JERSupporter at 11:55 AM : Mar 28, 2008
My response:
First, open your eyes and think! Do you notice the words ''tend to''? The words are used as qualifiers.
It expresses a tendency, not a given! A stereotype as commonly used expresses an ''all'' quantity condition---THIS, I did not do, Einstein!
Second, I served four years and got out because I got tired of dealing with idiots like you! By the way, how many years did you serve your country, loud-mouth? Somewhere between zero and none I bet! Huh? You fail to say!
Third, I see in spite of my prior post, you still specialize in attacking the messenger.
Finally, if you want to read my posts, that''s fine, I can''t stop you. But, I think you ought to interact with people on your own level---fools, idiots, etc.---and not with people who want to use this forum for positive purposes! In any case, I''m done babysitting you Einstein! I''m not going to explain to you---what would be apparent to any thoughtful person---concerning my posts anymore. So, good ''bye fool!
- Reply to this comment
- Finally, if you''''re going to criticize my posts than attack the content instead of the messenger, because this shows you have absolutely NOTHING important to say! Fortunately, most of the other posters realize this about you as well!
Posted by stn_sage at 11:25 AM : Mar 28, 2008
I started out reading this post and the first thing that came to mind was how MEAN you were until i realised it was in response to JERsupport who''s a very big Repug Jerk. Jersupport has no idea about what you''ve been posting to him, i''d save the energy if it were me. Cheers! - Reply to this comment
- I served four years myself. But, I also know from experience, officers tend to publicly vociferously support their superiors so as avoid the label ''''disloyal'''' being attached to them!
Again, your relatives'''' opinion of Dempsey is his---I and the rest of us---are entitled to ours, too!
Take care. Posted by stn_sage
-----------------------------
That was rich - your stereotyping of officers is hilarious - no wonder you only served four years. LMAO - Reply to this comment
- ekucrew - that''s great that you have a relative that served under LGen. Dempsey and he speaks most highly of him! And, if you wish to take your relatives'' word as ''gospel'' you''re entitled to! The rest of us---are under no such requirement!
I praise your relatives'' military duty---I served four years myself. But, I also know from experience, officers tend to publicly vociferously support their superiors so as avoid the label ''disloyal'' being attached to them!
Again, your relatives'' opinion of Dempsey is his---I and the rest of us---are entitled to ours, too!
Take care. - Reply to this comment
- Just like your depaerate attempt to say (of course written poorly) - But, having never REALLY served in the military neither B/C would understand this---and it shows! So get off of your high horse and stop being HYPOCRITICAL. My experiences show that people that whine are followers and people that provide input and recommendations are leaders. You must be a follower.
Posted by JERSupporter at 10:57 AM : Mar 28, 2008
My response:
First, Your opinion of my writing style is your opinion! By the way, desperate isn''t spelled depaerate, and your criticizing me?! That''s rich!
Second, You don''t clearly state how I''M being hypocritical!? Are you suggesting, you think I have no real military experience, either? You''re unclear.
Third, your use of the term ''high horse'' implies you believe I''m being ''haighty'',perhaps? Again, that''s your perception---that attacks me, the messenger as opposed to the message, which is true? HUH?!
Fourth, you suggest that people who whine are followers---you attacked me WHINING about my post!
Remember, Einstein!? You attacked me!
Fifth, where''s all your great input, wiseguy? Uh-huh.
Finally, if you''re going to criticize my posts than attack the content instead of the messenger, because this shows you have absolutely NOTHING important to say! Fortunately, most of the other posters realize this about you as well! - Reply to this comment
- I have a relative that retired from the US ARMY last year. He was an officer that served under LT General Dempsey in Iraq and in Europe. He said this guy was the greatest warrior he had ever served with and would go into battle with him at anytime, anywhere.
His critics should pick up a weapon and move out smartly if they deem themselves wiser than Dempsey. - Reply to this comment
- JERSupporter - I never served with George W. Bush, either, but that doesn''''t detract from my ability to observe his actions and conclude he''''s an idiot!
Likewise, I apply the same abilities to the generals and derive my conclusions and/or calculated speculations!
However, your implied premise that I---or anyone else---must have neccessarily served with them to have an opinion---is a non-argument! And, it is a desperate attempt to try to silence someone who may express a view that you don''''t want other people to hear!
From your comment(s), I conclude you''''re part of that tiny, mindless group of Americans that support this unholy, wasteful, murderous war---though, I''''m sure you''''ll deny it! No, sir---I could care less what YOU think---because my experience suggests people like you don''''t think! Good day to you! :) Posted by stn_sage
-----------------------------
Just like your depaerate attempt to say (of course written poorly) - But, having never REALLY served in the military neither B/C would understand this---and it shows! So get off of your high horse and stop being HYPOCRITICAL. My experiences show that people that whine are followers and people that provide input and recommendations are leaders. You must be a follower. - Reply to this comment
- JERSupporter - I never served with George W. Bush, either, but that doesn''t detract from my ability to observe his actions and conclude he''s an idiot!
Likewise, I apply the same abilities to the generals and derive my conclusions and/or calculated speculations!
However, your implied premise that I---or anyone else---must have neccessarily served with them to have an opinion---is a non-argument! And, it is a desperate attempt to try to silence someone who may express a view that you don''t want other people to hear!
From your comment(s), I conclude you''re part of that tiny, mindless group of Americans that support this unholy, wasteful, murderous war---though, I''m sure you''ll deny it! No, sir---I could care less what YOU think---because my experience suggests people like you don''t think! Good day to you! :) - Reply to this comment
Mike Huckabee on GOP "rock stars," 2012, health care reform and more.
