That's looking even more likely now, in the light of Fallon's resignation.
Citing an "urgent operational need," the Pentagon is seeking funds to modify B-2 stealth bombers to deliver an experimental 30,000-pound (13.6 ton), satellite-guided bunker busting bomb, officials said Oct. 24.
The likely purpose of the new weapon is to strike Iran's underground nuclear facilities, experts said.
"It raises a red flag," said U.S. Rep. Jim Moran, D-Va., who called for hearings on the request. "My immediate assumption is that it is a target in Iran, rather than Iraq or Afghanistan."
It makes perfect sense - it's exactly what the Republicans would do - enter into a war with Iran just prior to the 2008 election in an attempt to give War Hawk John McCain a better shot at the White House. It also further explains the White House's reluctance to draw down our presence in Iraq further.
Dan Froomkin at the Washington Post:
The abrupt resignation yesterday of the top U.S. commander in the Middle East, Admiral William J. "Fox" Fallon, has sparked a new round of speculation that President Bush and Vice President Cheney have some sort of plan in the works to attack Iran before their time is up.
Fallon's resignation -- or firing -- was apparently precipitated in part by a recent Esquire profile that depicted him as brazenly pushing back against the White House hawks eager to launch another war.
Now it turns out that what Thomas P.M. Barnett, a former Naval War College professor, wrote in that profile was eerily prescient: "How does Fallon get away with so brazenly challenging his commander in chief?
"The answer is that he might not get away with it for much longer. President Bush is not accustomed to a subordinate who speaks his mind as freely as Fallon does, and the president may have had enough.
Tom Shanker at the New York Times:
"Admiral Fallon had rankled senior officials of the Bush administration in recent months with comments that emphasized diplomacy over conflict in dealing with Iran, that endorsed further troop withdrawals from Iraq beyond those already under way and that suggested the United States had taken its eye off the military mission in Afghanistan.
"A senior administration official said that, taken together, the comments 'left the perception he had a different foreign policy than the president.' . . .
Many believe Fallon was the last man between Cheny/Bush and a war with Iran:
A number of officials said the last straw came in an article in Esquire magazine by Thomas P. M. Barnett, a respected military analyst, that profiled Admiral Fallon under the headline "The Man Between War and Peace."
The article highlighted comments Admiral Fallon made to the Arab television station Al Jazeera last fall, in which he said that a "constant drumbeat of conflict" from Washington that was directed at Iran was "not helpful and not useful."
"I expect that there will be no war, and that is what we ought to be working for," Admiral Fallon was quoted as saying. "We ought to try to do our utmost to create different conditions."
Readers of the Esquire article who are among the admiral's supporters said they did not believe after reading it that the admiral had made comments that could be viewed as insubordinate to the president. But the cast of the lengthy article put him at odds with the White House.
"If, in the dying light of the Bush administration, we go to war with Iran, it'll all come down to one man," the article begins, referring to Admiral Fallon. "If we do not go to war with Iran, it'll come down to the same man."
And that man is no longer standing in the way of a war with Iran.
Note: Wizbang Blue is now closed and our authors have moved on. Paul Hooson can now be found at Wizbang Pop!. Please come see him there!