[Just to pre-empt the winger headline on this one. Sorry to, er, deflate you, guys.] AP:

Every effort should be made to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, but failing that, the world could live with a nuclear-armed regime in Tehran, a recently retired commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East said Monday.

John Abizaid, the retired Army general who headed Central Command for nearly four years, said he was confident that if Iran gained nuclear arms, the United States could deter it from using them.

"I believe that we have the power to deter Iran, should it become nuclear," he said, referring to the theory that Iran would not risk a catastrophic retaliatory strike by using a nuclear weapon against the United States.

"There are ways to live with a nuclear Iran," Abizaid said in remarks at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank. "Let's face it, we lived with a nuclear Soviet Union, we've lived with a nuclear China, and we're living with (other) nuclear powers as well."

Duh. This is so obvious I would think a child could see it; in fact, I wrote as much yesterday).

So, a general is saying, in essence, that the administration's Iran policy is deeply bogus. What does it all mean?

Who knows? It could mean that Shooter's gaining whatever leverage he needs to pull the trigger (again); the retired Generals have been a relative voice of sanity on Iraq policy, after all. Or it could mean that Shooter lost the inter-agency battle, and Abizaid's putting the boot in on behalf of whoever won the battle, but can't speak because they're still in uniform. Or it's all a piece of insanely complex disinformation.

Yeah, who knows? I close by noting that such uncertainty about an administration's real motives, and the speculation born of a completely opaque policy process, is the hallmark of authoritarian regimes generally. Remember Kremlinology?a