Talk:John Abizaid

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the John Abizaid article.
Article policies
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Contents

[edit] Use of Arabic written form of his name

I find the use of Arabic characters in the general's name, and Arab-Americans persons in general, to be inconsistent with the general usage of non-Roman versions of proper names on Wikipedia.

Typically for proper names of European descent, the non-Roman version of their name is only given if the person has a strong association with the nation/region associated with that language, either by citizenship or other activity; ancestry by itself doesn't seem to trigger the inclusion of non-Romanized names. For example, the Hebrew version of Albert Einstein is not given, but it is for Yitzhak Rabin. I find this convention to be agreeable because it does not emphasize ancestry in articles where it is not warranted. Certainly the fact that Einstein was a Jew is a fact worth mentioning elsewhere in the article.

In the case of this article, the use of the non-Romanized name in the first five words is particularly noticeable because of the general's life, service, and actions strongly associate him with the United States, and one might say that he has earned the right to be represented as an American general first and foremost. As an ironic aside, the European name "John" is represented in romanized Arabic characters.

I appreciate the work of linguaphiles that take the time to translate names, but in this case I believe that the tone of the article is better served without it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hashkey (talk • contribs) .

It's unfair that Abizaid had to put up with derogatory profiling during his college years. That he had to put up with being called the "Mad Arab," while at West Point just goes to show how prevalent the underbelly of racism was and still is. And yet, many Arabs like him, are just as Caucasian or White as the average Anglo-Saxon American. A lot of Arabs are probably descended from the Europeans who invaded the Islamic lands during the Crusades. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.82.230.104 (talk) 05:21, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


What the hell? Only a yankee obsessed with skin color as race would reach the wild speculations...please stop now before you sound any more stupid, although Europeans were savages who raped and pillaged, very few rapes actually end in child birth; the woman usually faces a miscarriage from the trauma. I can't believe I had to say that. Racist stupid yankees. 213.42.2.11 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 19:59, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


Thanks for your insight on rape that "stupid racist" Americans would be uninformed about. Now, seeing as how some of the Crusader states had influence in the region for some 250 years (Antioch as an example)there is the phenomenon known as miscegenation or amalgamation that occurs amongst cultures in contact with each other. Someone such as ... John Abizaid is a good example of this. That being said, the cited raping and pillaging instigated Europeans seems to have continued intermittently until the close of the Bosnian conflict just over a decade ago. But, whatever culture you're from would never be guilty of the same crimes, would it? Don't be arrogant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.176.65.155 (talk) 17:59, 1 November 2007 (UTC)


Ok, we get your point but stop now, because this argument is pointless and off subject, and just unnecessary to mention the rape segment when this whole thing is about a general's heritage. Please, for the sake of staying on topic, drop it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.217.74.245 (talk) 16:04, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Presidential speculation

"Speculation exists about the possibility of a presidential run by Abizaid. While Abizaid professes no interest in politics, many believe that he would be a particularly strong candidate."

Who are these many and where is this speculation.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.68.95.200 (talk • contribs) 07:53 UTC, March 5, 2006

Worked for General Abizaid on his personal staff for 3 years and never heard a rumor regarding political office interests from him, staff, media or the public.

[edit] Speech on the War on Terror

Cut it short. One or two salient comments should suffice. Maybe a short section or two. Verbatim is always good. Since he seems to be of increasing prominence, this could be made into a section containing quotations. He had this other public appearance, before that committee, as of recently; please add & expand. Dysmorodrepanis 00:28, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the speech should be summarized more briefly with a few good quotes.Gogh 06:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I got tired of seeing that long summary of the speech, so I shortened it. In my view it is still too long. My sense is that the main relevance of the speech to this article are the General's view, as of 12/05, that the US was winning in Iraq, that Media focus on problems with the US occupation of Iraq was both inaccurate and playing into the strategy of the enemy, and that 2006 would see a significant improvement in the situation. I did not boil it down to just these points in deference to the original author, who I wish would construct a one paragraph summary of what he/she sees as the main points. Gogh 04:59, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Also, remove the biased interpretation. Make it clear that it is John Abizaid's view on the matter rather than being the matter itself. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.152.77.165 (talk • contribs) 18:17, 19 October 2006 (UTC).

Are we charting into new territory with "self-reporting that's likely credible"? Were the notes reported on in any other media? I'm also in favor of replacing the speech summary with the most salient points and quotes. Thanks, GChriss <always listening><c> 19:30, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Civil War

I added a summary of his testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee today (8/3/06) that has widely been seen as important. Gogh 06:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Abizaid & Murtha

Added a section based on Bob Woodward's reporting in his book State of Denial. Never saw Abizaid as a Kool Aid Drinker. Always seemed a straight shooter. Best Wishes. Will314159 16:02, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I spied what looked to be a Frappuccino in hearings. I've never been opposed to a "trivia" section... Thanks, GChriss <always listening><c> 19:22, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dates of Rank

I'm wondering if someone can include the date at which Abizaid reached each successive rank? I think it is a nice addition to the page of military commanders.

It certainly is. The trick is finding it online. When such information is found, it's usually included right away. So if you find it, be sure and let someone know, because I sure haven't yet. --ScreaminEagle 20:01, 19 December 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Succession

Is Fallon to replace Abazaid as is indicated at the bottom of the page? It seems odd that the article doesn't mention a Navy Admiral going to take his job.

In reference to the above question, Yes Navy Admiral Fallon replaced Army General Abizaid at Central Command. Central Command is a unified command that controls, Army ,Navy, Air Force, Marines & Coast Guard units in its area of responsibility. There have been Army and Marine Corp generals in the past commanding it. Admiral Fallon is the first Navy officer to command.

It's a unified command. the talk going around at the time was that Bush wanted a naval air commander in the theater so he could accentuate on his plans to bomb Iran.Godspeed John Glenn! Will 22:34, 18 September 2007 (UTC)