Chuck Hagel For Defense Secretary

• Footwedge

  Apparently Obama is giving this choice some serious consideration. Hagel, a Republican with a ton of brains, is just what the US needs.
  
  Hagel represents the paleoconservative wing and is a true critical thinker. Bibi and the Lobby don't like this guy. If Obama selects him, I would rank it right up there with his greatest accomplishments.
• fish82

  

  I like Hagel, but the "greatest accomplishments" bar is already set pretty damn low.
• Con_Alma

  Getting Bin Laden is his greatest accomplishment. There's no one he could select for his cabinet that would top that.
• believer

  

  Con_Alma;1345242 wrote:Getting Bin Laden is his greatest accomplishment.

  True. Every other "accomplishment" Barry has is dubious at best.
  
  Regarding Hagel, Barry could do worse but it's a stretch to label this a "great accomplishment".
• Footwedge

  fish82;1345241 wrote:I like Hagel, but the "greatest accomplishments" bar is already set pretty damn low.

  Never said his accomplishment bar was high. Thus the "one of his greatest accomplishments" would stand. :laugh:If Hagel is selected, I will celebrate big time. But the Lobby may make it very hard.
• Footwedge

  Bumpity bump...bumpity bump. I've stocked up with Orville Reddonbocker's finest popcorn.
• stlouiedipalma

  Hagel may be a good choice, IMO, but Obama hasn't exactly had much luck with appointments the last four years. http://www.stltoday.com/news/national/obama-struggles-to-nominate-confirm-federal-judges/article_22ae0865-0994-5d05-9528-8146e1b2c5f8.html
• majorspark

  

  Footwedge;1360043 wrote:Bumpity bump...bumpity bump. I've stocked up with Orville Reddonbocker's finest popcorn.

  All cabinet appointees should be given due deference by the Senate. Barring something atrocious the president was elected the chief of the executive and should be allowed to staff the executive as he sees fit. That said I see no reason Hagel should not be confirmed. I would suggest however you save your popcorn for another occasion. Nothing of note is going to change. Hagel will serve at the behest of the president and as an honorable subordinate he will dutifully perform as ordered regardless of his personal counsel.
  
  Hagel voted yes on weaker resolutions of force permitting the president to execute a wars in Iraq/Afghanistan and did not demand stronger terms to commit the nation to war, such as a formal declaration of a state of war. Words do have meaning. And declaring such puts the nation on a different footing. In fact he got on board with the same weak kneed "resolution" stuff that landed him in an open ended war in the jungles of Southeast Asia. When things got shitty in Iraq/Afghanistan he gets on a pedestal. Honestly Footwedge I don't know why you are humping this guy so hard. Maybe you think he just know "sees it"?
• Footwedge

  I hump this guy because I think he would make a great Sec of Defense, that is why. I agree that the ultimate calls are made by the president, but the president many times will cite the recommendations of the Defense secretary. As I stated up above, the "hiring" of Hagel is a political move made by Obama which will have the following effects..
  
  1. A huge slashing of miltary bloat
  2. A new mindset regarding occupation around the globe. Trust me, the troops will be coming home from a whole bunch of places where they are not needed and are taxing to our economy.
  3. Geneva Convention law will be once again honored and not shit upon.
  4. A commitment to separation regarding the unbelievable control the Israeli Lobby has regarding our foreign policy. Israel is our ally, not our 51st state.
  5. The wardrums for Iran...that have been pounding and bleating for 4 years or so, will pretty much come to a grinding halt.
  
  "You people" call this "much adieu about nothing". I call it the first step in transforming our bully mentality of global hegemony to a foreign policy of humbleness, as our forefathers clamored for. And as such....it is absolutely huge...for our troops, our economy, the view of us on the foreign stage.
  
  Make no mistake about it, Hagel's appointment, if it in fact gets confirmed, will be a major accomplishment for Obama.
  
  As an aside....I am really sorry about your brother. You had mentioned him to me I believe in a PM awhile ago. I wish all of your family well.
• majorspark

  

  I think you are setting yourself up for a major disappointment. Hagel is not the 2nd coming of our forefathers.
• majorspark

  

  Footwedge;1360991 wrote:4. A commitment to separation regarding the unbelievable control the Israeli Lobby has regarding our foreign policy. Israel is our ally, not our 51st state.

  Those darn Jews. Everyone wants to wring their hands over our relationship with Israel and the supposedly powerful Israeli lobby. Yet our most dangerous and costly foreign commitments lie in NATO, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan.
  
  NATO: We are by treaty required to commit our armed forces to the defense of any one of 27 nations. No declaration of war is in order as its already preordained in the treaty. Balkan and other European nations with a history of bad blood. Baltic states bordering the Russian federation. I am guessing the Russians find this as offensive as the US loosing Puerto Rico and them forming a defense alliance with Russia. You think that Latvia and Estonia did not have a lobby? Or any other NATO member wanting their defense needs taken care of? Of course when the outgoing secretary of defense Gates warned NATO that the US may not always be around to carry their defense waters his words quickly faded away.
  
  South Korea: Nearly 30,000 US military personnel on the ground maintaining a 60yr technical state of war. You think the South Korean government does not have a lobby in DC? They want us to provide them security as well. If hostilities resume the US by default of its continued presence will be be a combatant. Any resumption of large scale hostilities would kill more Americans in a matter of a few months than we have ever lost in the middle east and Afghanistan combined.
  
  Taiwan: Our continued defensive support of an island off the coast of mainland China does not further our relations with the Chinese government. China is a far greater power and potential military and economic adversary than all the Arab forces opposing our support of Israel combined. You think Taiwan does not have a lobbying force in Washington? Who ever heard of the Taiwanese lobby. But look what they have secured from the US government.
  
  The Israeli lobby can't even secure a mutual defense treaty with the USA. Nor a large contingent of US troops to perpetually maintain the peace. Nor have they been successful in preventing the US government from selling and giving large amounts of advanced military weaponry to their historically hostile neighbors. The Israeli lobby is not nearly as powerful as portrayed in the press. Nor by you. In fact it is far weaker than others that have secured a far greater commitment in blood and treasure from the US than Israel has to this date.
• believer

  

  majorspark;1361457 wrote:Those darn Jews. Everyone wants to wring their hands over our relationship with Israel and the supposedly powerful Israeli lobby. Yet our most dangerous and costly foreign commitments lie in NATO, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan.
  
  NATO: We are by treaty required to commit our armed forces to the defense of any one of 27 nations. No declaration of war is in order as its already preordained in the treaty. Balkan and other European nations with a history of bad blood. Baltic states bordering the Russian federation. I am guessing the Russians find this as offensive as the US loosing Puerto Rico and them forming a defense alliance with Russia. You think that Latvia and Estonia did not have a lobby? Or any other NATO member wanting their defense needs taken care of? Of course when the outgoing secretary of defense Gates warned NATO that the US may not always be around to carry their defense waters his words quickly faded away.
  
  South Korea: Nearly 30,000 US military personnel on the ground maintaining a 60yr technical state of war. You think the South Korean government does not have a lobby in DC? They want us to provide them security as well. If hostilities resume the US by default of its continued presence will be be a combatant. Any resumption of large scale hostilities would kill more Americans in a matter of a few months than we have ever lost in the middle east and Afghanistan combined.
  
  Taiwan: Our continued defensive support of an island off the coast of mainland China does not further our relations with the Chinese government. China is a far greater power and potential military and economic adversary than all the Arab forces opposing our support of Israel combined. You think Taiwan does not have a lobbying force in Washington? Who ever heard of the Taiwanese lobby. But look what they have secured from the US government.
  
  The Israeli lobby can't even secure a mutual defense treaty with the USA. Nor a large contingent of US troops to perpetually maintain the peace. Nor have they been successful in preventing the US government from selling and giving large amounts of advanced military weaponry to their historically hostile neighbors. The Israeli lobby is not nearly as powerful as portrayed in the press. Nor by you. In fact it is far weaker than others that have secured a far greater commitment in blood and treasure from the US than Israel has to this date.

  Thank you. Needed to be said.
• Footwedge

  majorspark;1361457 wrote:Those darn Jews. Everyone wants to wring their hands over our relationship with Israel and the supposedly powerful Israeli lobby. Yet our most dangerous and costly foreign commitments lie in NATO, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan.
  
  NATO: We are by treaty required to commit our armed forces to the defense of any one of 27 nations. No declaration of war is in order as its already preordained in the treaty. Balkan and other European nations with a history of bad blood. Baltic states bordering the Russian federation. I am guessing the Russians find this as offensive as the US loosing Puerto Rico and them forming a defense alliance with Russia. You think that Latvia and Estonia did not have a lobby? Or any other NATO member wanting their defense needs taken care of? Of course when the outgoing secretary of defense Gates warned NATO that the US may not always be around to carry their defense waters his words quickly faded away.
  
  South Korea: Nearly 30,000 US military personnel on the ground maintaining a 60yr technical state of war. You think the South Korean government does not have a lobby in DC? They want us to provide them security as well. If hostilities resume the US by default of its continued presence will be be a combatant. Any resumption of large scale hostilities would kill more Americans in a matter of a few months than we have ever lost in the middle east and Afghanistan combined.
  
  Taiwan: Our continued defensive support of an island off the coast of mainland China does not further our relations with the Chinese government. China is a far greater power and potential military and economic adversary than all the Arab forces opposing our support of Israel combined. You think Taiwan does not have a lobbying force in Washington? Who ever heard of the Taiwanese lobby. But look what they have secured from the US government.
  
  The Israeli lobby can't even secure a mutual defense treaty with the USA. Nor a large contingent of US troops to perpetually maintain the peace. Nor have they been successful in preventing the US government from selling and giving large amounts of advanced military weaponry to their historically hostile neighbors. The Israeli lobby is not nearly as powerful as portrayed in the press. Nor by you. In fact it is far weaker than others that have secured a far greater commitment in blood and treasure from the US than Israel has to this date.

  This editorial is laced with so many innacuracies, I really do not know where to start. Not gonna go line by line because, just like 5 deferment Dickless Cheney, I have "better things to do".
  
  If you think that our positioning of 30-40 thousand troops in Germany, Japan, and other places have anything to do with NATO, you are sadly mistaken. Our foreign policy is not dictated by NATO.....at all.
  You should reread the purpose of NATO, and what it was/is designed to do. And btw, Israel has more NATO violations than all of these "hostile neighbors" have COMBINED.
  
  Secondly, your utter nonsense regarding how "weak' the Israeli Lobby is is a joke. Look at AIPAC's website sometime and learn what they have done.
  
  "The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a private Jewish American group that claims to be “America’s pro-Israel lobby,” is considered by The New York Times to be, “the most important organization affecting America’s relationship with Israel.” In 1997, Fortune magazine called AIPAC the second most powerful lobby in America. Since that time AIPAC’s star has risen steadily, and is now widely regarded as the most powerful lobby in America.
  
  http://thebilzerianreport.com/aipac-the-most-powerful-lobby-in-america/
  
  From that same article:
  
  Each year, AIPAC is involved in more than a hundred legislative and policy initiatives involving Middle East policy or aimed at broadening and deepening the US-Israel bond. While building support in Washington is essential, AIPAC is found wherever the future of the US-Israel relationship could be affected. AIPAC has a network of ten regional offices and nine satellite offices that help pro-Israel activists from Missoula to Miami.
  This 100,000-strong group has been described as an agent of the Israeli government, and those accusations were substantiated in 2005 when a pentagon analyst plead guilty to passing military secrets to two AIPAC employees en route to Israel. After some political wrangling, all charges were dropped against the two Jewish AIPAC employees in 2009, even though the analyst agreed to testify against the AIPAC employees, and the government had overwhelming evidence to prosecute."
  
  Is it OK to throw espionage charges away...just because you are a member of AIPAC?
  
  Weak Lobby Spark? Very little influence Spark? You may want to re research the topic.
  Not gonna get into the 4 billion we give them annually either...virtually all of it for defense weopanry. They bitch about Iran's opacity on WMDs. The biggest offender regarding this subject....you guessed it...Israel. When's the last time the AIEA inspected their cites? And please spare me the "well, Israel isn't a signatory of the nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty. The question should be "well, why aren't they?"
• majorspark

  

  Footwedge;1361669 wrote:If you think that our positioning of 30-40 thousand troops in Germany, Japan, and other places have anything to do with NATO, you are sadly mistaken. Our foreign policy is not dictated by NATO.....at all.
  You should reread the purpose of NATO, and what it was/is designed to do. And btw, Israel has more NATO violations than all of these "hostile neighbors" have COMBINED.

  This left me scratching my head. Substitute UN in place of NATO and this statement at least makes some sense. NATO violations??? As for Germany its closer to 50,000 and another 20,000+ scattered among Euro members of NATO.
  
  Japan and the other places I mentioned (South Korea and Taiwan) are not members of NATO and not subject to its charter. NATO is not obligated to joint defense if the USA comes under attack while operating in these areas of the world. I thought I made that clear with the paragraph division.
  
  As with most governmental organizations NATO has evolved into something beyond the intentions of its founders. With the Iron Curtain quickly dividing the continent NATO was formed to prevent a quick resumption of violence that plagued Europe during WWII. With that threat now gone it has become an offensive alliance swallowing up economically ruined socialist Eastern European nations and former Soviet states with the promise of military protection. They have engaged in military actions against states that had not attacked other member states. Article 4 leaves this door wide open. NATO operates offensively in North Africa and is now encamped in Southern Turkey just an errant missiles throw away from getting involved in the Syrian shit storm. Perhaps we dodge this one because Syria lacks vast oil fields.
  

  Footwedge;1361669 wrote:"The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a private Jewish American group that claims to be “America’s pro-Israel lobby,” is considered by The New York Times to be, “the most important organization affecting America’s relationship with Israel.”

  LOL. No shit. Imagine that a pro-Israel lobby group is the most important organization affecting US's relationship with Israel. All this time I thought it was the NRA. Go figure.
  

  Footwedge;1361669 wrote:In 1997, Fortune magazine called AIPAC the second most powerful lobby in America. Since that time AIPAC’s star has risen steadily, and is now widely regarded as the most powerful lobby in America.

  Well if Fortune Magazine said it it must be so.

  Footwedge;1361669 wrote:Is it OK to throw espionage charges away...just because you are a member of AIPAC?

  No. Perhaps Jonathan Pollard should have joined AIPAC.
  

  Footwedge;1361669 wrote:Weak Lobby Spark? Very little influence Spark? You may want to re research the topic.

  Weak and little influence are your words. Not mine. Far weaker than other more influential lobbying groups are my words. When they can secure a contingent of 30,000 US troops guarding their border for 60 yrs against a neighboring nation that can't even feed its own people I''ll jump on board.
  

  Footwedge;1361669 wrote:Not gonna get into the 4 billion we give them annually either...virtually all of it for defense weopanry.

  Lets be real hear. All foreign aid we give no matter what it is earmarked for allows the foreign government receiving it to spend more domestic funds on weaponry. As for that nearly 4 billion we give more in total to Israel's historically hostile neighbors.
  

  Footwedge;1361669 wrote:They bitch about Iran's opacity on WMDs. The biggest offender regarding this subject....you guessed it...Israel. When's the last time the AIEA inspected their cites? And please spare me the "well, Israel isn't a signatory of the nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty. The question should be "well, why aren't they?"

  I have not lost a wink of sleep since the North Koreans nuked up. Nor will I if the Iranians do. But unlike the Iranian and North Korean governments the Israelis are not constantly threatening to unleash hell on their enemies.
• majorspark

  

  As an aside your buddy "Dickless" Cheney backed NATO membership for Georgia in an effort to cut the Ruskies land passage to the Middle East. Like I have always said the world is governed by the aggressive use of force (military and economic). NATO is no exception.
• believer

  

  majorspark;1362440 wrote:As an aside your buddy "Dickless" Cheney backed NATO membership for Georgia in an effort to cut the Ruskies land passage to the Middle East. Like I have always said the world is governed by the aggressive use of force (military and economic). NATO is no exception.

  No - It's governed now by the ultra-pacifist and ultra-socialist Keynesians who enjoy the freedom, personal liberties, and prosperity of worldwide American militaristic imperialism and semi-free enterprise as set-up and maintained by dickless draft-evading evil neo-cons.
• believer

  

  http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/charles-krauthammer-the-meaning-of-hagel/2013/01/10/12a37c48-5b5f-11e2-9fa9-5fbdc9530eb9_story.html
• Footwedge

  believer;1363428 wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/charles-krauthammer-the-meaning-of-hagel/2013/01/10/12a37c48-5b5f-11e2-9fa9-5fbdc9530eb9_story.html

  LOL at Charles Krauthammer. What a funny, funny article he wrote there. This just in Charles....America doesn't want to hear your bs anymore.
  
  Yes...the chickenhawks...like Krauthammer cannot stomach having a guy who places America first...over Israel...and an end to the endless wars.
  
  Try reading Pat Buchanan's article for some real perspective on why Hegal riles up the "war party".
  
  http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/why-the-war-party-fears-chuck-hagel/
• Footwedge

  majorspark;1362438 wrote:
  
  I have not lost a wink of sleep since the North Koreans nuked up. Nor will I if the Iranians do. But unlike the Iranian and North Korean governments the Israelis are not constantly threatening to unleash hell on their enemies.

  Sticks and stones will break my bones but words......
  
  Iran has invaded how many countries in the past 2 centuries? How about Israel?
  
  Case closed.
• Footwedge

  majorspark;1362438 wrote:
  
  
  Weak and little influence are your words. Not mine. Far weaker than other more influential lobbying groups are my words. When they can secure a contingent of 30,000 US troops guarding their border for 60 yrs against a neighboring nation that can't even feed its own people I''ll jump on board.

  So...how about clarifying what you meant when you said this up above.....
  
  Majorspark...."The Israeli lobby is not nearly as powerful as portrayed in the press. Nor by you. In fact it is far weaker than others that have secured a far greater commitment in blood and treasure from the US than Israel has to this date."
  
  And then you play the "consider the source card". Typical.
  
  
  Plenty of other sources out there...plenty....confirming the size and power of AIPAC....as either number 1...or number 2. But what makes the whole thing so tragic, we are talking about an organization that is complicit in the death and destruction of hundreds of thousands of people...pushing a war agenda in Iraq...based completely and totally on fabrications.
• jhay78

  

  Footwedge;1363536 wrote:Sticks and stones will break my bones but words......
  
  Iran has invaded how many countries in the past 2 centuries? How about Israel?
  
  Case closed.

  Iran doesn't need to invade anyone. They are the world's biggest state sponsor of terrorism, and have been for awhile. They can accomplish their goals in other ways.
• Footwedge

  jhay78;1364008 wrote:Iran doesn't need to invade anyone. They are the world's biggest state sponsor of terrorism, and have been for awhile. They can accomplish their goals in other ways.

  No. Depending on whose history books you read, which periodicals you peruse daily, the US is by far and away the biggest sponsor of terrorism. Don't believe me? Ask the families of 3,000,000 Iraqi citizens (over 10% of their entire population) that have been killed maimed, and or displaced.
• Footwedge

  From Ike's speech in 1953. All 5 points in completete deference to the neoconservatives' agenda in establishing the Project for New Century America.....a Soviet Empire type of global militarism.
  
  First: No people on earth can be held, as a people, to be an enemy, for all humanity shares the common hunger for peace and fellowship and justice.
  Second: No nation's security and well-being can be lastingly achieved in isolation but only in effective cooperation with fellow-nations.
  Third: Every nation's right to a form of government and an economic system of its own choosing is inalienable
  Fourth: Any nation's attempt to dictate to other nations their form of government is indefensible.
  And fifth: A nation's hope of lasting peace cannot be firmly based upon any race in armaments but rather upon just relations and honest understanding with all other nations.
  
  Moreover, back to the topic at hand, the hiring of Hagel and today's announcement of early troop withdrawal from Afghanistan is quite Eisenhowereresque. Really, really bad news for the warmongers of our country.
  
  Also....from the former 5 star general, and president, and proud member of the GOP...from that same speech...
  Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.
  
  Thank God that the peacemakers are overtaking the Krauthammers of the world...and we will return to what we were once so proud of.
• believer

  

  Footwedge;1364073 wrote:No. Depending on whose history books you read, which periodicals you peruse daily, the US is by far and away the biggest sponsor of terrorism. Don't believe me? Ask the families of 3,000,000 Iraqi citizens (over 10% of their entire population) that have been killed maimed, and or displaced.

  I did a quick Google on that figure and the max number I can dig up is 650,000. Link to back up your figure?
• majorspark

  

  believer;1364080 wrote:I did a quick Google on that figure and the max number I can dig up is 650,000. Link to back up your figure?

  I would also be interested in the definition of the word "displaced".