I have no problem whatsoever with Hagel. I approve of this nomination, and I hope the Senate does as well. The amount of consternation his nomination is causing neocons is delicious.
So he voted for the war in Iraq and then changed his mind when public sentiment changed... Stand up guy. He was against the surge, saying it was "the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam.” Turned out it was a great success. He certainly SEEMS like he knows what he is talking about... Or not.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/the-hagel-dossier/ Iraq is something that Hagel likes to talk about—a lot. But it’s not what the CPAC faithful wanted to hear. In a recent interview in his Senate office, he explained why being conservative and condemning the Bush administration’s policy in Iraq—and in broader terms, Bush’s foreign policy in the Muslim world—aren’t mutually exclusive. “Conservatives, I’ve always known, like this guy up there,” he said, gesturing to a framed picture of President Dwight D. Eisenhower, “and Reagan, Goldwater, and others—[Sen. Robert] Taft, Mr. Conservative—were very protective in conserving our resources. And what is more significant in a country’s resource inventory than its people, its army? I think we have used our military recklessly and carelessly. I don’t think that’s conservative.” He continued, “I find it fascinating sometimes when I am challenged on this. I think I am the real conservative on the Iraq debate here.” President Bush’s loyal congressional supporters, bolstered by the base, beg to differ. They find Hagel’s brand of realist internationalism, his hammering away at the Iraq policy as a misbegotten adventure akin to the Vietnam War he nearly died in, quite noisome. They’ve called him an appeaser, a traitor even. A personally popular senator with 35-year-old ties to the Republican Party, his detractors have done everything to marginalize him.
So the do-nothing Congress isn't going anywhere. We're apparently going to have to go to war for simple judicial appointments. If the pubs can't even support the appointment of their own member, how can we expect any of them to be responsible with any respect? The President should have wide discretion to choose who he wants, especially since the Dems control the Senate. Opposing this nomination, the Republicans will just continue to show how out of touch they really are.
The do nothing congress....that's a good thing when it comes to enacting many of obamas policies. The dems have had the numbers for the last 6 years to get whomever they want approved by he senate so it doesn't matter what the pubs do. Coburn has already said he won't support hagels nomination as he isn't qualified for the job. Better tell him that doesn't agree with your assessment, maybe he'll change his mind.
To claim the surge was a "great success" is a stretch a best...laughable at its worst. As for changing his mind, many in the gop would be better served if they repudiated the folly that was the Iraq War. In Mitch McConnels own words: “Many of the predictions Chuck Hagel made about the war came true,” the Kentucky senator said in a brief interview after his remarks at a fundraising reception. “They have proven to be accurate.” Hagel’s views on the war “have not diminished his effectiveness,” McConnell said, and may, in fact, increase his effectiveness over time.
Yep, the surge was such a failure in Iraq that Obama used it again in Afghanistan even after he was against the surge in Iraq. Hagel sounds like the perfect fit for him.
Hagel is absolutely correct about the misuse of our military. Our military is used to prop up the US dollar as the world's reserve currency which in turn "encourages" other countries to prop up our debt. You must ask yourselves, "Who in this country profits the most from the continued accumulation of massive debt?" And no, it isn't those addicted to government spending. Answer that question and you will have the answer to who really controls and misuses our military.
Yep, quite certain that the surge in Afghanistan will bring peace and prosperity...a great success if you will.
The Gnomes of Zurich? The Illuminati? Perhaps the Trilateralists? Seriously, Presidents from either party should be given their choices for cabinet posts (not so much for judges who are in for life). Hagel seems fairly reasonable (not totally, but who is?). Israel DOES run us around like a chihuahua on a leash. No, Chuck, the surge was a great success. But, like the Tet Offensive, everything connected with Iraq is now painted black by an oversimplifying press/academy in their jihad against W. But, on balance, he seems like a decent enough candidate. And, as a former enlisted man, you'd have to think that, in an era of shrinking budgets, he'll at least look out for salaries and benefits for the troops.
Up to 10 Dem Senators have made statements that show they may not support Hagel... Does that mean they are out of touch?
I'm not a big World Order type of guy. I am big on believing that there are a group of very powerful and very GREEDY people in the world who are not above using their wealth and power to influence government policy in a way that benefits them to the detriment of the average citizen. If that makes me a tinfoil hat type then so be it.
Just from a political point of view the pubs owe hagel nothing...in fact they really owe him a bloody nose.
To claim his prediction about the surge was "accurate" is a stretch at best.... laughable at its worse. Actually that is incorrect... You cannot even stretch his prediction to anywhere near accurate.
So why is so much attention on whether the 'pubs will turn on one of their own (in name, anyway), and not on an administration that insists on making such critical appointments based whatever political leverage it believes it may garner, instead of actually caring about what's best for the country?
You can argue about whether the war in Iraq was worthwhile or whether it achieved its intended ends. But arguing that the surge, as part of the strategy there, was a failure is infantile. Even most Dems aren't stupid enough to attempt to claim that. (I said most)
