Posted on 12/19/2012 5:58:13 AM PST by Kaslin
The conventional wisdom is that Barack Obama dodged a politically perilous "bullet" when he declined to nominate Susan Rice as the next Secretary of State. Had he done so, the President would have provided his critics a high-profile platform for exposing and critiquing his administration's conduct with respect to Benghazigate and the larger, dangerous practice of "engaging" Islamists, of which it was a particularly dismal example.
Yet, President Obama is reportedly intent on creating what may prove to be a similar "teachable moment" by nominating former Republican Senator Chuck Hagel to replace Leon Panetta as Secretary of Defense. Sen. Hagel has been an outspoken champion of controversial and even radical policies firmly embraced by Mr. Obama during his first administration. Worse yet, they are likely to be priorities for his second term now that the President has, as he put it in his overheard side-bar with Russia's Dmitri Medvedev last March, "more flexibility."
In the event Barack Obama actually taps the former Nebraska senator, he will be inviting the sort of national debate that has long been needed, but generally missing, about his administration's positions in several areas vital to U.S. security. As there is no evident daylight between Sen. Hagel's views and those of this president, the opportunity must be seized to expose both. Consider several topics that cry out for such high-profile, critical examination:
• A Pentagon chief who favors U.S. disarmament? As Adam Kredo of the Washington Free Beacon has reported, Sen. Hagel believes that, "The Defense Department, I think, in many ways has been bloated. So I think the Pentagonneeds to be pared down." Do Republican senators want a former colleague to give political cover to President Obama's insistence that the United States use reductions in defense spending as a source of half the revenue given up pursuant to the Budget Control Act of 2011 - even though the Pentagon receives only twenty-percent of federal expenditures? Do they want thus to be implicated in the inevitable, attendant dismantling of the sort of freedom-protecting presence the American military has had around the globe since the end of World War II, its ability to project power and its vital modernization programs? [While Mr. Hagel has correctly observed that "defense is not a jobs program," he - like President Obama - seems indifferent to a harsh reality: Such draconian cuts in defense expenditures will have an adverse impact on employment. In fact, an estimated one million jobs in the defense sector will shortly be lost as a result of the now-imminent, so-called "sequestration" round of budget reductions. Do Republican senators share this indifference?]
• Sen. Hagel has been defeatist about Iraq and Afghanistan. And he seems much given to what the late Jeane Kirkpatrick called the "blame-America-first" syndrome with comments like: "Our policies are a source of significant friction not only in the region, but in the wider international community. Our purpose and power are questioned." A Hagel nomination would be a perfect opportunity to repudiate such sentiments and disassociate Republicans from them.
• Of particular concern is Senator Hagel's enthusiasm for U.S. disarmament in the nuclear arena. His advocacy of a "world without nuclear weapons" affords a vehicle for challenging the President's like-minded efforts to bring about the only thing that is remotely achievable - if unimaginably irresponsible: a world without U.S. nuclear weapons. As Mr. Obama is determined not to upgrade our arsenal or to test realistically its aging weapons or tomaintain the strategic "Triad" at present levels, despite growing nuclear threats from North Korea and Iran to China and Russia, every effort must bemade to challenge and counteract such recklessness. Again, a Hagel nomination is a good and very visible place to start.
• Speaking of Iran, Mr. Hagel has long been an enthusiastic proponent of direct negotiations with the mullahs, professing, "Engagement is not surrender. It's not appeasement. [Rather it is] an opportunity to better understand [others]." He has long opposed military action and meaningful economic sanctions. He appears, in short, confident that we can live with a nuclear Iran. Do Senate Republicans agree? If not, are they willing to challenge a president who, despite his rhetoric to the contrary, seems to share that confidence - and oppose a Pentagon nominee who clearly would work to foreclose whatever options remain for precluding such a nightmare?
• Last for the present purpose, but hardly least, there is the problem of Senator Hagel's longstanding hostility towards Israel, A FACT RECOGNIZED EVEN BY IRAN'S STATE MEDIA. He favors engaging its enemies, including terrorist groups like Hamas. While in the Senate, Mr. Hagel declined to condemn Hezbollah. His anti-Israel and pro-Islamist views have earned him accolades from the Muslim Brotherhood front known as the Council on American Islamic Relations.
To be sure, Sen. Hagel's enmity towards the Jewish State tracks with that of President Obama. The question is: Do Republican Senators, and for that matter Democratic ones, who disagree wish to intensify the undermining of Israel in this administration by elevating someone with these credentials to the job of Secretary of Defense?
It is deeply regrettable that the last campaign - which was a perfect opportunity for a teachable moment with the American electorate about the dangers posed the Obama presidency to U.S. security interests - was not used for that purpose. The next best thing may be a nomination fight over Mr. Obama's choice as Secretary of Defense of a man who so aggressively embraces the worst of his policy proclivities.
Sounds perfect for the A-hole in chief.
We can just ignore Isreal, and watch THEM turn the ME into a parking lot. Then we can go in and take the new gas and oil finds.
Then we can restock it with “our” Jews.
Sounds like a plan.
//sarcasm off
This is a good example of honest people wasting time on trivia (policy discussion) when the only thing they need to know is that Barack Obama is a Marxist-Leninist (and Moslem jihadist) bent on destroying the Republic and making himself dictator-for-life.
Everything else, at this point, is like arguing over deck-chair arrangements on the Titanic.
Business career (1982-1996)
After leaving government employment, Hagel co-founded Vanguard Cellular, a mobile phone manufacturer that made him a multi-millionaire. While working with Vanguard, he served as president and chief executive officer of the United Service Organizations and the Private Sector Council, as deputy director and chief operating officer of the 1990 G7 Summit, and on the board of directors or advisory committee of the American Red Cross, the Eisenhower World Affairs Institute, Bread for the World, and the Ripon Society. He also served as Chairman of the Agent Orange Settlement Fund and is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.
Although he was pressured by some to run for Governor of Virginia, where he had lived for 20 years, in 1992 Hagel moved back to Nebraska to become president of the McCarthy Group, an investment banking firm. He also served as a Chairman and was CEO of American Information Systems Inc. (AIS), a voting machine manufacturer.
In 1992, as President of investment group McCarthy & Co., Hagel assumed ownership and became Chairman of American Information Services (AIS), later known as Election Systems & Software (ES&S), a manufacturer of computerized voting machines. On March 15, 1995, Hagel resigned from the board of AIS as he intended to run for office.[8] Michael McCarthy, the parent company’s founder, was Hagel’s campaign treasurer.[9]
Current positions
Following Hagel’s retirement from the Senate, in February 2009 he accepted a position as Distinguished Professor in the Practice of National Governance at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C.
Hagel currently teaches at Georgetown University in the Walsh School of Foreign Service (SFS), as a Distinguished Professor in the Practice of National Governance.[38] He is Chairman of the Atlantic Council, Co-Chairman of the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board; a member of the Secretary of Defense’s Policy Board and Secretary of Energy’s Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future; and is a member of Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) board of directors. He also serves on the Board of Directors of Chevron Corporation; the Advisory Boards of Deutsche Bank Americas; Corsair Capital; M.I.C. Industries; is a Director of the Zurich Holding Company of America; and is a Senior Advisor to McCarthy Capital Corporation.[39] In October 2012 Defense Secretary Leon Panetta asked Hagel to chair an advisory committee for the Vietnam War 50th anniversary commemoration. When a Senator, Hagel co-sponsored the bill creating the commemoration committee.[18]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Hagel
Hagel is one of the Gnostic Global Elites.
Still pending on anti-Semitic accusations.
A lot of vague waving around of references, none of which are serious.
If Hagel is an anti-Semite then prove it please.
Huh?
Why do you come to the defense of this RINO traitor?
I make no accusation but it would not surprise if his opposition to Israel was borne out of enmity for Jews.
He would not have been the first RINO Jew-hater to have served in the Senate.
Of course if he may just an idiot, but politicians who support terrorists open themselves up to the accusation.
He's a successful businessman who went on to get on some boards. Not much more gnostic or global or elite than Frank Gaffney, who's attacking him here.
Once upon a time, you could believe that politics were Wall Street against Main Street, the CFR against ordinary small town Americans. Nowaday's everybody's in the big money big government power game. It's hard to say that Hagel would be that much more globalist or interventionist than Gaffney.
You could be right thereagain you could be wrong.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.