Getty Images
We'll learn soon enough what kind of opposition Chuck Hagel's nomination to be the next Secretary of Defense will face, but in the meantime, as Jim Rutenberg noted over the weekend, it's starting to sound a lot like 2006.
In the bitter debate that led up to the American invasion of Iraq in 2003, Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska said that some of his fellow Republicans, in their zest for war, lacked the perspective of veterans like him, who have "sat in jungles or foxholes and watched their friends get their heads blown off."
Those Republicans in turn called him an "appeaser" whose cautious geopolitical approach dangerously telegraphed weakness in the post-Sept. 11 world.
The campaign now being waged against Mr. Hagel's nomination as secretary of defense is in some ways a relitigation of that decade-old dispute. It is also a dramatic return to the public stage by the neoconservatives whose worldview remains a powerful undercurrent in the Republican Party and in the national debate about the United States' relationship with Israel and the Middle East.
To be sure, Hagel has plenty of credible detractors on the left, who've focused on the former senator's conservative voting record and positions on social issues.
That said, it's hard to miss the larger proxy fight on the right. Rutenberg's piece quoted Bill Kristol complaining that Hagel "would always err on the side of not intervening" in overseas military actions, Elliott Abrams accusing Hagel of anti-Semitism, and Richard Perle complaining that Hagel is among those who "so abhor the use of force that they actually weaken the diplomacy that enables you to achieve results without using force."
And on the other side, we see Colin Powell championing Hagel's nomination, and Richard Armitage telling the Times, "This is the neocons' worst nightmare because you've got a combat soldier, successful businessman and senator who actually thinks there may be other ways to resolve some questions other than force."
The intra-party fight over neoconservatism never really went away -- Hagel's nomination is simply bringing it back to the fore.
Rutenberg added:
To Mr. Hagel's allies, his presence at the Pentagon would be a very personal repudiation of the interventionist approach to foreign policy championed by the so-called Vulcans in the administration of President George W. Bush, who believed in pre-emptive strikes against potential threats and the promotion of democracy, by military means if necessary. [...]
In the years since the war's messy end, the most hawkish promoters have maintained enormous sway within the Republican Party, holding leading advisory posts in both the McCain and Romney presidential campaigns as their counterparts in the "realist" wing of the party.... Their prominence in the fight over Mr. Hagel's nomination is testament to their continued outsize voice in the public debate, helped by outlets like The Weekly Standard, research groups like the American Enterprise Institute and wealthy Republican financiers like the casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, whose nearly $100 million in political donations last year were driven largely by his interest in Israel. The Republican Jewish Coalition, on whose board of directors Mr. Adelson sits, was among the first to criticize the Hagel nomination
The spectacle is a reminder that the right has never fully come to terms with the neocons' spectacular failures. Kristol & Co. were proven wrong, but for the Republican mainstream, this inconvenient detail is better left ignored. Neocons' credibility has been left in the same condition as the integrity of their strange worldview -- in tatters -- but it never occurred to the Republican establishment to stop taking these guys seriously.
And so, the proxy fight continues. It doesn't matter that President Obama has nominated a conservative Republican for a leading role in his cabinet; what matters is that this conservative Republican has no use for a discredited vision of foreign policy and the (mis)use of military power, which means he must be attacked by the very voices who most deserve to be ignored.
Or put another way, the decorated combat veteran who's reluctant to launch new invasions is being lectured on war-avoidance by the same "chicken hawks" who left their credibility in Iraq -- and most of the GOP doesn't find this odd.
I'm reminded of an on-air conversation Rachel had with Chris Hayes last April about the neocons' failures: "No one [on the right] has ever had to face up to what happened, this sort of magnitude of the error is just completely erased by history. It's like those old Stalinist books where they just get rid of the people that were disappeared."
At the time, Chris was talking about folks like Dan Senor taking a leading role in the Romney campaign, despite his role in "the worst period of American foreign policy in 100 years, quite plausibly." But the problem obviously continues.
Leave a Comment:
In the good ole days hypocrisy had repurcussions. Now these losers like McCain don't even care what they said two seconds ago if a ding at Obama is available...
McCain is a fool, an angry old man, a sore loser, and an irrelevant voice of the endless war crowd.
Not one of the neoconservatives who drumbeat for war ever served a day in the armed forces, and many of them were active service-avoiders back in the day. Demonstrating for a war they would not fight.
The premise of their assault is that they have credibility to make any kind of assertion regarding national security.
The promise of the neocons in Iraq was a 2 month war that would pay for itself. The current pricetag is 4 to 6 trillion dollars. Simply on military grounds, they have profoundly weakened the US. Had foreign agent moles taken over the defense department and succeeded in promoting these Neocon policies, they would be credited with striking a major blow against US national security strength.
McCain and Kristol are at best buffoons, and at worst, treasonous shills for the defense industry.
John Messerly, So true. And it is far from limited to these two neocons.
These right-wing Republicans always bring out the same tired and UNtrue argument: He's not on Israel's side! It's become very predictable. They know it's a lie, but it gets the fundamentalists all fired up.
Hegel is the best man for the job, they know it, but fear the money will stop coming into their greedy hands if he cuts the defence budget. They're a big bunch of hypocrites. They don't have the right to pick Obama's posts.
It's time for all the BS and obstruction to end. Let the duly elected president do his job.
I don't recall Hagel being against the Iraq invasion. Far as I know he never apologized for his lack of due dilligence either. Before I'd be willing to defend his nomination, I need to hear something that convinces me he's qualified. And terms like reasonable, bipartisan, and gentlemanly don't come close. Nor do centuries of membership on Senate committees.
Dan: Hagel indeed voted yes on the Iraq invasion, but then went 180 degrees and started a years long advocasy against the war and for the soldiers. That is worlds better than an apology IMHO.
If Hegel does not get this post, I will have finally lost all faith in this government.
I'm almost there now.
To say that I have come to hate the neocons and House conservatives is actually an understatement.
Given that Ron Paul was in essentially the same position -- conservative Republican who didn't believe in war-mongering -- it would be nice if the would activate the Paulbots (who, you'll recall, used persistance and procedural attention to capture several key state party structures) in support of the nomination. That would add a little more stress to the faultline in the GOP, which would ultimately be good for the economy as it would set off soaring demand for popcorn.
Somehow a large group of Ron Paul fans backing Obama on anything is but a dream...
I have doubts about Hegel, but I'm glad you re-animated the term "chicken hawks" - it's what best describes these people.
Somehow, it's all getting very, very boring, isn't it? Good sign?
Some Americans shed blood on the battlefield for their country.
Others shed ink on the op ed pages, had "other priorities" to serving, or suffered from anal cysts.
The answer's really simple. If you advocate for war, you have to go fight it.
The problem is, it is these neocons who've never served a day who want to promote endless war. The lobbyists line their pockets to keep them from voting to downsize the bloated military budget.
These right wingers are not interested in deficit reduction. They are interested in how much money they'll get to promote the bloated military budget. They will say any outrageous thing to get their way, too.
This BS has to end. We have to cut defence; if not we'll be forced to undo the New Deal.
Oh.............wait.............that's their plan! For a second, I forgot what the vultures were circling after. They smell the sweet scent of opportunity!
I am always baffled by the schizophrenic foreign policy ideas of the republican party and conservatives in general. On the one hand they want to close all overseas bases get out of the UN and institute protectionist economic policy and on the other they want to go and kick the crap out of anyone who looks at us with anything less than sycophantic adoration...
I guess I shouldn't expect anything better from the he-man woman haters club and the let them eat cake crowd but I keep holding out hope...although in this instance that might be the definition of insanity
Oh c'mon. It's all the INTERNETS fault! They simply GOOGLE old talking points and spew.
For 13 years I worked for a defense contractor. I even helped administer their Political Action Committee. So I know a lot about the military industrial complex and how it works to assure that the Congress keeps funding each companies contracts. In the end jobs and profits are at stake.
As I understand it, President Obama chose Hagal because he is to cut the defense budget to remove the fat and make our military suitable for modern situations. We no longer live under the threat of nuclear war with the Soviet Union, which no longer exists, and we do not need the big bombers and nuclear subs and air craft carriers.
Any cuts will affect jobs, but the defense contractors need to be flexible and adapt to the new conditions. We cannot keep funneling money to weapon systems designed to fight the last war and which are not adaptable to the world as it is now.
As for Hagal's comments on Israel, I agree with him that we cannot take orders from the Israelis. Referring to the Jewish lobby is not inti-Semetic. Is the word "Jewish" the new N word? The far right is just snatching at straws to disrupt the President's agenda and to get on national TV.
bflynch, #11
100% correct on all points.
Hegel would be perfect for the job. Problem is, they'll probably filibuster the nomination. I hope Hegel is confirmed. Why have elections is the minority still rules the country?
The defense industry wants another SecDef that comes from their industry so they can continue selling us overpriced, underperforming weapons that are delivered years late. All I know is that if I performed like a defense contractor for my boss, I would have been out the door a long time ago.
Bill Kristol is a gutless wonder who all his adult life has urged other people to risk theirs to assuage his craving for empire. He is truly one of the most disgusting examples of the social disease that calls itself Neoconservatism.
#12
Yes, a gutless wonder, a liar, and a hypocrite, that's Crystal, alright.
I like neoconservatism as a social disease! Perfect!
We turned all kinds of factories into making weapons of war for WWII. We certainly have the ability to turn war factories into something appropriate to a time of peace. We do not have the pressure of the Axis powers hanging over our collective heads, so it is a matter of will rather than of lack of ability or time. Put that energy into environmental mitigation, preparation and prevention of the next natural disaster. A trip to an asteroid to mine the ore comes to mind as another direction.
After WWII the government and the business community made plans to move the economy back to a peace time economy. They developed methods to help service personnel transfer their skills to new jobs.
I think Obama had introduced bills that would have helped veterans of the Iraq and Afghan wars fine jobs. I think the Republicans in Congress blocked it.
We need a government-business partnership to move our economy to a peacetime economy. There are so many things we could do to make our country stronger and create jobs, in the private sector, for the people who will be displaced by cuts to defense spending. It does need to be done in a coordinated way. Not just throw people out of work and expect then to fend for themselves. That applies to people as well as to companies.
I think Obama has a bill already before the congress to retrain people for the jobs of tomorrow. But the whole argument about whether government has a role in our economy is keeping it hostage to cuts to the Big Three.
Kristol has been wrong repeatedly about Iraq and just about everything else. Only in the strange world within the Beltway would anyone give a $%&* what he says or thinks.
If you want to find the real reason that Hagel is being attacked, look at AIPAC and the Jewish political brokers. If anyone says anything about Israel, He or she is anti-Semitic. The Jewish lobby is the strongest in Washington. If the Jewish bloc doesn't want Hagel he will not get approved. There are thirteen Jewish senators, all Democrats.
I hope that he gets confirmed.
Pro-Israel Lobby AIPAC Sitting Out Hagel Fight