The BATTLE lines are already being drawn for the upcoming confirmation of Chuck Hagel for secretary of defense. The attacks being put out by Hagel’s detractors are myths: that his earlier remarks that supporters of Israel have dominant influence over Congress amount to anti-Semitism; that his skepticism about war with Iran makes him naive; that his comments about making overtures to Hamas prove he is weak on terrorism.
In response, allies of the former Republican senator from Nebraska have now settled on an alternative myth, almost as removed from reality as the ones being promoted by neocons. Their argument, reiterated on the airwaves and in newspapers, is clearly part of the approved talking points by those in the Obama administration who want to placate any substantive concerns by members of both parties:
Comments
This comment has been removed.
Yes, it was 4 years ago. And the "mess" would have been far worse had Senator Obama succeeded in stopping the surge in Iraq. To the this president, it has always been about the politics, not about the policy. That is why the selection of Hagel is so offensive. It was meant as a piece of symbolism politically, and not as a serious choice for someone who has the experience and competence to run the pentagon. Juliettte is another Globe cheerleader, who worships at the alter of Obama idolatry. There are people far more qualified than Hagel, but none who could have been a stick in the eye to Republicans as well. Juliette is not to be taken seriously.
George W Bush, based mainly on his foreign policy, left office with a 30+% approval rating by the American people. Invading Iraq was a human disaster. The "surge" did not provide any redeeming strategy for the decision to enter that country in the first place. Iraq is now more cosy with Iran than any time in its previous history and it has still not recuperated to its pre Sadaam level. It remains a mess created by our intervention with reduced rights for women and minorities and a struggle to survive day to day.
OETKB: Your opinion about Iraq is quite interesting. We saved a people from tyranny, and gave it the ability to form a Democracy. We did so with supoport of the congress (unlike Obama's Libya excursion). To those who are so mired in the politics of it, you embarrass your country. To you, our "invasion" of France in 1945 would also be termed a "human disaster".
A reasonable editorial until the end were Juliette Kayyem gets in some Obama (her old boss) talking points about Iraq.
Obama lost a major opportunity in Iraq, of course he put Joe Biden in charge of the draw down negotiations - so what do we expect.
We should have left a force in Iraq, just as we did in Germany after WWII. This would have prevented Iran from overrunning Iraq in exactly the same way as it prevented the USSR from overrunning Germany.
Also nary a comment about Hagel's previous anti-gay comments, which he didn't disavow until he was being considered for the secretary of defense.
"Obama lost a major oppurtunity in Iraq..." That is funny!
I suppose you also think Nixon lost a major oppurtunity in Vietnam. (I know, I know, let me say it for you .... it was Johnson who lost Vietnam).
In any reply you might give please let us know who you would envision paying for keeping troops in Iraq for another half century or more.
We didn't lose the war in Iraq - we did lose the war in Vietnam - big difference. Also the surge which Obama and I'm sure Kayyem did not support - won the war the second time.
Of course we have now lost the war for the first time with our 100% withdrawl.
To pay for the troops stationed there, lets see maybe 1/2 of the 52K troops stationed in germany ?
How dare you say that a person who claims that the Congress is dominated by a "Israel lobby" is not an anti-Semite? Hagel is said to favor "being tough on Israel" as though the lack of a Palestinian state is Israel's fault. In fact, ever since 1948, Arab governments and many Palestinian Arabs have sought the destruction of Israel. The IDF has won several wars against Arab aggression and yet has generously offered to return land to the Arabs in return for permanent peace. It is Arafat , Fatah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad who have rejected peace. If Hagel doesn't know that, he is unfit to serve.
He's from the Lindberg side of the republican party.
Hagel has simply stated that he is tired of the US government being led around by the nose by Isreal when it comes to policy and actions in the middle east. That is facilitated by the Jewish lobby (and wacky fundemental Christians that belive the bibical end time is nigh.) Critizism of Isreal and calling Jews Jews does not equal anit-Semetism.
Mali
By this, do you mean that the threat of Islamic terrorists didn't evaporate just because Barack Obama got a second term in the White House?
I mean we are putting our head in the sand and nominees like Hagel, Kerry, and Brennan do not help
By Kayyem's logic the Sec. of the Treasury determines foreign policy. To argue that Hagel does not determine foreign is quite correct, he does not. He advises, makes assessments, but he doesn't make the final decision.
To say that Congress is dominated by the Israeli lobby is anti-semitic it is simply fact. Who in their right mind would deny the reality of the power of the Israeli lobby?
As to the second Iraw war please we gave people relief from tyranny? What so they can have a Shiitte tyranny instead of a Sunni one? Good grief such naive thinking.
Now Kayyem does like to cheerlead for the President, but for some to defend GWB's foreign policy isn't much better. Good grief the neo-cons have created such a foreign policy nightmare I'm not sure how long it will take to straighten out.
"Be" What is it with you and Mali?
"To say that Congress is dominated by the Israeli lobby is [not?] anti-semitic it is simply fact. Who in their right mind would deny the reality of the power of the Israeli lobby?" This is not a logical argument or empirical evidence, this is simply an anti-Jewish assertion. I could argue that there must be an Iranian lobby in the US because the US has failed to act decisively to prevent an Iranian nuclear bomb. Go back to watching al Jazeera, Al Gore's favorite media empire.
Ozark it is not anti-semitic to acknowledge the pwoer of the Israeli lobby. If one alleged that the Israeli lobby in some way controlled American foreign policy in some insidious way then one might have an argument in saying it is anti-semitic. However, to simply say and I would agree that the Israeli lobby distorts American policy is not to oppose Israel but to merely say that in a global sense their power within the Congress is in greater proportion to its place on the world stage. Or perhaps more aptly said American foreign policy interests are sometimes overcome by the strength of the Israeli lobby. ONe could easily say that regarding the US-British alliance. Everything isn't anti-semitic.
"be" I appreciate the remark but I honestly have somehow missed the importance of Mali. I'll have to do a little research in order to not start talking "stupid". I know Mali has some Islamic problems but no big deal to my knowledge but as I said, I'm not up on that one.
The French, not a typo, have started intervening and bombing
This comment has been removed.
attaturk, article on it
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/14/world/africa/french-jets-strike-deep-inside-islamist-held-mali.html?emc=eta1&_r=0
Jews smearing someone they don't agree with charges of anti-semitism has begun to backfire as of late. The Kristols, Podhoretzes and Abrams of the world are no longer influencing events with their baseless accusations. People will not tolerate more U.S. military deaths fighting Israel's wars. Netanyahu fooled the U.S. on Iraq (see You Tube video of 2002 testimony of Netanyahu to Congress) but he won't fool us on Iran.
And the media, including the Boston Globe refuses to report on "Global Warming" guru Al Gore's sale of his cable network to Al Jazeera of Qatar. Now thousands of American cable subscribers are forced to view Al Jazeera. The English version of this TV station is somewhat benign, but still is anti-Semitic. The ARABIC version has shown videos and quotes from Hamas members and Hezbolla who have prayed to Allah for the sdestruction of every Jew in the world. Just imagine what the same media would have done if Mitt Romney did the same thing.
"be" Okay read the article. Good. Let's hear it for the French it's about time someone besides US troops have to blunt extremist Islamic elements. However, as I said I have no problem with the US keeping it's distance. Islamic fundamentalism from my perspective is a dead end street for the Islamic world and I believe over time it will pass. While it is important that we keep our national interests in mind, there are plenty of European countries including the French who also have interests. Go French.
"The attacks being put out by Hagel’s detractors are myths: that his earlier remarks that supporters of Israel have dominant influence over Congress amount to anti-Semitism; that his skepticism about war with Iran makes him naive; that his comments about making overtures to Hamas prove he is weak on terrorism." But the writer never published QUOTES from Chuck Hagel, which can be foubnd on-line. We DO have computers, you know. Juliette FORGOT to add that Chuck Hagel opposed sanctions on Iran's Revoluntionary Guard and on Iran in general. And he is ready to ACCEPT Iran with a nuclear weapon. And Barack Obama, in order to win reelection said "I will not accept a nuclear Iran". ..BUt in fact, he WILL. And he know that Chuck Hagel will advocate for that policy. And Hagel, like Obama HATES the US military, and will work to dismantle it....And Juliette, you KNOW these things about Chuck Hagel. Which is why your column is one big MYTH