HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Hagel: Window closing on ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:33 PM

Hagel: Window closing on Iran and diplomacy

Source: Associated Press

Defense Secretary nominee Chuck Hagel said the "window is closing" on Iran and the possibility of diplomacy if it continues to ignore international demands to end pursuit of a nuclear weapon.

In his first opportunity to express his opinions since President Barack Obama nominated him Jan. 7, Hagel addressed a range of issues, from Iraq and Afghanistan to women in combat, in a 112-page questionnaire for the Senate Armed Services Committee. The panel submitted the extensive questions to Hagel in advance of his confirmation hearing on Thursday.

<snip>

"If Iran continues to flout its international obligations, it should continue to face severe and growing consequences," Hagel said. "While there is time and space for diplomacy, backed by pressure, the window is closing. Iran needs to demonstrate it is prepared to negotiate seriously."

<snip>

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/hagel-window-closing-iran-diplomacy-170046922--politics.html



Obama, Kerry, and Hagel are going to make a great team!
I am confident they will be able to resolve this issue non-violently.
Remember - non-violence does not preclude property destruction:
http://quest.quaker.org/issue-10-johnson-02.htm

The Berrigan Tradition

One cannot address the issue of nonviolence and property damage without acknowledging the Berrigan brothers and the Plowshares movement. Daniel and Philip Berrigan were influenced by the writings of Dorothy Day and the Catholic Worker Movement. After participating in some rallies, marches and being arrested in protests against the Viet Nam war, the brothers Berrigan decided to take a bolder stand against the war. 14

On 17 May 1968, Daniel and Philip Berrigan along with seven others raided the Catonsville draft board. "First, they liberated about four hundred folders from a Selective Service office, drenched them with homemade napalm in an adjoining parking lot, then set them on fire. While the papers crackled, the protestors joined in prayer." 15 The "ultra resistance" was born. Their goal was to bring attention to the injustices of the Viet Nam War. 16 On 9 September 1980 a Plowshares group broke into a General Electric facility and destroyed the casing on nuclear war heads by hitting them with hammers and pouring blood over them. 17

The main argument used by the Berrigans and those who have taken up their cause is that some property has no right to exist and therefore damage done to this type of property is not violence. The movement maintains it is nonviolent because property not human life was harmed. 18 Examples of property that has no right to exist can be seen in things like nuclear arms or the ovens at Hitlerís concentration camps. The impact of the Berrigans can be seen in groups like the War Resisters League. In the 1986 War Resisters League Organizerís Manual, the following is written about property damage:

"Some property has no right to exist (e.g., nuclear weapons, napalm, electric chairs). Other property, such as fences around nuclear power plants or military bases, while Ďneutral,í serve only to protect facilities which are harming all of us. The concern is not their destruction, but how they are destroyed. No one has suggested blowing them up or indiscriminate property destruction, but a calm deliberate cutting of a fence with a minimum of hardware can gain entry into a site otherwise not accessible." 19

What is key to the quote above, and to this paper, is the distinc-tion in the types of property being destroyed. It is not indiscriminate. The targets of this type of property destruction are carefully selected and the attitude of those doing the destruction is spiritual.

18 replies, 2233 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 18 replies Author Time Post
Reply Hagel: Window closing on Iran and diplomacy (Original post)
bananas Jan 2013 OP
Kolesar Jan 2013 #1
Report1212 Jan 2013 #3
patrice Jan 2013 #4
Kolesar Jan 2013 #6
Democracyinkind Jan 2013 #2
TwilightGardener Jan 2013 #5
Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #9
TwilightGardener Jan 2013 #11
Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #15
TwilightGardener Jan 2013 #17
Inuca Jan 2013 #7
Gregorian Jan 2013 #8
Selatius Jan 2013 #10
bananas Jan 2013 #12
Selatius Jan 2013 #13
Socal31 Jan 2013 #14
Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #16
Xolodno Jan 2013 #18

Response to bananas (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:01 PM

1. Iran is using Hamas to fight a proxy war against Israel

I find that to be objectionable.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/frame_game/2012/11/egypt_and_gaza_missiles_how_iran_s_fajr_5_rockets_are_smuggled_to_hamas.html

Where do these missiles come from? Iran. How do they get around Israelís land and sea blockade of Gaza? When you look at the map and read the intel, thereís only one possible answer: Egypt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #1)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:18 PM

3. This isn't actually true

The fact is that gaza is still basically controlled by Israel, and hamas almost never is firing rockets at Israel either

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Reply #3)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:25 PM

4. k, so help us out a bit here with Lebanon & Israel, about 10 years' worth, please & thanks very much

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Reply #3)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:51 PM

6. I spent a lot of time looking for that story

thanks for your contribution!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:09 PM

2. Must be a freakingly large window if it takes decades to close... nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Democracyinkind (Reply #2)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:32 PM

5. Because Hagel hasn't spent the last 10 years or so blustering at Iran, when he

says diplomacy is running short...it means something. War is a last resort and a sign of failure. I'm glad there is a "large window", as you say.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #5)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 09:40 PM

9. He's saber rattling at the very first chance to do so. Last round, he voted to attack Iraq, this

time it is all about Iran, closing windows, making threats, the same old thing he did with Bushco and Iraq to such stunning success. They bombed the fuck out of civilians for no real reason at all. That's what he's back to do again. Shock and Awe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #9)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 10:24 PM

11. Nope, he's not a saber rattler. Never has been. Just stating the facts--and also reiterating

Obama's and Kerry's views. Kerry also gave warnings about Iran in his testimony. Hagel's job from here on out will be representing and reinforcing the Obama administration's foreign policy and defense views in public.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #11)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 08:02 AM

15. It is a threat of military action, prior to his so much as being confirmed.

Saber rattling. Denial is not helpful. Yesterday the Hagel folks were trying to push the lie that he voted against the Iraq War Resolution. It does get old, the duplicity. Take a look. This pro Hagel author uses the term 'haters' to describe those who don't care for a Republican who voted for the Iraq War while smearing gay people and opposing choice. But in order to do so, she lies openly about Hagel's War vote. Inuendo is just not enough at this late date:

"the former two-term senatorówho voted against the Iraq War..."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251282137

So folks who are shouting 'haters' also lie about the man they are supporting She builds her case around the lie that he voted against Iraq War Resolution. Calls those who oppose him 'haters' because, you see, he opposed Iraq so why would anti war folks oppose him?
The lowest, most dishonest promotion of any candidate or nominee in memory. Simple lies strung together and used to smear others while characterizing political disagreement as 'hate'. She lies about WAR so she can accuse others of HATE. This is what Republicans do, and of course that makes sense because Hagel is a Republican.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #15)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 09:07 AM

17. Guy...Hagel is famous for NOT being a saber rattler. That's one of the reasons why Repubs and

neocons are throwing a fit over him and hate him. You can assert whatever you want, but it flies in the face of reality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:59 PM

7. Add Biden to that great team n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 05:31 PM

8. Gotta keep that military machine moving.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 10:22 PM

10. I believe Iran is more keen to listen to North Korea than Chuck Hagel.

North Korea, as anyone can see, isn't under constant threat of being bombed by anyone. Nobody wants to provoke a state armed with nuclear weapons, even if it only had five or six warheads. One warhead alone, even a relatively small one, could kill 100,000 easily.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Selatius (Reply #10)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 11:36 PM

12. Logic fail - the Korean War ended in 1953, but they got their first nuke a few years ago.

So how did a nuke they just got deter an attack for the past 60 years?

Do you think they have a time machine, too?

You think in 1953 they said, "Hey, you Americans! If you attack us again, in 60 years, we'll have a nuke and a time machine, we'll send it back through time and blow you up!"

And a handful of nukes isn't considered a credible nuclear deterrent. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credible_minimum_deterrence

Pakistan has around 50 nukes - we invaded anyway. They have enough to deter India, but not the US. They'd need hundreds of nukes.

You wrote, "Nobody wants to provoke a state armed with nuclear weapons", but it happens all the time. Argentina provoked Britain into the Falklands War, Israel is continually being provoked by its neighbors, the U.S. is easily provoked and goes to war at the drop of a hat, India and Pakistan are continually provoking each other, as are India and China. Apartheid South Africa had nukes, that didn't stop anyone from provoking them.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Reply #12)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 03:04 AM

13. Well, to be fair, I was talking about the last three years. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Selatius (Reply #10)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 03:16 AM

14. NK is supposedly about to test an enriched Uranium nuke.

Kind of off-topic, but I believe Iran and NK are linked, as they are what we should have been spending our now-diminishing clout and resources on, not 12 years in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, and now Africa.

Before, they were very low-yield plutonium bombs, and the first one fissled.

This would be the actual window do to something, but nobody wants that, or can afford it. NK is China's buffer state against the US. I read english language foreign boards as much as I can, and while I know some are government controlled, some if it is very interesting. I read this today, someone posted an "open letter" style post, as if China was speaking to NK. I do not know the original source, but it shoes that although China will continue to back them, some people are becoming frustrated, because they are "reforming", and NK is just a thorn at this point.




"You and I are good friends. Our friendship has lasted for a rather long time since it was established at the time when we fought shoulder to shoulder against our common enemies.



But now, over time things grow differently. Iíve been becoming stronger and stronger, and clearly, that is because I am open-minded and ready to absorb nutrients which are good for my growth. So, youíll find my thoughts are different from those I adhered to, and shared with you, decades ago. You are still living in the dream of the past, and refuse to make any difference. In the end we are on diverged roads. We have different friends, styles, goals and ideals. We have more differences than similarities. I know youíre unsatisfied, or even angry, with me.


But I cherish our long-lasting friendship and hope to maintain it. Thatís why I exerted myself to help you, to protect you, to fight for you at my peril. To tell you the truth, even today Iím still ready to fight a war for your benefit if necessary, just as I did half a century ago. I know you harbor a deep prejudice against me, and you are not appreciative of all Iíve done for you, though you always accepted that. You need those help desperately, whatever it is, from food to security efforts. In your inner heart you must be happy youíve got a friend like me whoíd like to sacrifice so much for you. But on the surface, you appear at odds with me, and even openly quarrel with me. Frankly, I know why youíre doing so. Youíre trying to make me to give you more! Just like a child, youíre crying for more sugars, with little knowledge how much toil I have to pay for those sugars. Letís take what happened these two days as an example.


USA, one of your hideous enemies, took a lead in the UN to file a paper against you, under a plea of sanctioning you for rocket launching. I wielded my influence to soothe the furies of the majorities of UN members. I managed to make the sanction and the complaints become less aggressive. Otherwise, the counter-measures of the international society are sure to subject your people to more sufferings, and also disgrace you. I did it at the cost of other affairs on which I made a compromise. To my grief, you damned me today for not holding on my principles instead of saying thanks.


Even so, Iím still trying every means to understand you, my pal. You have got less and less friends in the international family and your people are suffering a lot. You feel lonely. Youíre certain to deny that. But on the other hand, you know thatís fact. Youíre making a try to do something about it, arenít you? Youíd like to open your mind and your country to the outside world. But youíre doing so with no confidence and with fear that youíll lose control of the country.


Iíve told you, and now I guarantee you, youíll have my support. I am on your side ever and forever. Long live our friendship!"

http://bbs.chinadaily.com.cn/thread-823120-1-1.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Original post)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 08:15 AM

16. Note that Barrigans were not a State making war and that the statement says this:

" No one has suggested blowing them up or indiscriminate property destruction, but a calm deliberate cutting of a fence with a minimum of hardware can gain entry into a site otherwise not accessible."

What Hagel is talking about is the blowing up Barrigans said no to. This is not about cutting a fence, this is about bombing ala Shock and Awe, which Hagel supported, voted for like every other Republican but one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Original post)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 11:20 AM

18. Translation....

If sanctions doesn't force Iran to back down or get enough of the populace to revolt...

1. Obama talks to Putin.
2. Obama says you want the missile shield gone, yes?
3. Putin says "Da".
4. Obama says get rid of the nuke development in Iran.

Scenario One.
A. Putin tells Iran knock it off.
B. Iran, grumbles but gives in. Opens up to inspectors.
C. Missile Shield is removed.

Scenario Two.
A. Putin tells Iran knock it off.
B. Iran says "No!, you can't tell us what to do" like a child that has decided to test his parents.
C. Putin says, ok, you asked for it.....
D. Putin says to Obama using his best "The Rock" impression "layeth the smacketh down on their candy asses!!!"
E. US launches and crater's the suspected nuke sites...and maybe a few more areas for good measure.
F. Missile shield is removed.

I took some liberties, but I think everyone can see what has to happen. Things like this are seldom about one issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread