HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Good Reads (Forum) » Israel lobby should not h...

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 11:50 PM

Israel lobby should not have veto over US president's cabinet

If you care about the direction of this country but think you don't have time to pay attention to what the Israel lobby is doing, you may want to think again. This is no conspiracy theory - it is all in broad daylight and the stakes are big, in fact they are matters of life and death right now. As we communicate, the Israel lobby is teaming up with the neocon right to prevent President Obama from choosing his Secretary of Defence. +++

Now comes Chuck Hagel, a Republican Senator who would normally also be easy to confirm in the Senate, as Obama's choice for Secretary of Defence. But unlike in the case of Susan Rice, there are real, substantive objections to real substantive positions he has held: he was an early critic of the Iraq war; he wants to get out of Afghanistan, soon; he does not want a war with Iran; and he has supported cuts in military spending. This makes him neocon enemy number one, someone who must be crushed
+++
It's almost not worth mentioning the smears that the Israel lobby has managed to get taken seriously, since they are not worth dignifying. So, Hagel once said he was a US senator and not a senator in the Israeli government. And for this he has been vilified. This really completes my argument. Is there any other country in the world where a legislator can be denounced for not being sufficiently loyal to a foreign government? This is worse than the McCarthy era; at least back then you had to swear loyalty to the US government

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/12/20121230652285915.html

32 replies, 2979 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 32 replies Author Time Post
Reply Israel lobby should not have veto over US president's cabinet (Original post)
jaysunb Dec 2012 OP
Angry Dragon Dec 2012 #1
dballance Dec 2012 #3
Angry Dragon Dec 2012 #4
dballance Dec 2012 #6
MotherPetrie Dec 2012 #7
xxxsdesdexxx Dec 2012 #8
leveymg Jan 2013 #27
Tempest Jan 2013 #28
Angry Dragon Dec 2012 #10
marble falls Dec 2012 #13
Angry Dragon Dec 2012 #15
marble falls Dec 2012 #16
Angry Dragon Dec 2012 #17
TwilightGardener Dec 2012 #18
marble falls Dec 2012 #19
Tempest Jan 2013 #29
dsc Dec 2012 #22
dsc Dec 2012 #12
TwilightGardener Dec 2012 #2
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #5
Bluenorthwest Dec 2012 #9
center rising Dec 2012 #11
marble falls Dec 2012 #14
jaysunb Dec 2012 #20
center rising Dec 2012 #21
The Stranger Jan 2013 #25
leveymg Jan 2013 #30
The Stranger Jan 2013 #24
Odin2005 Jan 2013 #32
yurbud Jan 2013 #23
mitchtv Jan 2013 #26
yurbud Jan 2013 #31

Response to jaysunb (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 11:55 PM

1. Hagel does not belong in the cabinet

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:32 AM

3. Okay, so Why?

You can't just make a statement like that and not back it up with factual reasons why he should not be in the cabinet.

So far the only objections I've seen reported are that he stood by his oath of office that he was a US senator beholding to the US people and not to a foreign nation. I found it very disconcerting that Romney said he'd pick up the phone and ask the Prime Minister of another country what they wanted him to do. That's not in line with the oath of office a President or any representative or senator takes in the US.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Reply #3)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:46 AM

4. I am tired of republicans and lobbyists in the cabinet

I want to see real democrats in the cabinet

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:27 AM

6. You Still Have Provided No Facts, No Arguments

I'm not excited about the possibility of Obama appointing a Republican. But you have still not provided any arguments at all against Hagel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Reply #6)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 02:35 AM

7. it's not enough that he's a Republican???

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #7)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 03:40 AM

8. No, actually it is not enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xxxsdesdexxx (Reply #8)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 02:52 PM

27. I agree. Furthermore, I think the last two SoDs have both been good choices, even if Gates is Repub

he and Panetta struck me as cautious and considered, as does Hagel. The center of war-making in the last Administration was at Petraeus' CIA and Clinton's State Dept., and demonstrably running foreign policy as serial covert actions and regime changes didn't work well because it had so many longer-term, destabilizing consequences.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #7)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 02:58 PM

28. If you knew anything about Hagel, you wouldn't make such an assinine statement. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Reply #6)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:25 AM

10. I stated my opinion

Opinions are like emotions, they are real.

I have not heard any facts or arguments to change my opinion.
Let's hear yours.


add: Right now he is a republican, to me, that is enough. I have heard nothing to out weigh that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #10)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:05 PM

13. Eyes wide closed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marble falls (Reply #13)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:13 PM

15. Then state all the facts that make him the best to run Defense

I see up to this point you have not offered anything

By being a former Congressman makes him qualified?? That all you got??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #15)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:30 PM

16. Name someone better. Or are you one of those "anyone but ...." types.........

The latest endorsement received by former Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel to be secretary of Defense comes from four former national security advisers: Brent Scowcroft, James L. Jones, Zbigniew Brzezinski and Frank Carlucci. This quartet of national security leaders has served presidents of both parties, including Republican Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush and Democratic Presidents Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.

Hagel is one of the finest people I have ever known in public life, along with President Obama's excellent nominee to be secretary of State, Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.).

Hagel (Neb.) embodies the highest American ideal of service: service in war, service in peace, service in government, service in military life and service in civilian life, as well as a powerful lifetime commitment to go many extra miles supporting those who wear the uniform and their families at home.

He is a man who knows war, having served courageously in Vietnam, and who knows the world, having been involved in global diplomatic, military and security issues for a generation.

Hagel's expertise ranges from combat experience and military strategy to diplomatic skill and intelligence matters both operational and analytical.

Hagel is a devoted, fierce, passionate and untiring champion of wounded warriors and veterans causes of all kinds. When the phrase "band of brothers" is used, Hagel is one of the true brothers. His commitment to helping troops and military families is boundless.

Hagel knows how to wage war, how to win wars, how to end wars and how to avoid wars that may be unwise. This is why Hagel wins such strong support from national security advisers who served previous administrations, and from a number of leading retired military commanders and former U.S. ambassadors to Israel.

He is a public servant of rock-solid integrity who would be highly qualified to be secretary of State, secretary of Defense, director of National Intelligence or any other high-level position essential to protecting our nation. I believe it is particularly important that Obama ignore the dishonest campaign of defamation and disinformation that is being run, mostly by neoconservatives who know far less about war than Hagel, who have far less experience in war than Hagel and who are far less skilled than Hagel at both winning wars that should be fought and avoiding wars that should not be fought.

While I am pleased beyond description that Obama named the man he correctly called the perfect choice to be secretary of State, John Kerry, I have argued strongly that some of the attacks levied against United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice were grossly unfair to her. With similar unfair attacks being made against Hagel, the more firmly the president rejects these attacks, the better.

I would bet anyone in Washington that Hagel would be confirmed by a large majority of senators if he is nominated to be secretary of Defense.

Chuck Hagel as secretary of Defense would bring immense confidence in the capitals of America's allies around the world, and great enthusiasm from veterans and military families throughout America who know him well, and trust him greatly.


Budowsky was an aide to former Sen. Lloyd Bentsen and Bill Alexander, then chief deputy majority whip of the House. He holds an LL.M. degree in international financial law from the London School of Economics. He can be read on The Hillís Pundits Blog and reached at brentbbi@webtv.net.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marble falls (Reply #16)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:48 PM

17. I do not have to name someone better because

it is for you to list his qualifications

What you posted are opinions from others

Nothing you posted changed my mind. I am willing to change my opinion if you can list his qualifications.

How about McCain ........ he knows war??
John Kline ........ he was in Vietnam ........ carried the football??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #17)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:09 PM

18. You could just Wiki him. A few things:

Serves on Obama's Intelligence Advisory board. Foreign policy professor. 12 years in Senate on Foreign relations and Intelligence committees. Under-deputy of VA (Reagan appointment). Worked with SecDef Leon Panetta in past in a foreign policy think tank. Shares very similar foreign policy, defense, nuclear arms, and diplomacy views as Obama, Biden, and Kerry. The other people Obama is considering are long-time Pentagon staffers, which tells me they are not the ones to go in and break the china if necessary. The only person I could think of that would equal Hagel in stature and vision is maybe Wes Clark, but apparently he's not up for consideration, and the neocons would throw the same fit they're throwing now. Maybe Russ Feingold, but I don't know if he has the same foreign policy/defense/national security connections that Hagel has built.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #17)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:52 PM

19. MCCAIN???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marble falls (Reply #19)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 02:59 PM

29. He lost all credibility with me by bringing him up as an option. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marble falls (Reply #16)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 05:29 PM

22. I would prefer someone who wasn't an anti gay bigot

Michele Flournoy would be fine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Reply #3)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:47 AM

12. because he is bigoted against gays

and so proud of the fact he bragged about it to his hometown paper.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jaysunb (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:00 AM

2. Obama has let this man be a pinata for a month now. Enough.

Make a damn decision.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jaysunb (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:13 AM

5. Hagel, not-Hagel, doesn't matter

Unless foreign policy radically changes with the nomination of a SecDef (it won't) then whoever holds the position is completely irrelevant; the policy will always, ALWAYS be the same.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jaysunb (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 08:01 AM

9. Hagel is a Republican and a bigot of extraoridnary venom who should not be in government at all.

Did you read his anti Muslim quote? It's intense:
'They are representing our lifestyle, our values, our standards. And I think it is an inhibiting factor to be Muslim - openly, aggressively Muslim...'

Do you like that language? It is actually what he said about gay people, I just replaced the word 'gay' with 'Muslim'. If the attack is acceptable toward ANY minority, it must be acceptable toward ALL minorities, and if it is acceptable from ONE Republican bigot, then ALL of them get to say any shit they want about any group they hate with impunity, correct?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jaysunb (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:31 AM

11. When you link something from AlJazeera, your credibility is quite low.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to center rising (Reply #11)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:08 PM

14. al Jazera actually is fairly good source of news the lamestream here won't cover out deference to ..

conservative masters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marble falls (Reply #14)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 03:12 PM

20. You are correct...

I'm more inclined to believe them, than the WP or NYT.

btw, I once went to a place called Marble Falls, Texas. Would that be the origin of your handle ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marble falls (Reply #14)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 04:46 PM

21. AlJazeera is blatantly anti-Israel, and doesn't cover up that fact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to center rising (Reply #21)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 02:35 PM

25. That they criticize Israel -- even doing so "blatantly" -- is not really a critique.

Israel does things that are "blatantly" wrong. Not everything, but plenty of things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to center rising (Reply #21)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:00 PM

30. Aljazeera reflects the Gulf Arab line, and at this point that's more anti-Iran/Shi'ia than anti-Isr

Frankly, the Saudis/GCC are de facto Israeli allies, and together they wield enormous influence on the U.S. to act aggressively toward Iran, Syria, and Lebanese Shi'ia groups. And saying that reflects economic and political reality, not any predisposition to religious bigotry on the part of this commenter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to center rising (Reply #11)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 02:34 PM

24. When your only criticism is that it's linked Al-Jazeera, your credibility is even lower.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to center rising (Reply #11)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 02:38 PM

32. LMAO, i think you are at the wrong website.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jaysunb (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:57 PM

23. Can you imagine if a president said, "France doesn't like him, so he had to withdraw his name?"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yurbud (Reply #23)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 02:41 PM

26. no, but I can imagine

"Miami doesn't like him...."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mitchtv (Reply #26)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 07:03 PM

31. Can you imagine Israel or Cuban exiles having a veto without electoral college?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread