Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Whisp

(24,096 posts)
74. found the names: Fred and Kimberly Kagan (Hardball link)
Tue Feb 5, 2013, 12:48 AM
Feb 2013
http://tv.msnbc.com/2012/12/19/gen-petraeus-neo-con-connection-is-really-strange/

I’d like to know why General Petraeus was taking day-to-day advice from people on the other side of the Iraq war argument.

Fred and Kimberly Kagan are hawks. They share the ideology of those who backed the Iraq War. Why are they on the inside of an administration elected based on its opposition to the Iraq war?

I am one of those who believed from square one that the war in Iraq was an ideological war pushed from the outset by those who wanted us to overthrow the Iraq government and install ourselves in Baghdad. They got their way under a less-than-informed President, George W. Bush. Now we discover that a pair of them, the Kagans, have been right there in the room with the head of the Afghan mission, advising him every step of the way.

Why? Why did General Petraeus assume the right to allow people who represent the very opposite of President Obama’s philosophy to advise him? What agenda was his seeking here? What was he buying into? Was he buying into the hawkish agenda of those who advocated war on Iraq in the first place? If so, why was he working for President Obama who stood out there against that war?

---etc.

http://consortiumnews.com/2012/12/19/neocons-guided-petraeus-on-afghan-war/

Neocons Guided Petraeus on Afghan War
December 19, 2012

Exclusive: Gen. David Petraeus was so cozy with neocon think-tankers that he ensconced two of them in his Afghan War command and granted them top-secret access to U.S. military policy. One later leveraged Petraeus’s friendship to impress military contractors for funding support, writes Robert Parry.

By Robert Parry

Even after the Iraq War disaster and Barack Obama’s election in 2008, neoconservatives retained their influence over U.S. war policies in Afghanistan through their close ties to George W. Bush’s national security holdovers, such as Gen. David Petraeus who partnered with neocon war hawks in escalating the Afghan War.

How tight Petraeus’s relationship was with two neocons in particular, Frederick and Kimberly Kagan, was explored Wednesday in a Washington Post article by war correspondent Rajiv Chandrasekaran who described how Petraeus installed the husband-and-wife team in U.S. offices in Kabul, granted them top-secret clearances and let them berate military officers about war strategy.

Gen. David Petraeus posing before the U.S. Capitol with Kimberly Kagan, founder and president of the Institute for the Study of War. (Photo credit: ISW’s 2011 Annual Report)

Though the Kagans received no pay from the U.S. government, they drew salaries from their respective think tanks which are supported by large corporations, including military contractors with interests in extending the Afghan War. Frederick Kagan works for the American Enterprise Institute, and Kimberly Kagan founded the Institute for the Study of War [ISW] in 2007 and is its current president.

----
from the commentary on that article:

It’s much worse – the whole Kagan clan is involved. Fred was the architect of the surge while his wife Kimberly penned an article in the Weekly Standard discussing how successful it was and of course Fox Noise parroted it. Robert Kagan, Fred’s brother, was an editor at the Standard at the time. Later, Hillary Clinton appointed Victoria Nuland, Robert’s wife as State spokesperson. Victoria served as the principal deputy foreign policy adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney and then as U.S. ambassador to NATO. Robert admitted in a Q&A interview last March that he was serving in Hillary’s State department while at the same time “advising” Mitt Romney....
Oh sweet Jesus. Please do better, John Kerry. TwilightGardener Feb 2013 #1
Hillary has always been one of the biggest hawks in the administration. Jennicut Feb 2013 #9
My big reservation about her, too. There is no way Kerry or Hagel would TwilightGardener Feb 2013 #14
Yeah probably only second to Obama lol. nt BootinUp Feb 2013 #26
Obviously not. Obama said no. Pirate Smile Feb 2013 #38
So you bought it hook line and sinker. BootinUp Feb 2013 #39
The NYT article looked like it came from Clinton people - giving her credit for any Obama successes Pirate Smile Feb 2013 #53
Like I said... Biden/Unnamed sources 2016! lol. BootinUp Feb 2013 #56
Biden in 2016? Beacool Feb 2013 #58
deja vu AtomicKitten Feb 2013 #64
Biden ain't Obama. Beacool Feb 2013 #65
and Hillary ain't no Cleopatra. Whisp Feb 2013 #79
Rand Paul says the US is already arming Syrian rebels through a Libya-Turkey-Syria pipeline. pampango Feb 2013 #63
Hopefully just a crackpot theory. But I will argue that today's story, that TwilightGardener Feb 2013 #66
Apparently Rand Paul does not think that the arms plan was 'rebuffed' by President Obama. pampango Feb 2013 #69
The only pipe involved in that ^^^ is the one Rand Paul is smoking. nt cstanleytech Feb 2013 #67
'Cause you know how much Turkey wants heavily-armed rebels living next door. Scootaloo Feb 2013 #76
who cares if Arabs are murdered by their own government! Deep13 Feb 2013 #2
Who cares if England had aided the confederacy? Ash_F Feb 2013 #7
Who cares if the governor of Cloud City is aiding those Jedi rebels? Bucky Feb 2013 #17
Who cares if you're confusing simplistic movie fantasy with the real world? JackRiddler Feb 2013 #28
Thank you for taking the time and effort to reply. Bucky Feb 2013 #33
What? Deep13 Feb 2013 #27
But aren't the fascists the rebels? Don't they want to be more like the west? nt kelliekat44 Feb 2013 #40
Depends what "be more like the West" means. Deep13 Feb 2013 #50
Well, you need to John2 Feb 2013 #48
Well yeah, the USA's and the UK's imperialism... Deep13 Feb 2013 #52
Every civil war has a government killing it's own people Ash_F Feb 2013 #61
Apparently not you, if the Arabs are in Bahrain. JackRiddler Feb 2013 #29
Yeah, we should not be supporting those regimes. nt Deep13 Feb 2013 #30
Or setting up the next regimes, either. JackRiddler Feb 2013 #34
So what's the alternative? Deep13 Feb 2013 #37
Wrong question, wrong time. JackRiddler Feb 2013 #57
Exactly!!! Beacool Feb 2013 #43
So is this the true reason Petraeus was fired? DFLforever Feb 2013 #3
Maybe just his idea was alarming enough to Obama--but I tend to think TwilightGardener Feb 2013 #4
Could be. DFLforever Feb 2013 #6
Wasn't just an idea. The Benghazi incident was related to the pipeline to Syria. leveymg Feb 2013 #13
Yes. Hillary, too. She was the real mover behind the Libya-Syria regime change operation. leveymg Feb 2013 #12
She's just a knee-jerk interventionist, it sounds like. TwilightGardener Feb 2013 #15
Rather, she's a politically sophisticated and aggressive neocon with close ties to the Gulf Arabs leveymg Feb 2013 #18
And good for her for speaking up!!! Beacool Feb 2013 #44
Maybe Petraeus threw a temper tantrum when Obama said no. LiberalFighter Feb 2013 #59
maybe. Who were those people that were 'in command' with him. Whisp Feb 2013 #72
found the names: Fred and Kimberly Kagan (Hardball link) Whisp Feb 2013 #74
I'm glad Obama didn't go the reckless adventure route. Comrade Grumpy Feb 2013 #5
Indeed good to see Obama use his own judgment and avoiding a "reckless adventure" pampango Feb 2013 #8
Me too, but for different reasons. Beacool Feb 2013 #45
Good. Socal31 Feb 2013 #10
Hindsight isn't always 20-20. Igel Feb 2013 #41
Sometimes hindsight is pretty darn close to 20-20 Socal31 Feb 2013 #47
I bet what happened in Egypt is exactly why Obama nixed this idea... Drunken Irishman Feb 2013 #49
I've been telling you this is what happened. Bengahazi was blow-back from that operation. leveymg Feb 2013 #11
No, she was going to step down anyway. Petraeus wasn't, but he was TwilightGardener Feb 2013 #16
She had tenure as SoS for one term. It's not clear she had decided to leave until after Benghazi. leveymg Feb 2013 #19
Yeah, that must be why Hillary had already announced that she didn't plan to stay for a second term Beacool Feb 2013 #46
She didn't make an official announcement until after Benghazi leveymg Feb 2013 #60
the uncertainty was stoked AtomicKitten Feb 2013 #62
She has some expert stokers. leveymg Feb 2013 #68
This story is about as reliable as something on Drudge. BootinUp Feb 2013 #20
I don't know who released it, or why. Or why now. TwilightGardener Feb 2013 #21
. BootinUp Feb 2013 #22
Do you find this story to be not credible? TwilightGardener Feb 2013 #23
1. There is no way to know BootinUp Feb 2013 #25
There's no way to know? JackRiddler Feb 2013 #32
How do you define secret policy? BootinUp Feb 2013 #36
It's Reuters citing the New York Times citing "unnamed Obama administration officials" Comrade Grumpy Feb 2013 #24
Seems like a trend lately, don't like the content of an article...tarnish the source regardless of Purveyor Feb 2013 #77
Well, if true, this shows I was right to support Obama in 2008. Mass Feb 2013 #31
And also if true, Arrowhead2k1 Feb 2013 #35
Oh, because things are going sooooo well in Syria. Beacool Feb 2013 #42
Just follow history. John2 Feb 2013 #55
Good for the president still_one Feb 2013 #51
It's 100% John Kerry's responsiblity now.Time for campaigning is over. Time for Job is now. graham4anything Feb 2013 #54
When did Kerry become President? That kind of decision is made by the President karynnj Feb 2013 #71
Robert Dreyfuss, The Nation: Good Riddance to Warmonger Hillary Clinton antigop Feb 2013 #70
Petraeus, thankfully, is gone. And Hillary Clinton, Obama’s hawk, is gone, too. Whisp Feb 2013 #73
Yeah, let's just stand by and watch Assad decimate the rest of his country. Beacool Feb 2013 #75
Considering how well Egypt and Libya went…… MrSlayer Feb 2013 #78
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»White House rebuffed Clin...»Reply #74