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
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: White House rebuffed Clinton-Petraeus plan to arm Syrian rebels: report [View all]Whisp
(24,096 posts)74. found the names: Fred and Kimberly Kagan (Hardball link)
http://tv.msnbc.com/2012/12/19/gen-petraeus-neo-con-connection-is-really-strange/
Id 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 Obamas 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 Petraeuss friendship to impress military contractors for funding support, writes Robert Parry.
By Robert Parry
Even after the Iraq War disaster and Barack Obamas election in 2008, neoconservatives retained their influence over U.S. war policies in Afghanistan through their close ties to George W. Bushs national security holdovers, such as Gen. David Petraeus who partnered with neocon war hawks in escalating the Afghan War.
How tight Petraeuss 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: ISWs 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:
Its 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, Freds brother, was an editor at the Standard at the time. Later, Hillary Clinton appointed Victoria Nuland, Roberts 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 Hillarys State department while at the same time advising Mitt Romney....
Id 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 Obamas 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 Petraeuss friendship to impress military contractors for funding support, writes Robert Parry.
By Robert Parry
Even after the Iraq War disaster and Barack Obamas election in 2008, neoconservatives retained their influence over U.S. war policies in Afghanistan through their close ties to George W. Bushs national security holdovers, such as Gen. David Petraeus who partnered with neocon war hawks in escalating the Afghan War.
How tight Petraeuss 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: ISWs 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:
Its 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, Freds brother, was an editor at the Standard at the time. Later, Hillary Clinton appointed Victoria Nuland, Roberts 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 Hillarys State department while at the same time advising Mitt Romney....
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
79 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
White House rebuffed Clinton-Petraeus plan to arm Syrian rebels: report [View all]
Drunken Irishman
Feb 2013
OP
My big reservation about her, too. There is no way Kerry or Hagel would
TwilightGardener
Feb 2013
#14
The NYT article looked like it came from Clinton people - giving her credit for any Obama successes
Pirate Smile
Feb 2013
#53
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
Who cares if you're confusing simplistic movie fantasy with the real world?
JackRiddler
Feb 2013
#28
But aren't the fascists the rebels? Don't they want to be more like the west? nt
kelliekat44
Feb 2013
#40
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
Rather, she's a politically sophisticated and aggressive neocon with close ties to the Gulf Arabs
leveymg
Feb 2013
#18
Indeed good to see Obama use his own judgment and avoiding a "reckless adventure"
pampango
Feb 2013
#8
I've been telling you this is what happened. Bengahazi was blow-back from that operation.
leveymg
Feb 2013
#11
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
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
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