Left this comment on the New York Times today. Since the NYT seems to be unable to post my comments in the last year, I thought I’d post it here instead.
Obama knows that the Hagel nomination is a huge uphill battle. The republicans won’t vote for him and at least ten Democratic senators have come out against him. So the question is why is Obama using up all his political capital on this guy? That pundits think that Hagel is not representative of Obama’s leanings is absurd. Hagel is Obama’s political philosophy in the flesh. Hagel is the epitomy of Obama’s foreign policy and Pentagon perspective that Obama cannot say publicly, not yet anyway.
In reality the Hagel fight is about pro-Israel voices.Obama has designs on forcing Israel back to the pre-1967 armistice lines and the first salvo in that war is to limit the pro-Israel voters on Capital Hill. If Obama is successful with Hagel he feels he can go all the way and back Israel and her supporters into a corner.
Obama will allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon, spouting that containment will work. It is also an old Lefty adage that the issue standing in the way of peace in the Middle East is not an Islamic nuclear weapon but the Israeli ones. The Left has always said that the only way to secure “peace” in the ME is for Israel to be so weak that she does what Washington and the EU wants. Then Obama thinks he will have the Israelis scared enough to compromise their security and do his bidding..
While the present fight is about Hagel, his blatant antisemitism and homophobia, the question becomes why does Obama want someone with no Pentagon or pertinent experience for SecDef.
That is the real question isn’t it? Why would Obama support someone with no Pentagon or bureaucratic experience to oversee the most comprehensive scale down in the history of our military? Simply because he won several medals in Vietnam? With all due respect to Sen. Hagel, he was not the only decorated hero of the Vietnam War. Medals also do not indicate the ability to run, organize and mandate the proper directional changes in our military.
So there has to be something else going on underneath the surface. The Obama White House would not support the immensely qualified Susan Rice to be Secretary of State, even after she took that bullet for Obama on Benghazi. So why Hagel? What does he bring to the equation? Interestingly he has the same philosophy as John Brennan, the new CIA nominee, appeasement of the Islamists and backing away from Israel. Maybe that is all you need to garner a foreign policy and militarily sensitive position in the Obama White House.
Well guess what? The NYT actually posted my comment. HERE