Footwedge;1363538 wrote:So...how about clarifying what you meant when you said this up above.....

Majorspark...."The Israeli lobby is not nearly as powerful as portrayed in the press. Nor by you. In fact it is far weaker than others that have secured a far greater commitment in blood and treasure from the US than Israel has to this date."

I made it quite clear. Read the statement you quoted.

Footwedge;1363538 wrote:And then you play the "consider the source card". Typical.

Honestly it was not an attack on Fortune Magazine. You provided no links to that 1997 article. And expect us to take their word for it. I did not take the time to search for the article. If I find the time maybe I will. With all the influence peddlers in DC (foreign and domestically driven) it is quite a chore to prove that influence over our supposed national interests and which one is greater. Personally I find the one that perpetually convinces us to secure a hostile border with 30,000 Us troops against a nation that can't even feed its own people far more convincing. Israel is in a strategic location as well.

Footwedge;1363538 wrote:Plenty of other sources out there...plenty....confirming the size and power of AIPAC....as either number 1...or number 2. But what makes the whole thing so tragic, we are talking about an organization that is complicit in the death and destruction of hundreds of thousands of people...pushing a war agenda in Iraq...based completely and totally on fabrications.

This mentality of an ultra powerful small minority of Jewish boogeymen pulling the puppet strings of western governments is one of the reasons that caused a majority of the German people to turn a blind eye to some of their friends and neighbors being hauled off in cattle cars. I know that is not you but think about it.

If AIPAC is as powerful as you say, Chuck Hagel does not stand a snowballs chance in Hell. Especially since he would appear to be one that would cut into the military industrial complex. You think those that feed off of it are not a powerful lobby? Likely more powerful than your boogeyman AIPAC.

Footwedge;1363536 wrote:Iran has invaded how many countries in the past 2 centuries?

Iran was attacked and invaded by Iraq in 1980 setting off a nearly decade long war. After the Iraqis were pushed back they sued for peace on pre-war borders. The peace proposal was rejected by Iran and they launched an invasion of Iraq with the goal of setting up an Islamic regime that would be friendly to Iran drawing support from Shiites in Iraq This drew the attention of the west and they began supplying military aid to Iraq to prevent that from happening. As a result Iran's offensive to capture Baghdad was ground to halt and the war became a stalemate with Iraq holding defensive positions and Iran began attacking shipping in the Persian Gulf. As you know the war ended basically where it started.

Footwedge;1363536 wrote:How about Israel?.

Well there was the UN partition plan accepted by the Jews and rejected by the Arabs. The Jews declare the state of Israel in 1948 and they were then attacked and invaded by an alliance of Arab nations that surrounded Israel setting off a decades long war. The initial invasion by the Arab states was repelled by Israel and an armistice was signed. Without a peace agreement the hostile parties remain technically at war. Intermittent offensives have been launched by both sides since. Decades after 1948 two of the Arab belligerents (Egypt and Jordan) have made peace with Israel. The rest remain at war with Israel's existence as a state.

majorspark;1364140 wrote:Iran was attacked and invaded by Iraq in 1980 setting off a nearly decade long war. After the Iraqis were pushed back they sued for peace on pre-war borders. The peace proposal was rejected by Iran and they launched an invasion of Iraq with the goal of setting up an Islamic regime that would be friendly to Iran drawing support from Shiites in Iraq This drew the attention of the west and they began supplying military aid to Iraq to prevent that from happening. As a result Iran's offensive to capture Baghdad was ground to halt and the war became a stalemate with Iraq holding defensive positions and Iran began attacking shipping in the Persian Gulf. As you know the war ended basically where it started.

Exactly. Iraq attacked Iran and the US funneled in munitions to Saddam Hussein....how did that end up? We sided with Iraq because of the recent hostage crisis. What was the reasoning for Iran in holding 444 hostages?

Well there was the UN partition plan accepted by the Jews and rejected by the Arabs. The Jews declare the state of Israel in 1948 and they were then attacked and invaded by an alliance of Arab nations that surrounded Israel setting off a decades long war. The initial invasion by the Arab states was repelled by Israel and an armistice was signed. Without a peace agreement the hostile parties remain technically at war. Intermittent offensives have been launched by both sides since. Decades after 1948 two of the Arab belligerents (Egypt and Jordan) have made peace with Israel. The rest remain at war with Israel's existence as a state.

Most of "the rest" don't give 2 shits about Israel being recognized as a state. What they do not like is the militarism and land grabbing in Golan Heights and the West Bank. They don't care for the human rights violations either. Not to mention the human carnage caused by Israel in places like Qana, Lebanon...not once...but twice.

majorspark;1364134 wrote:I made it quite clear. Read the statement you quoted.

Huh? I read it...and then I asked what you meant by it. You haven't retracted.

Honestly it was not an attack on Fortune Magazine. You provided no links to that 1997 article.

Um...yes I did...but it was obvious that you refused to open it.

This mentality of an ultra powerful small minority of Jewish boogeymen pulling the puppet strings of western governments is one of the reasons that caused a majority of the German people to turn a blind eye to some of their friends and neighbors being hauled off in cattle cars. I know that is not you but think about it.

And it is this worn out argument that gets to be annoying. Criticize Israel's foreign policy...and somehow you become a sympathizer to the Nazis. It is old and tiring. Maybe Bibi should revisit that horror show himself and start acting like the majority of Jews, both here and abroad want him to. The sooner the Likuds are thrown out, the sooner peace will be given a chance.

If AIPAC is as powerful as you say,

Yes, they are that powerful. And if you have been paying attention, they are raising bloody hell on his nomination. As I said a few times up above, the tide is turning against these people...and they know it. Hagal will do what George W. Obama refused/refuses to do.

Chuck Hagel does not stand a snowballs chance in Hell. Especially since he would appear to be one that would cut into the military industrial complex. You think those that feed off of it are not a powerful lobby? Likely more powerful than your boogeyman AIPAC.

Yes the MIC is also very powerful indeed. And yes, Hagel for years has been critical of this monster. That is why I will pop my popcorn and enjoy the show.

As Bob Dylan put it...the times are a changin....and not a minute too soon.

Footwedge;1366323 wrote:Most of "the rest" don't give 2 ****s about Israel being recognized as a state. What they do not like is the militarism and land grabbing in Golan Heights and the West Bank. They don't care for the human rights violations either. Not to mention the human carnage caused by Israel in places like Qana, Lebanon...not once...but twice.

Sure they do. Despite the rhetoric, they don't care about a Palestinian state, a peaceful solution, or final status negotiations, etc, etc. They want Israel and the Jews wiped out. Period. Your refusal to recognize that does not mean it isn't so.

And this "land-grabbing" of the Golan and West Bank. It can only be called "land-grabbing" because the Israelis at various times "land-gave-away" those territories in the first place, despite gaining them after the Six Day War. If those territories had not become breeding grounds for terrorists and launching pads for rockets maybe the Israelis would leave them be.

Wow, this is a fun thread.

Hagel is a solid choice. He is a Ike Republican, with a realist point of view on International Affairs (look it up kids).
I'm a big fan of his and have been for years. He was my speaker at my Maryland graudation and gave a great speech on public service, engagement, and the U.S. being a responsbile, strong power.

He is not radical, or weak on issues.
He will also not dramatically change things.
Yes, the DOD budgets are going down, but things are not going to radically change just like in 1992-1993.
The U.S. will still have troops all over the globe, will continue drone strikes, will continue to shift towards Asia, will continue to build new nuclear weapon delivery systems (new bomber, new Ohio class replacement, etc.), and will continue to strongly support Israel.
The DOD will still throw a ton of money to Israel in weapons, training, and missile defense.
This all will not change.

There will be small changes here and there, but really, the DOD will stay the same as it has been since Gates got there.

ptown_trojans_1;1366624 wrote:Wow, this is a fun thread.

Hagel is a solid choice. He is a Ike Republican, with a realist point of view on International Affairs (look it up kids).

"look it up kids?" lol

ptown_trojans_1;1366624 wrote:Wow, this is a fun thread.

Hagel is a solid choice. He is a Ike Republican, with a realist point of view on International Affairs (look it up kids).
I'm a big fan of his and have been for years. He was my speaker at my Maryland graudation and gave a great speech on public service, engagement, and the U.S. being a responsbile, strong power.

He is not radical, or weak on issues.
He will also not dramatically change things.
Yes, the DOD budgets are going down, but things are not going to radically change just like in 1992-1993.
The U.S. will still have troops all over the globe, will continue drone strikes, will continue to shift towards Asia, will continue to build new nuclear weapon delivery systems (new bomber, new Ohio class replacement, etc.), and will continue to strongly support Israel.
The DOD will still throw a ton of money to Israel in weapons, training, and missile defense.
This all will not change.

There will be small changes here and there, but really, the DOD will stay the same as it has been since Gates got there.

No surprise here ........... looking forward to you growing up, and realizing what the he!! is actually going on.

ptown_trojans_1;1366624 wrote:Wow, this is a fun thread.

Hagel is a solid choice. He is a Ike Republican, with a realist point of view on International Affairs (look it up kids).

K dad :rolleyes:

jhay78;1366609 wrote:Sure they do. Despite the rhetoric, they don't care about a Palestinian state, a peaceful solution, or final status negotiations, etc, etc. They want Israel and the Jews wiped out. Period. Your refusal to recognize that does not mean it isn't so.

There it is folks there it is. People that think this way are why we have this clusterfuck in the ME. Where jhay gets this nonsense from is beyond reason....beyond reproach. Funny how Iran hasn't made any effort to wipe out....or at least deport the 5.000 Jews that live (quite comfortably I might add) in Iran.

And this "land-grabbing" of the Golan and West Bank. It can only be called "land-grabbing" because the Israelis at various times "land-gave-away" those territories in the first place, despite gaining them after the Six Day War. If those territories had not become breeding grounds for terrorists and launching pads for rockets maybe the Israelis would leave them be.

And this...all bs. All of it. Israel was granted territories after WWII...and THEY have annexed territories beyond was a agreed upon. And this is not true because I believe it to be true or that I wish it be true...but the facts...as anyone can look up with the use of a google button.

Footwedge;1366324 wrote:Huh? I read it...and then I asked what you meant by it. You haven't retracted.

Like I have said many times this world is governed by the aggressive use of force (both military and economic). When our founders signed the Declaration of Independence they knew full well they were taking on one of the most powerful forces on the face of the earth at the time. They knew the likely hood of their success would hinge in part on their ability to appeal to other powerful world players for support. Lobbyists were sent by the colonial government as well as economic bodies with interest in the outcome to appeal to a particular power (France). Appealing to their strategic interests, showing our resolve to fight and the ability to keep the military pressure on the British aided them in convincing the government of France to begin covert support by supplying ammunition/gun powder and later intervening militarily, eventually trapping Cornwallis and forcing his surrender.

The US victory over Spain during the Spanish American war pushed the status of the USA on the world stage towards givers rather than receivers. Just 15 yrs later during WWI lobbyists representing foreign governments and economic entities are petitioning the US government for economic and military support. There was little support for war in the USA but the Germans began sinking civilian and merchant ships many of them were carrying covert arms to the allies and the Germans knew it. Then they sent a letter to the Mexicans to stir shit up on the Southern border that the Germans would help them get Texas and the Americans Southwest back. Oh no!

In the aftermath of WWII the USA and USSR emerged as the two main powers in the world. Lobbyists, power brokers, etc... behind the scenes working between those competing powers. Weak nations lobbied them for military and economic aid. Cash and arms were dolled out. Some with strings attached, some freely given to wield influence, and some because of political, cultural, and religious ties. In the early 90's the USSR collapsed leaving the USA as the most powerful economic and military force.

Point being this shit has gone on since the dawn of time. This idea that a small group of people that have barely survived history and number less than 14 million (6 million of which occupy a small strip of land in the eastern Mediterranean) in a world of 7 billion has the most powerful nation on earth at this point in history acting outside their national and political interests because AIPAC (who lobbies for them) has the leaders of the USA's balls firmly in their grip is is quite frankly ludicrous. We have far greater commitments to other nations. Nations that if invaded require immediate US military intervention without congressional approval. Nations that have our troop guarding its borders.

Footwedge;1366324 wrote:Um...yes I did...but it was obvious that you refused to open it.

I did open it and no you did not. Your link was to a site called the Adam Blitzerian report. A piece written by Adam Blitzerian referencing a statement from the 1997 Fortune magazine article. I like to put things into context. Regardless that 1997 Fortune magazine article cited is 16yrs old.

Footwedge;1366324 wrote:And it is this worn out argument that gets to be annoying. Criticize Israel's foreign policy...and somehow you become a sympathizer to the Nazis. It is old and tiring.

Criticizing Israel's foreign policy is one thing. Propagating a theory that a very small minority within a world power holds the puppet strings and is manipulating economic and political forces within those governments against their own economic and political interests is another thing. That is what I am referring to and what I perceive you to be referring to.

Footwedge;1366324 wrote:Maybe Bibi should revisit that horror show himself and start acting like the majority of Jews, both here and abroad want him to. The sooner the Likuds are thrown out, the sooner peace will be given a chance.

Just to note the most significant peace ever achieved between between the warring parties in this particular conflict happened under prime minister Menachem Begin a member of the Likud party. The labor party under Ehud Barak offered Yassir Arafat the best offer the Palestinians will ever receive and it was rejected forthwith. Peace was given a chance and it was rejected. Then Arafat launched the 2nd Intifadah.

Footwedge;1366324 wrote:Yes, they are that powerful. And if you have been paying attention, they are raising bloody hell on his nomination. As I said a few times up above, the tide is turning against these people...and they know it.

They are raising bloody hell because the press tells you they are. If they were as powerful as you say they are all they would need to do is squeeze and twist. Hagel will and should be confirmed.

Footwedge;1366324 wrote:Hagal will do what George W. Obama refused/refuses to do.

Hagel will do exactly what Barak H. Obama orders him to do.

Footwedge;1367738 wrote:And this...all bs. All of it. Israel was granted territories after WWII...and THEY have annexed territories beyond was a agreed upon.

Talk about BS. Israel was granted territories under the UN partition plan. It was accepted by the Jews and rejected by the Arabs. When Israel officially accepted the UN plan Arab states invaded those territories in defiance of it and lost. No agreement between any of the warring parties existed until 1978. During that state of war Israel gained ground. Egypt made peace and lost land was returned (the Sinai).

BoatShoes;1366719 wrote:"look it up kids?" lol

Got a chuckle out of this myself. Though I agree with his post and a have alluded such in some of my posts. His "kids" reference only points to the elitist mentality he has developed in his line of work.

Spark....what books do you read?

All of following are footnoted...so spare me "the source" crap. Israel has only their leadership to blame for their continual hatred amongst the bordering locals. Only America turns it's blind eye to their brutalization of their neighbors.
Hey Bibi? Want peace? Like the majority of your people do? Quit violation UN resolutions, the Geneva Conventions, and abide by human rights and then maybe, just maybe the international community would have your back..

settlements[SUP][2][/SUP]) are the Jewish civilian communities built on land that was captured by Israel from Jordan, Egypt and Syria during the 1967 Six-Day War. Such settlements currently exist in the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and in the Golan Heights. The settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem are built either on part of the proposed Arab state, or on part of the proposed Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem. Both were originally proposed by the Plan of Partition attached to Resolution 181(II) of the General Assembly of 29 November 1947. Settlements also existed in the Sinai and Gaza Strip until Israel evacuated the Sinai settlements following the 1979 Israel-Egypt peace agreement and unilaterally disengaged from the Gaza Strip in 2005. Israel dismantled 18 settlements in the Sinai Peninsula in 1982, and all 21 in the Gaza Strip and 4 in the West Bank in 2005,[SUP][3][/SUP] but continues to both expand its settlements and settle new areas in the West Bank in spite of the Oslo Accords, which specified in article 31 that neither side would take any step that would change the status of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip pending the outcome of the permanent status negotiations. However, Israeli settlement expansion has continued unabated.[SUP][4][/SUP][SUP][5][/SUP][SUP][6][/SUP][SUP][7][/SUP]The international community considers the settlements in occupied territory to be illegal.[SUP][8][/SUP] Israeli neighborhoods in East Jerusalem and communities in the Golan Heights, areas which have been annexed by Israel, are also considered settlements by the international community, which does not recognise Israel's annexations of these territories.[SUP][9][/SUP] The United Nations has repeatedly upheld the view that Israel's construction of settlements constitutes violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention.[SUP][10][/SUP][SUP][11][/SUP] The International Court of Justice[SUP][12][/SUP] also says these settlements are illegal,[SUP][13][/SUP][SUP][14][/SUP] and no foreign government supports Israel's settlements.[SUP][15][/SUP] In April 2012, UN secretary general Ban Ki-Moon, in response to moves by Israel to legalise Israeli outposts, reiterated that all settlement activity is illegal, and "runs contrary to Israel's obligations under the Road Map and repeated Quartet calls for the parties to refrain from provocations."[SUP][16][/SUP] Similar criticism was advanced by the EU and the US.[SUP][17][/SUP][SUP][18][/SUP]
Israel disputes the position of the international community and the legal arguments that were used to declare the settlements illegal.[SUP][19][/SUP]
As of December 2010, 327,750 Israelis live in the 121 officially-recognised settlements in the West Bank, 192,000 Israelis live in settlements in East Jerusalem and over 20,000 live in settlements in the Golan Heights.[SUP][20][/SUP][SUP][21][/SUP] Settlements range in character from farming communities and frontier villages to urban suburbs and neighborhoods. The three largest settlements, Modi'in Illit, Maale Adumim and Betar Illit, have achieved city status, with over 30,000 residents each.
Israeli policies toward the settlements have ranged from active promotion to removal by force.[SUP][22][/SUP] The last new West Bank settlement to be authorised by the Israeli government was in 1999.[SUP][23][/SUP] The ongoing expansion of existing settlements by Israel and the construction of settlement outposts is frequently criticized as an obstacle to the peace process by the Palestinians[SUP][24][/SUP] and third parties, including the United Nations,[SUP][25][/SUP] Russia,[SUP][26][/SUP] the United Kingdom,[SUP][27][/SUP] the European Union,[SUP][28][/SUP] and the United States.[SUP][25][/SUP] In July 2012, the UN Human Rights Council decided to set up a probe into Jewish settlements. Israel responded by saying it would bar the Council's experts from access to the sites.[SUP][29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_settlement[/SUP]

majorspark;1367865 wrote:Got a chuckle out of this myself. Though I agree with his post and a have alluded such in some of my posts. His "kids" reference only points to the elitist mentality he has developed in his line of work.

Undeniably. I like ptown but he's living and working waaaay too close to the Kool Aid.

majorspark;1367763 wrote:Point being this **** has gone on since the dawn of time. This idea that a small group of people that have barely survived history and number less than 14 million (6 million of which occupy a small strip of land in the eastern Mediterranean) in a world of 7 billion has the most powerful nation on earth at this point in history acting outside their national and political interests because AIPAC (who lobbies for them) has the leaders of the USA's balls firmly in their grip is is quite frankly ludicrous. We have far greater commitments to other nations. Nations that if invaded require immediate US military intervention without congressional approval. Nations that have our troop guarding its borders.

This is the point that needs to be repeated, and the fact that Chuck Hagel at least partially believes that is why some people have questions about him and anti-Semitism.

While the "Israel lobby" is powerful. I agree in that I think there is truth to the idea that the Israel lobby's influence is overrated.

But, I do find it strange how often Israel is talked about...by both democrats and republicans...considering that we really haven't committed as much to Israel as say South Korea when you break it down.

I could be wrong but was it always this way? In the eighties did politicians emphasize how much they support Israel so much? I don't remember then 90's that well as I was still pretty young but I don't remember the emphasis of support for Israel.

I'm inclined to believe that Republicans for one, have emphasized their support of Israel more so to appeal to their evangelical christian base as opposed to pleasing the Israel lobby...but I don't know. And then, from there democrats try to one up them in their support for Israel because they traditionally have more Jewish voters.

believer;1367877 wrote:Undeniably. I like ptown but he's living and working waaaay too close to the Kool Aid.

Perhaps, but I also deal with, on a day to day basis issues in foreign policy that are more important than does Hagel support Israel, and is he a liberal now, and stupid political garbage BS.
But, glad to know I obtained a chuckle.

jhay78;1368167 wrote:This is the point that needs to be repeated, and the fact that Chuck Hagel at least partially believes that is why some people have questions about him and anti-Semitism.

Yes, AIPAC's influence is overblown. They have influence, but it is not as great as Stephen Walt and others think it is.
That said, there is a huge gap between thinking Israel has too strong a lobby and being an anti-semite.
But, alas, it is all for naught as military aid to Israel will continue even if Hagel is SECDEF. It is irrelevant as Congress puts most of those funds in yearly with the NDAA at the end of each year. And Hagel cannot cancel those programs without ticking off Congress, who will then put the money back in.

majorspark;1367763 wrote:Hagel will do exactly what Barak H. Obama orders him to do.

Circa....april 10th, 2013...

Pres Obama....." I have been advised by my cabinet officials....such as that from Sec of Defense, Chuck Hagel, that it is in our best interest to slash the bloated miltary by x %, and will prematurely remove our brave troops from harm's way."

You mean something like that Sparky?

Go back to my opening thread and reread. Again, the point you are missing...AND the point that even PTown has missed...the changoing of the guard and the changing of the philosophy. You two, among others, claim this is much adieu about nothing . Bull.

Obama will use Hagel....time and time and time again in implementing a cost cutting program for the military....and...a rapid deployment of our overtaxed troops all over the globe. George W Obama does not have the effin balls to do it on his own...because of the fear associated with answering to the American warmongers.

If you and PTown can't grasp that....then I don't know what to tell you.

This nomination does not signify the end of the chickenhawk neocons "Project of New Century America", nor the subsequent "Bush Doctrine", calling for global dominance by the US, but it certainly is a major move in shitcanning those movements.

"You people" have a habit of conveniently avoiding the unbelievably devastating costs related to these needless wars. I don't. I pay attention to the fact that our military membership have the highest suicide rate...ever. I pay attention to the fact that this "50 billion dollar war" as predicted by Bush and his minions has now exceeded 3 trillion....and forever counting. That almost 1 million of our troops will need monthly stipends of 5K or more to take care of their life needs. All the while these same pro war types that permeate these political boards cry "fiscal insanity" at every whim.

People like jmog who claim that we need some "trimming" to our military. A military complex that spends 20 times more per capita than China does...the second largest spender on "defending" their country.

No....hiring Hagel isn't a panacea. But hiring Hagel is a clear start...and a real start in bringing our out of control military ventures around the globe to a reversing pattern.

Now...when the Lobby squeals like the pig that they are...Obama has his scapegoat in place answering these people. And....it's long, long overdue.

For PTown...and anyone else to read...and learn. The Hagel hiring is in fact "All About Israel". Written by Philip Giraldi, who worked as a counter terrorism czar for the CIA...18 long years.

A long read...but for those that would like to understand the real reason behind the Hagel appointment, take it from a guy who's lived it...in the ME.

And if you don't like the link....tough. Yes, there are people who are in fact "antiwar."

http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2013/01/16/it-is-all-about-israel/

Footwedge;1369590 wrote:Circa....april 10th, 2013...

Pres Obama....." I have been advised by my cabinet officials....such as that from Sec of Defense, Chuck Hagel, that it is in our best interest to slash the bloated miltary by x %, and will prematurely remove our brave troops from harm's way."

You mean something like that Sparky?

Not going to comment on your wet dreams.

Footwedge;1369590 wrote:Go back to my opening thread and reread. Again, the point you are missing...AND the point that even PTown has missed...the changoing of the guard and the changing of the philosophy. You two, among others, claim this is much adieu about nothing . Bull.

Obama promised to close Gitmo. We have heard his words. Its still open yet he holds the power to close it. The reality is the individuals held there if tried in civilian court under civilian law under our constitution should be set free. The evidence gathered against Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was not under a warrant by a civilian judge. He would be convicted regardless and it would make a mockery of our justices system. Obama is fully aware of this that is why he dropped it. This is why we declare states of severity such as war under the constitution to deal with these people in a different manner. The indefinite imprisoning of enemy combatants during the term of that state is permissible.

Crimes committed during the state of war are dealt with by the victors with military tribunals. Once the state of war has ended nearly all imprisoned individuals are released under the simple terms of "dropping their arms". But we don't do that anymore so the situation gets confused. Let the military separate the sheep from the goats. Time to let the sheep return to their lives.

Footwedge;1369590 wrote:Obama will use Hagel....time and time and time again in implementing a cost cutting program for the military....and...a rapid deployment of our overtaxed troops all over the globe. George W Obama does not have the effin balls to do it on his own...because of the fear associated with answering to the American warmongers.

If you and PTown can't grasp that....then I don't know what to tell you..

Let me get this straight. A guy with that holds the office of POTUS who is going to take on the military industrial complex, the multitude of lobbyists that surround them, all the while fighting the all powerful Jewish lobby, cowers in fear of the warmongers, and has no effin balls, just nominated an underling that is going to carry the dirty water. Yeah change is a commin. LOL.

I know some of us (myself included) rib Ptown about having his head up Uncle Sam's ass but he does have a birds eye view. He does have a grasp on how the shit flows in DC.

Footwedge;1369590 wrote:Now...when the Lobby squeals like the pig that they are...Obama has his scapegoat in place answering these people. And....it's long, long overdue.

False leaders need scapegoats to hide behind. True leaders need only the ability to communicate and shine the light of truth and reason.

Footwedge;1369590 wrote:Obama will use Hagel....time and time and time again in implementing a cost cutting program for the military....and...a rapid deployment of our overtaxed troops all over the globe. George W Obama does not have the effin balls to do it on his own...because of the fear associated with answering to the American warmongers.

If you and PTown can't grasp that....then I don't know what to tell you.

I don't think anyone can grasp that. So much contradiction in so little space.

This nomination does not signify the end of the chickenhawk neocons "Project of New Century America", nor the subsequent "Bush Doctrine", calling for global dominance by the US, but it certainly is a major move in ****canning those movements.

"You people" have a habit of conveniently avoiding the unbelievably devastating costs related to these needless wars. I don't. I pay attention to the fact that our military membership have the highest suicide rate...ever. I pay attention to the fact that this "50 billion dollar war" as predicted by Bush and his minions has now exceeded 3 trillion....and forever counting. That almost 1 million of our troops will need monthly stipends of 5K or more to take care of their life needs. All the while these same pro war types that permeate these political boards cry "fiscal insanity" at every whim.

People like jmog who claim that we need some "trimming" to our military. A military complex that spends 20 times more per capita than China does...the second largest spender on "defending" their country.

You people ignore quite a bit yourselves:

1. The only Department in the federal bureaucracy where Obama has appointed a real cost-cutter, concerned about a bloated budget, is the Defense Department. That is quite telling. Now I might applaud him if Defense took up 60% of the budget, as it did in JFK's day. But it doesn't. Obama is a complete fraud when it comes to trimming budgets, and this pseudo display of frugality doesn't change my opinion.

2. I count one "needless war" (singular) enacted by Bush- Iraq. The overwhelming majority of US money and blood in Iraq/Afghanistan was spent rebuilding infrastructure and government in the hopes that the new ruling body would remain stable and not threaten our interests or security. I and others have maintained that we should not have rebuilt a thing until the Taliban, et al, surrendered. But we thought the native population would appreciate our efforts to rid them of tyrants and extremists. That was a bad policy.

3. Why is it that everyone who disagrees with your rants is "pro-war", or a "chickenhawk", etc.? Or everyone who thinks the Israeli/Jewish lobby is not behind every US foreign policy decision automatically falls under those labels? Can't your argument stand on its own two feet without throwing names around?

[No....hiring Hagel isn't a panacea. But hiring Hagel is a clear start...and a real start in bringing our out of control military ventures around the globe to a reversing pattern.

Now...when the Lobby squeals like the pig that they are...Obama has his scapegoat in place answering these people. And....it's long, long overdue/QUOTE]

Careful . . . sounds eerily similar to Mohammed Morsi . . .

Footwedge;1369602 wrote:For PTown...and anyone else to read...and learn. The Hagel hiring is in fact "All About Israel". Written by Philip Giraldi, who worked as a counter terrorism czar for the CIA...18 long years.

A long read...but for those that would like to understand the real reason behind the Hagel appointment, take it from a guy who's lived it...in the ME.

And if you don't like the link....tough. Yes, there are people who are in fact "antiwar."

http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2013/01/16/it-is-all-about-israel/

I should have stopped reading after this part, but I didn't:

Christian Zionists, whose unflinching support for both Israel and military spending is linked to their desire to hasten the end of the world and bring about the battle of Armageddon preceding the second coming of Christ, are also on the list.

That is a lie and a smear. Clouds my opinion of the rest of the article.

jhay78;1369832 wrote:That is a lie and a smear. Clouds my opinion of the rest of the article.

I was thoughtfully considering the article. Then I hit that nonsense.

Christian Zionists, whose unflinching support for both Israel and military spending is linked to their desire to hasten the end of the world and bring about the battle of Armageddon preceding the second coming of Christ, are also on the list.

As a Bible-thumping evangelical Christian, I had to laugh at this statement.

It is true that conservative Christians recognize the Biblical significance of Israel and throw political support to the Israelis. We also believe that we are in the midst of the end times as prophesied in both the Old and New Testaments.

But I personally don't know of a single pastor, church leader, or layperson who actively supports military spending as a means to spurring Armageddon and the Second Coming of Christ.

No amount of support of increased military spending will hasten the return of Christ. Any knowledgeable evangelical Christian knows this to be true. Jesus Christ will come when he comes. (Matthew 24:36).

Christian Zionists, whose unflinching support for both Israel and military spending is linked to their desire to hasten the end of the world and bring about the battle of Armageddon preceding the second coming of Christ, are also on the list.

As a Bible-thumping evangelical Christian, I had to laugh at this statement.

It is true that conservative Christians recognize the Biblical significance of Israel and throw political support to the Israelis. We also believe that we are in the midst of the end times as prophesied in both the Old and New Testaments.

But I personally don't know of a single pastor, church leader, or layperson who actively supports military spending as a means to spurring Armageddon and the Second Coming of Christ.

No amount of support for increased military spending will hasten the return of Christ. Any knowledgeable evangelical Christian knows this to be true. Jesus Christ will come when he comes. (Matthew 24:36).