Chuck Hagel Has My Vote
In this already-started presidential election season, it is often hard to find anyone who not only knows what they are talking about, but also respects voter intellect. Chuck Hagel is that kind of guy. Unfortunately, he doesn't seem to be in the running.
Originally an economist, my inclination is to reach for a Republican answer, but when they went off the reservation with W, one had no choice but to go left. Hagel offers a hope.... He has a moral center that is informed and he does not fear speaking his mind.
I was elated this morning when I opened the Post and saw that he had an opinion piece. I read it with excited anticipation, wanting to know what would make this mind speak out... and I was not disappointed.
How often have we heard a Republican senator (other than Lincoln Chafee) point to Iraq as a colossal mistake? More interesting, he reminds us that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. In other words, "America cannot impose a democracy on any nation..." He chastises the policy of the US for taking its eye off the ball. "And our effort in Afghanistan continues to deteriorate, partly because we took our focus off the real terrorist threat which was there, and not in Iraq." Not that it actually matters, but that is coming from a Vietnam vet.
For those who wonder why we even bother to have a Congress in view of its rubber stamp status these past years, Hagel seems to agree. After funding over $500 billion in Iraq and Afghanistan "dishonestly, mainly through supplemental appropriations," it is time for Congress to fulfill its obligation. As Hagel states, "Congress has abdicated its oversight responsibility in the past four years."
That is refreshing! Now, how can we get him to run??
Leaving Iraq, Honorably
By Chuck Hagel (Sunday, November 26, 2006; Washington Post B07)
There will be no victory or defeat for the United States in Iraq. These terms do not reflect the reality of what is going to happen there. The future of Iraq was always going to be determined by the Iraqis -- not the Americans.
Iraq is not a prize to be won or lost. It is part of the ongoing global struggle against instability, brutality, intolerance, extremism and terrorism. There will be no military victory or military solution for Iraq. Former secretary of state Henry Kissinger made this point last weekend.
The time for more U.S. troops in Iraq has passed. We do not have more troops to send and, even if we did, they would not bring a resolution to Iraq. Militaries are built to fight and win wars, not bind together failing nations. We are once again learning a very hard lesson in foreign affairs: America cannot impose a democracy on any nation -- regardless of our noble purpose.
We have misunderstood, misread, misplanned and mismanaged our honorable intentions in Iraq with an arrogant self-delusion reminiscent of Vietnam. Honorable intentions are not policies and plans. Iraq belongs to the 25 million Iraqis who live there. They will decide their fate and form of government.
It may take many years before there is a cohesive political center in Iraq. America's options on this point have always been limited. There will be a new center of gravity in the Middle East that will include Iraq. That process began over the past few days with the Syrians and Iraqis restoring diplomatic relations after 20 years of having no formal communication.
What does this tell us? It tells us that regional powers will fill regional vacuums, and they will move to work in their own self-interest -- without the United States. This is the most encouraging set of actions for the Middle East in years. The Middle East is more combustible today than ever before, and until we are able to lead a renewal of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, mindless destruction and slaughter will continue in Lebanon, Israel and across the Middle East.
We are a long way from a sustained peaceful resolution to the anarchy in Iraq. But this latest set of events is moving the Middle East in the only direction it can go with any hope of lasting progress and peace. The movement will be imperfect, stuttering and difficult.
America finds itself in a dangerous and isolated position in the world. We are perceived as a nation at war with Muslims. Unfortunately, that perception is gaining credibility in the Muslim world and for many years will complicate America's global credibility, purpose and leadership. This debilitating and dangerous perception must be reversed as the world seeks a new geopolitical, trade and economic center that will accommodate the interests of billions of people over the next 25 years. The world will continue to require realistic, clear-headed American leadership -- not an American divine mission.
The United States must begin planning for a phased troop withdrawal from Iraq. The cost of combat in Iraq in terms of American lives, dollars and world standing has been devastating. We've already spent more than $300 billion there to prosecute an almost four-year-old war and are still spending $8 billion per month. The United States has spent more than $500 billion on our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And our effort in Afghanistan continues to deteriorate, partly because we took our focus off the real terrorist threat, which was there, and not in Iraq.
We are destroying our force structure, which took 30 years to build. We've been funding this war dishonestly, mainly through supplemental appropriations, which minimizes responsible congressional oversight and allows the administration to duck tough questions in defending its policies. Congress has abdicated its oversight responsibility in the past four years.
It is not too late. The United States can still extricate itself honorably from an impending disaster in Iraq. The Baker-Hamilton commission gives the president a new opportunity to form a bipartisan consensus to get out of Iraq. If the president fails to build a bipartisan foundation for an exit strategy, America will pay a high price for this blunder -- one that we will have difficulty recovering from in the years ahead.
To squander this moment would be to squander future possibilities for the Middle East and the world. That is what is at stake over the next few months.
The writer is a Republican senator from Nebraska.
Originally an economist, my inclination is to reach for a Republican answer, but when they went off the reservation with W, one had no choice but to go left. Hagel offers a hope.... He has a moral center that is informed and he does not fear speaking his mind.
I was elated this morning when I opened the Post and saw that he had an opinion piece. I read it with excited anticipation, wanting to know what would make this mind speak out... and I was not disappointed.
How often have we heard a Republican senator (other than Lincoln Chafee) point to Iraq as a colossal mistake? More interesting, he reminds us that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. In other words, "America cannot impose a democracy on any nation..." He chastises the policy of the US for taking its eye off the ball. "And our effort in Afghanistan continues to deteriorate, partly because we took our focus off the real terrorist threat which was there, and not in Iraq." Not that it actually matters, but that is coming from a Vietnam vet.
For those who wonder why we even bother to have a Congress in view of its rubber stamp status these past years, Hagel seems to agree. After funding over $500 billion in Iraq and Afghanistan "dishonestly, mainly through supplemental appropriations," it is time for Congress to fulfill its obligation. As Hagel states, "Congress has abdicated its oversight responsibility in the past four years."
That is refreshing! Now, how can we get him to run??
Leaving Iraq, Honorably
By Chuck Hagel (Sunday, November 26, 2006; Washington Post B07)
There will be no victory or defeat for the United States in Iraq. These terms do not reflect the reality of what is going to happen there. The future of Iraq was always going to be determined by the Iraqis -- not the Americans.
Iraq is not a prize to be won or lost. It is part of the ongoing global struggle against instability, brutality, intolerance, extremism and terrorism. There will be no military victory or military solution for Iraq. Former secretary of state Henry Kissinger made this point last weekend.
The time for more U.S. troops in Iraq has passed. We do not have more troops to send and, even if we did, they would not bring a resolution to Iraq. Militaries are built to fight and win wars, not bind together failing nations. We are once again learning a very hard lesson in foreign affairs: America cannot impose a democracy on any nation -- regardless of our noble purpose.
We have misunderstood, misread, misplanned and mismanaged our honorable intentions in Iraq with an arrogant self-delusion reminiscent of Vietnam. Honorable intentions are not policies and plans. Iraq belongs to the 25 million Iraqis who live there. They will decide their fate and form of government.
It may take many years before there is a cohesive political center in Iraq. America's options on this point have always been limited. There will be a new center of gravity in the Middle East that will include Iraq. That process began over the past few days with the Syrians and Iraqis restoring diplomatic relations after 20 years of having no formal communication.
What does this tell us? It tells us that regional powers will fill regional vacuums, and they will move to work in their own self-interest -- without the United States. This is the most encouraging set of actions for the Middle East in years. The Middle East is more combustible today than ever before, and until we are able to lead a renewal of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, mindless destruction and slaughter will continue in Lebanon, Israel and across the Middle East.
We are a long way from a sustained peaceful resolution to the anarchy in Iraq. But this latest set of events is moving the Middle East in the only direction it can go with any hope of lasting progress and peace. The movement will be imperfect, stuttering and difficult.
America finds itself in a dangerous and isolated position in the world. We are perceived as a nation at war with Muslims. Unfortunately, that perception is gaining credibility in the Muslim world and for many years will complicate America's global credibility, purpose and leadership. This debilitating and dangerous perception must be reversed as the world seeks a new geopolitical, trade and economic center that will accommodate the interests of billions of people over the next 25 years. The world will continue to require realistic, clear-headed American leadership -- not an American divine mission.
The United States must begin planning for a phased troop withdrawal from Iraq. The cost of combat in Iraq in terms of American lives, dollars and world standing has been devastating. We've already spent more than $300 billion there to prosecute an almost four-year-old war and are still spending $8 billion per month. The United States has spent more than $500 billion on our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And our effort in Afghanistan continues to deteriorate, partly because we took our focus off the real terrorist threat, which was there, and not in Iraq.
We are destroying our force structure, which took 30 years to build. We've been funding this war dishonestly, mainly through supplemental appropriations, which minimizes responsible congressional oversight and allows the administration to duck tough questions in defending its policies. Congress has abdicated its oversight responsibility in the past four years.
It is not too late. The United States can still extricate itself honorably from an impending disaster in Iraq. The Baker-Hamilton commission gives the president a new opportunity to form a bipartisan consensus to get out of Iraq. If the president fails to build a bipartisan foundation for an exit strategy, America will pay a high price for this blunder -- one that we will have difficulty recovering from in the years ahead.
To squander this moment would be to squander future possibilities for the Middle East and the world. That is what is at stake over the next few months.
The writer is a Republican senator from Nebraska.
posted by Dahlia at 10:05 AM
5 Comments:
I'm certainly hoping that Senator Hagel will run. He has excellent sense with regard to foreign affairs and is focused on trying to balance the budget.
Couldn't agree with you more!
I'm sure he'll support McCain.
He has always been more principled, than most liberal Democrats. At the start of the war, the Dems were really quiet. They gave Hagel no help.
Hagel and McCain are both doomed. The U.S. as a whole has only elected two Senators since the 1800's (Harding and Kennedy).
Both died in office and won very close (fixed) elections.
U.S. Senators are too easy to portray as corrupt and geo-political. Nebraska and every State West of Mississipi are 'cow-country' except for California and Texas.
Not an accurate view, but one the average and ignorant voter holds...
Thanks Sauron
While you may be correct in your summary of history, I hope that Hagel will break that mold. He is very principled even when it is not popular
Post a Comment
<< Home