-
That’s a Lot of Caca in Caracas
May 16, 2013 | 7 comments
-
Canadian PM: Keystone XL Pipeline “Absolutely Needs To Go Ahead.”
May 16, 2013 | 2 comments
-
Has Obama Done Sufficient Damage Control With The IRS?
May 15, 2013 | 7 comments
-
Liberals Surprisingly Re-Elected in British Columbia
May 15, 2013 | 1 comment
-
Eric Holder Has No Shame
May 15, 2013 | 9 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Commenting on the opposition to the possible nomination of Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense, Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic opines that President Obama should appoint former Nebraska Republican because he is the only thing standing between Israel and its self destruction.
Goldberg argues that if the Jewish Home Party becomes the third largest party in the Knesset and/or joins Benjamin Netanyahu’s next coalition government “it will bring about the destruction (self-destruction) of Israel” through the construction of more settlements, the absorption of West Bank Arabs and turn Israel into the Jewish equivalent of a Sharia state. Goldberg goes on to say that these policies “would turn Israel into a pariah state.”
So what does any of this have to with Hagel? Goldberg states, “Maybe, at this point, what we need are American officials who will speak with disconcerting bluntness to Israel about the choices it is making.”
O.K., where do I begin?
First, I don’t see how the Jewish Home Party is any different from any of Israel’s other Orthodox religious parties much less yield more power.
Second, perhaps Goldberg should attend a sitting at the UN General Assembly. Israel is already treated as a pariah nation.
Third, where the hell has Goldberg been the past four years? President Obama, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton and, for that matter, both Secretaries of Defense (Bob Gates and Leon Panetta) have made tough public statements criticizing Israel’s policies concerning settlements. In fact, the Obama Administration has been far tougher in its rhetoric on Israel building homes than on Iran building nuclear bombs. Their rhetoric has been counterproductive to say the least.
Given the Obama Administration’s sour disposition towards Israel I suppose Hagel won’t say anything worse about Israel than what has already been said. Still, methinks appointing Hagel as Secretary of Defense would be like asking Michael Vick to walk your dog. In other words, I hope President Obama won’t unleash Hagel on Israel.
View all comments (13) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Aaron Goldstein
http://spectator.org/blog/2012/12/20/goldberg-hagel-will-save-israe
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
BD57| 12.20.12 @ 8:17PM
Goldberg's opinion seems ill-considered.
Bottom line, though - Hagel wouldn't lead policy, he'd implement. Obama wants a weaker Israel & American military.
DRed| 12.20.12 @ 10:14PM
Right, that's why Obama increased military aid to Israel. It's part of his sinister plot to make Israel weaker.
JmsA| 12.21.12 @ 5:34PM
Never mind that he just sent twenty F-16s to the Muslim Brotherhood.
RCV| 12.21.12 @ 11:25AM
I'm not a fan of Hagel because of his weak-kneed views on Israel. But that's not his biggest roadblock to confirmation. His prior opposition to an ambassador just because he was gay will kill him. It's the issue-de-jour among Democrats, and I'm glad it will likely put the kebosh on Hagel's nomination.
Occam's Tool| 12.21.12 @ 1:00PM
RCV: nice comments today.
Being gay does not disqualify one from serving as an ambassador, especially if one is open about it. Hagel is a fan of terrorist organizations. I don't like him.
Why not put Lieberman in that position? Or Lugar, if you want a Republican?
RCV| 12.21.12 @ 3:36PM
Lieberman would be an excellent defense secretary, as would Lugar. And, although you probably don't agree, so would Colin Powell.
JmsA| 12.21.12 @ 6:06PM
Why would you want a republican? Would it be convenience in case something goes wrong, or just two more pliable stooges who present no political risks to themselves or the administration, such as those two "Republican" flakes you mentioned. Wasn't Powell who said that Castro had done some wonderful things for his people? Such as what? Imprisoning, torturing, executing thousands, and exiling 20 percent of the country's population?
How about this, then:
http://spectator.org/blog/2012.....lin-powell
Don't get me wrong, by that standard, as far as I'm concerned, he fits right in, with the rest of the flakes, including the soon to be named commie loving Secretary of State. Moreover, wasn't Powell the one that prevented the utter and completed destruction of retreating Iraqi forces following their being kicked out of Kuwait? How did that work out? According to his own book, "My American Journey", Powell wrote: "[T]he television coverage was starting to make it look as if we were engaged in slaughter for slaughter's sake." Never mind that post-war studies, according to Foreign Policy Research Institute showed that most of the wrecks on the Basra roadway had been abandoned by Iraqis before being strafed and that actual enemy casualties were low, and that opinion surveys showed that American support for the war was largely unaffected by the images. You leftists are all so predictable.
RCV| 12.21.12 @ 6:27PM
Unlike you far rightists who are always so wild and crazy, going off doing stuff no one expected!
JmsA| 12.21.12 @ 6:31PM
Thanks for the compliment.
RCV| 12.22.12 @ 6:59PM
It was pure sarcasm. You're as predictable as the morning sunrise.
Crassus| 12.21.12 @ 3:26PM
Isn't Hagel the same assclown who once scheduled a press conference back in 2007 to announce that he would be running for POTUS and then announced at the press conference that he hadn't made up his mind yet and would get back with everyone at a later date? I guess now is the later date. I was wondering whatever happened to this doofus.
Kingofthenet| 12.21.12 @ 10:00PM
What is the 'End-Game' with settlements? Say the Israelis get 100% of the land, and Millions of NEW Palestinian citizens, is THAT victory? Seriously how does annexing more and more land work out for the JEWISH state?
RCV| 12.22.12 @ 7:02PM
They're only going to annex the land that the actual settlements are on. That's why they're building to make them contiguous to Jerusalem. The longer the Palestinians wait to make true peace with Israel, the smaller their eventual state will be. Look at how large it would have been in 1948, had they only accepted the UN Partition! What idiocy!