It will be Republican Chuck Hagel 4 Defense Secretary: Whoo Hoo! Fight is on.

Hagel is just as much of a war hawk as Obama is.

No, he doesn't support the "all options on the table" nonsense in regards to Iran that Obama does. He's said a war with Iran would be a disaster in the past. Of course, I'm sure he'll change his mind during the confirmation hearings.

I don't see a "war" with Iran coming. I could be wrong though.

can you see Cantor (R) demanding that there be offsets to pay for it? :doubt: :lol:
 
Hagel is just as much of a war hawk as Obama is.

No, he doesn't support the "all options on the table" nonsense in regards to Iran that Obama does. He's said a war with Iran would be a disaster in the past. Of course, I'm sure he'll change his mind during the confirmation hearings.

I don't see a "war" with Iran coming. I could be wrong though.

Well if you're right it won't be for a lack of trying.
 
No, he doesn't support the "all options on the table" nonsense in regards to Iran that Obama does. He's said a war with Iran would be a disaster in the past. Of course, I'm sure he'll change his mind during the confirmation hearings.

I don't see a "war" with Iran coming. I could be wrong though.

Well if you're right it won't be for a lack of trying.

There are people who've been "trying" to get a war started with Iran for decades now. I just don't think it's really going to gain that much traction.

The only ones who seem really gung-ho about it are the oldschool neo-cons, but they've got significantly less power now than they did 10 years ago.
 
I don't see a "war" with Iran coming. I could be wrong though.

Well if you're right it won't be for a lack of trying.

There are people who've been "trying" to get a war started with Iran for decades now. I just don't think it's really going to gain that much traction.

The only ones who seem really gung-ho about it are the oldschool neo-cons, but they've got significantly less power now than they did 10 years ago.

Well they're the ones opposing Hagel right now, so I guess we'll see if they have much sway left. It looks like Obama's going to have to rely on Democrats to get Hagel through.
 
I don't see a "war" with Iran coming. I could be wrong though.

Well if you're right it won't be for a lack of trying.

There are people who've been "trying" to get a war started with Iran for decades now. I just don't think it's really going to gain that much traction.

The only ones who seem really gung-ho about it are the oldschool neo-cons, but they've got significantly less power now than they did 10 years ago.

:clap2:
 
Well if you're right it won't be for a lack of trying.

There are people who've been "trying" to get a war started with Iran for decades now. I just don't think it's really going to gain that much traction.

The only ones who seem really gung-ho about it are the oldschool neo-cons, but they've got significantly less power now than they did 10 years ago.

Well they're the ones opposing Hagel right now, so I guess we'll see if they have much sway left. It looks like Obama's going to have to rely on Democrats to get Hagel through.

It's going to be interesting to watch.
 
There are people who've been "trying" to get a war started with Iran for decades now. I just don't think it's really going to gain that much traction.

The only ones who seem really gung-ho about it are the oldschool neo-cons, but they've got significantly less power now than they did 10 years ago.

Well they're the ones opposing Hagel right now, so I guess we'll see if they have much sway left. It looks like Obama's going to have to rely on Democrats to get Hagel through.

It's going to be interesting to watch.

Sen. Graham is already voicing opposition to Hagel and he's basing his apparent "hostility" to Israel as a reason.

Sen. Graham was a JAG officer. They take an oath when appointed:

I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

I don't see anything about Israel in there, does anyone else?
 
Well they're the ones opposing Hagel right now, so I guess we'll see if they have much sway left. It looks like Obama's going to have to rely on Democrats to get Hagel through.

It's going to be interesting to watch.

Sen. Graham is already voicing opposition to Hagel and he's basing his apparent "hostility" to Israel as a reason.

Sen. Graham was a JAG officer. They take an oath when appointed:

I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

I don't see anything about Israel in there, does anyone else?

When has any kind of oath mattered to any politician ever?
 
More than a few Democrats aren't thrilled with Hagel either whatever.

so what? Democrats don't march in lock step, but a majority, a healthy majority will hopefully shut out the lunatics that will attack Hagel in personal, and partisan ways

Democrats don't march in lockstep? LMAO then they must be a fractured and disintegrating party just like the Republicans when they don't all agree on something before you try and claim the Republicans do march in lockstep I suggest you check back about a week ago to the fiscal cliff debate.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top