Chuck Hagel is surprised that Obama is who Obama is
Any surprise at this shows a certain amount of poor judgment, I’d say. On Hagel’s part:
It was Aug. 30, 2013, and the U.S. military was poised for war. Obama had publicly warned Syrian strongman Bashar al-Assad that his regime would face consequences if it crossed a “red line” by employing chemical weapons against its own people. Assad did it anyway, and Hagel had spent the day approving final plans for a barrage of Tomahawk cruise missile strikes against Damascus. U.S. naval destroyers were in the Mediterranean, awaiting orders to fire.
Instead, Obama told a stunned Hagel to stand down. Assad’s Aug. 21 chemical attack in a Damascus suburb had killed hundreds of civilians, but the president said the United States wasn’t going to take any military action against the Syrian government. The president had decided to ignore his own red line ”” a decision, Hagel believes, that dealt a severe blow to the credibility of both Obama and the United States…
In the days and months afterward, Hagel’s counterparts around the world told him their confidence in Washington had been shaken over Obama’s sudden about-face. And the former defense secretary said he still hears complaints to this day from foreign leaders.
“A president’s word is a big thing, and when the president says things, that’s a big deal,” he said…
The 69-year-old former Nebraska senator and Vietnam War veteran, speaking for the first time about his treatment by the Obama administration, said the Pentagon was subject to debilitating meddling and micromanagement by the White House ”” echoing criticism made by his predecessors, Robert Gates and Leon Panetta.
Looking back on his tenure, Hagel said in the Dec. 10 interview that he remains puzzled as to why some administration officials sought to “destroy” him personally in his final days in office, castigating him in anonymous comments to newspapers even after he had handed in his resignation…
Hagel’s biggest hurdle, though, was that he was never fully embraced by Obama’s tight inner circle.
By the time Hagel was confirmed he should have been aware that (a) Obama was never going to order that sort of response in Syria, no matter what he said for public consumption (b) one of Obama’s goals is to destroy the credibility of the United States so that other nations do not trust it in the future (c) the hallmark of this administration has long been “debilitating meddling and micromanagement” of the military, as his predecessors have said (d) personal destruction has long been an Obama tactic; and (e) no one is “fully embraced by Obama’s tight inner circle” except Obama’s tight inner circle—that’s what makes it tight.
Hagel served his purpose.
Clearly either utter stupidity or… a case of, “I’m shocked! Shocked to discover that there is gambling going on!”
Hagel’s public statement about Obama’s decision on Syria is his finest hour.
Fellow Nebraskan!
Third question at press conference is about Syria and the press person doesn’t ask about the Hagel news.
Obama just stalls and stalls. Impossible to listen to.
And the source of the personal attacks, micromanaging and policy failures is Susan Rice.
Susan Rice the liar.
how can a man that age (with 4+ previous years of Chicago on the Potomac immediately in front of him) be that naive ?
Silly man, he can redeem himself by speaking out, of course MSM will give it a *good leaving alone* !
As Neo has pointed out, before Obama, at least in terms of foreign affairs, Republican and Democratic presidents shared a presidential version of the ‘Overton Window’ distinguished from the partisan, popular politics.
Both sides upheld the paradigm of “neocon” American leadership of the free world.
One could criticize a President for acting relatively weakly in his duties as Commander-in-Chief (eg, Carter with Iran hostages, Reagan with Beirut barracks bombing, HW Bush with Saddam post-Gulf War, Clinton with al Qaeda, etc), but differences were usually an issue of degree, rather than kind.
Obama is different. He’s undertaking a paradigm shift for American leadership. The cornerstone piece of the paradigm shift has been the sabotage of the Iraq intervention in accordance with the false narrative of OIF made prevalent in the zeitgeist. Disqualifying the paradigm of the Iraq intervention has been key for the Left because OIF was invested with every fundamental principle of American leadership of the free world.
Obama’s approaches to Syria, Iran, Libya, etc, have purposely contradicted the paradigm of the Iraq intervention.
In Hagel’s defense, isn’t it well known that the man is dumb as a box of rocks?
KLSmith
Chuck is a dunce but not completely clueless. He was in over his head at DOD.
Chuck is savvy and I’m glad he is getting some revenge.
Susan Rice is horrible.
Clarification. Chuck doesn’t have a high IQ but he is a street fighter. Fights back against the backstabbers.
neo: “(b) one of Obama’s goals is to destroy the credibility of the United States so that other nations do not trust it in the future”
Good point. Doubtful that it can be undone given the simple refusal of Republicans to fight. What happened to all those millions of Scots-Irish that Jim Web wrote about in his book.
“Hagel served his purpose.”
He was a useful idiot.
Now he’s just a tragic idiot.
Harold:
I’m Scots-Irish. Can’t be led into accepting anything and I will fight for what I believe. I too read Webb’s book.
This is by far Hagel’s finest hour, finest moment, whatever definition you want. His best moment in public life.