Email | Twitter | G+
Political animals of all stripes are tying themselves in knots over the Chuck Hagel Secretary of Defense nomination.
Wouldn't it be great to have a Cliff's Notes version for libertarians who have better things to worry about?
Well, Laurence Vance provides it.
He writes:
Hagel as secretary of defense will change nothing when it comes to U.S. foreign or military policy. Will the U.S. Navy no longer be a global force for evil (not good as the commercials say)? Of course not. Does Hagel want to bring all U.S. troops home from overseas? Of course not. Has he ever said that U.S. troops should no longer be in Germany, Japan, and Italy--since WWII ended in 1945? Of course not. Does Hagel want to close all foreign military bases? Of course not. Does he want to close any? I mean out of principle, not because they are no longer an efficient use of resources. Does Hagel think very highly of the U.S. military and its role in the world? Of course he does. Will Hagel be loyal to the president and his foreign and military policy objectives? Of course he will. Does Hagel think that the U.S. military should withdraw from the Middle East and stop intervening? Of course not. Would Hagel be "better" than Rumsfeld? Only in the sense that getting hit 9 times is better than 10 or getting $9 stolen is better than $10.Vance was a recent guest on The Robert Wenzel Show. If you missed that great episode, you can listen to it here.
The problem with Hagel is not that he's just another statist. He is, but that's not the real problem.
ReplyDeleteThe real problem is that the guy is simply a moron. He can't even parrot the administration's talking points properly.
I suspect he was nominated because the president wants a cabinet member even dumber than he is.
Marginal gains are gains nonetheless. At least Hagel seems to accept the possibility that there are other indices of good policy besides dollars spent, ships built and presences expanded.
ReplyDeleteSame old story from EPJ . . . this guy doesn't align with us 100%; therefore, he must suck just as much as everyone else! (Seriously, who would you rather have as Sec. of Defense: Hagel or a John McCain? You can't tell me there's no difference!)
ReplyDeleteMaybe Hagel won't change a thing, but the fact that he gets warmongers like McCain and Joe Lieberman worked up over his nomination is evidence of something. I know EPJ doesn't believe in incremental liberty -- that's fine -- but I consider it progress when someone like Hagel is nominated for Sec. of Defense. Again, maybe his nomination is much ado about nothing. But hopefully his nomination shifts the debate ever so slightly. And it gives me hope the neocon influence in Washington is waning.
Uh, Chris Rossini is quoting Laurence Vance .
DeleteI know he's quoting Laurence Vance (I can read). It's very clear that Rossini agrees with the position he takes. Otherwise, why post it?
DeleteI consider it progress when someone like Hagel is nominated for Sec. of Defense.
DeleteYour definition of liberty is more drone strikes. Ok then.
OP here . . .
Delete@Anonymous 11:59, nice straw man. I never said I agree with drone strikes or anything of the sort. But that's the sort of false dichotomy EPJ loves -- the "you're either with us or against us" mentality." All I said was that Chuck Hagel, taken as a whole, is better than replacement X. If you follow baseball, Chuck Hagel would have about a 2 WAR. That's a good thing in my book.
"Maybe Hagel won't change a thing, but the fact that he gets warmongers like McCain and Joe Lieberman worked up over his nomination is evidence of something."
DeleteIt is evidence that a fake debate can still make many Americans believe that there is a real debate.
If it's a "fake" debate, why are so many people worked up about it? I presume John McCain, the Heritage Foundation, or whoever else is tied up in knots about this nomination, have much closer ties to the military industrial complex than you or I. These people wouldn't waste their time, energy, and political capital on an issue they deemed insignificant.
DeleteI'm with Anonymous at 8:02.
ReplyDeleteSo what if Hagel is marginally different. What's important is public perception. And perception would be that the neoconservatives have lost much of their influence over controlling the foreign policy narrative. It strikes a blow to neocon political influence. That's an acceptable step in the right direction, no?
That's an acceptable step in the right direction, no?
DeleteWell, no, it's not. It's a step backward because it implies that all politicians support the same policies - "gee, that Hagel sounded different but it turned out he was just another warmongering statist like Obama and Panetta and..." etc etc.
Well, Justin Raimondo disagrees. He thinks Hagel is a real obstacle to a war against Iran breaking out.
ReplyDeleteThere never was going to be a war against Iran.
DeleteWant to share your intel sources with the rest of us worker bees?
DeleteSkip
Funny, apparently Chuck's PEU ties aren't in the "everything category."
ReplyDeletehttp://peureport.blogspot.com/2012/12/chuck-hagel-peu.html