The public policy blog of the American Enterprise Institute

Subscribe to the blog

Discussion: (9 comments)

  1. He thinks Palestinians are kept “caged like animals” by Israel.

    Most people agree with him on this issue.

    He is not “an Israeli Senator”

    Correct. He was supposed to be an American Senator looking after the interests of Americans.

    1. “American interests” are oppostion to racism of Islam, where would you rather be a Jew, in Israel or in Arabia, homophobism, where would you rather be gay, in the US where you can marry most of the time or in Arabia where different methods of stoning, as in rocks not smokes, is debated theologically, and where would you rather be a Christian, in Egypt or the US

      US interests are freedom not racism, thus our interests align with Israel, and Israelis do not fly airplanes into American buildings, Muslims do, who are pals of Pals

      thus we have common enemies, in best Mideast tradition, the enemy of my enemy is my friend, we are all Muslim snow

  2. Hagel is in august company in supporting the Global Zero movement. But his Global Zero compatriots are not up for a job at the Pentagon, where he will be part steward of our nuclear arsenal — an arsenal he wishes to cut by 80 percent, and implicitly believes denies the United States the moral authority to demand that Iran and North Korea end their own nuclear weapons programs.

    The nuclear arsenal should be cut by 80% or more. No country can threaten the US militarily so what is the point of nukes that kill indiscriminately. Given the fact that Truman dropped two nukes on civilian targets I would say that the US does not have the moral authority to tell other countries what they must do with their programs.

    1. we have absolute moral authority we are the good guys, we tell only Muslim countries because they believe that murder is ordered by god against infidels and practice by flying airplanes into buildings, and preach such to their people

      American buildings, and they routinely blow each other up with suicide bombers, so there is certainly no moral authority there,

      peace through strength, pax americana

  3. Jeff Blankfort

    It might be a good time to re-open an investigation into Pletka’s path to US citizenship from her native Australia since she obviously has a problem with Hagel declaring that he was “a US senator, not an Israeli senator.” when in office, “Because, apparently, 99 other senators are?”

    Yes, for all intents and purposes they are, they’re not being a single one of the unholy lot that has cast a single vote against an AIPAC supported resolution.

    It is not surprising that she was a part of the war-mongering Project for a New American Century and now is member of the Committee on the Present Danger which I must admit is where, as a present danger, she should be.

    At the very least she should be frog marched down to the Foreign Agents Registration office of the Justice Dept. and be forced to register for what she is, a foreign agent.

    1. Hagel thinks that 99 other senators are from Israel, i see, thus HE is the one percenter, who knew

      he should be frog marched to the Iranian embassy for his honorary Iranian citizenship, since he has actual citizenship in his mind

  4. “Do we want a defense secretary who believes the greatest challenge the U.S. faces in the Middle East is the fact that Israel has not made peace with the Palestinians? Not Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Not the rise of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. Not the collapse of Syria. Not the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood. Not the takeover of Lebanon by Hezbollah. Not the return of al Qaeda in Iraq. Just Israel.”

    Many people realize it is precisely this intransigence of Israel’s aggressive and immoral behaviour toward the Palestinians that drive tensions with Iran, Hezbollah, the Muslim Brotherhood and most of the rest of the world. Anyone applying the same common sense standards toward anything else would see this.

  5. jackmorpher

    The Pals and their pals are the authors of their own misfortunes and whine whine whine. Since 1947 when the UN created Israel, as part of ‘self-determination for peoples’ ie ethnic territorial nationalism, ie homeland, they have refused the UN vote and waged endless and permanent war without UN authorization and waged war against civilians and by using civilians as soldiers and as shields and as such are outlaw nations, and as such deserve to be in cages.

    These cages have billion dollar international funding, direct to Swiss bank accounts, armies, radio stations, thriving industries, international diplomatic corps, newspapers, and internal security apparatus. Almost as good as Norwegian cages or prisons. Oh and they have Muslim freedom of religion, the freedom of Muslims to kill each other over Allah, prohibited to them inside Israel proper.

    Peace will come when these outlaws pay sixty years of reparations, rewrite their history books, hang their war leaders, and repudiate jihad in favor of universal rights, vs the apartheid of sharia.

    The West denies the 1300 year Long War, as inconvenient, and it is. Mr Hagel’s mental problem defies analysis, although he is more likely stupid and brittle, vs evil, and his rapprochement with Iran and sharia enemies of our entire western heritage of freedom, suggests the war wounds he received left permanent trauma and fear of violence, a good partner to Mr Kerry who also hates American exceptionalism.

    His Judaization of his own permanent post traumatic stress disorder suggests he is a good Secretary for Surrender, a bad one for Defense.

  6. Dear Ms. Pletka,
    Obama certainly knows how to pick them. But I am afraid it makes no difference anyway because it seems to me that foreign policy is determined by the White House and Obama has ‘withdrawal syndrome’. The game was lost once Obama was re-elected, and I do blame Romney for not putting up a stronger fight in the last debate. The present reality is that vulnerable countries like Israel, South Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, as well as Europe, who have relied on American protection, will have to start relying on themselves for their defenses. France has already decided to act on its own and I notice that South Korea has just launched a rocket.
    No matter what Kerry says, Obama’s actions indicate that he is not going to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Of course I may be wrong, but the longer he waits the more difficult it will be to intervene militarily.
    It might therefore be wise to consider what the consequences of a nuclear Iran will be. Perhaps the AEI could make a study of possible scenarios. What would Iran’s main objectives be? To threaten Israel? Surely, they don’t actually think of using it? Blackmail seems more likely, perhaps inciting Hizbollah and Hamas to strike Israel again? Or to dominate the Arab world? Will Saudi Arabia be in a position to develop a nuclear weapon of their own, and how soon? Should they even be encouraged to do so? What should the answer to such threats be? It is as well to be realistic and see what is coming. In any case, we can look forward to ‘interesting times’ as the Chinese say.

Comments are closed.

Sort By:

Refine Content:


Additional Keywords:

Refine Results

or to save searches.

Refine Content