A First: Two Vietnam War Veterans In Charge Of Our Foreign And Defense Policies

Here we are, 40 years after the Paris Peace Accords ended US involvement in Vietnam, and we finally have two Vietnam War veterans in charge of our State Department and Defense Department, with Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts taking over the State Department on Friday, and former Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska facing a Senate confirmation hearing tomorrow, in which he will be challenged by critics who never served in Vietnam, and could best be described as “chicken hawks”!

Hagel will have a rough reception, but he will be confirmed, rightfully, and he and Kerry will bring a different perspective to our foreign and military policies, the concept of thinking clearly and moving toward confrontation and engagement only when absolutely necessary for our national security and safety.

Kerry and Hagel are a repudiation of neoconservatism, which sees engagement in wars overseas as always a good thing, and constantly looking for places to send military force to promote American capitalist values and Christianity, and in so doing, antagonizing much of the “third world” nations of the Middle East, Africa, Asia, and Latin America. That is why they are fighting so hard to stop Hagel, but they will fail to do that.

Kerry and Hagel know the horrors of war and the reality of military life, and Hagel has war wounds to prove it. They will be excellent advisers to President Barack Obama, and will help to promote sanity in our foreign and military policies. May we wish both of them good fortune as they chart the course of America at a time when rational, sane behavior is essential for America’s revival from a decade of war and economic turmoil.

15 comments on “A First: Two Vietnam War Veterans In Charge Of Our Foreign And Defense Policies

  1. Blue In A Red State January 31, 2013 8:42 am

    Vietnam…another war that we shouldn’t have been involved in.

  2. Juan Domingo Peron January 31, 2013 12:05 pm

    Yes we should have left Vietnam to the Communist. Wait a minute we did that. We abandoned millions of people after the Communist, once they realized that Ford was weak and the Democrat controlled Congress would do nothing, repudiated the Peace Accords, invaded the South and slaughtered millions. What did the Democrat controlled Congress do? In spite of having an obligation by the Treaty to support the South, replacing every tank, plane , artillery lost, they abandoned them. And millions died, not only in Vietnam but in Cambodia, where the Khmer Rouge decapitated and killed millions. The American left, the Kerry’s the Fonda’s and the rest? They just looked the other way because of course , we Americans are always the evil ones.

  3. Juan Domingo Peron January 31, 2013 3:38 pm

    Senator Jim Inhofe asked Chuck Hagel why the Iranians had endorsed his nomination for secretary of defense:”Given that Iran, the people — I’m quoting right now from Iran — people of the Middle East, the Muslim region and North Africa, people of these regions hate America from the bottom of their heart,” said Inhofe. “It further said Israel is a cancerous tumor in the heart of the Islamic world. They further said Iran’s warriors are ready and willing to wipe Israel off the map. The question I’d like to ask you, and you can answer for the record if you’d like, why do you think the Iranian foreign ministry so strongly supports your nomination to be the Secretary of Defense?”

    Hagel responded, “I have a difficult enough time with American politics, Senator. I have no idea, but thank you. And I’ll be glad to respond further for the record.”

    I suggest forget Hagel, he is not important. The important man is Obama, he is in charge, the rest, Clinton, Kerry , Hagel , whoever occupies the seat is just a fuse in case something goes wrong. The correct question would be “Why has Ahmendinejad, Chavez, and Castro endorsed Obama?”

  4. Progressive Girl January 31, 2013 4:27 pm

    Professor,

    Can we have some emote icons around here?

  5. Ronald January 31, 2013 4:39 pm

    Juan, your use of the term “endorse” is a “red herring”, as if Obama is the equivalent of Ahmadinejad, Chavez, and Castro. That is reckless, extreme right wing rhetoric, and unbecoming of someone who has, actually, conducted himself quite responsibly in comments on this blog. I have respected your differences with me on different topics, but this is preposterous. If anything, their so called called “endorsement”, as you term it, could simply be that Obama is NOT like George W. Bush, making a fool of himself, shooting ridiculous comments from the hip, saber rattling like Dick Cheney also was infamous for doing.

    We have to learn to co-exist with our adversaries, as our Presidents of both parties did with Nikita Khrushchev, Leonid Brezhnev and Mikhail Gorbachev of the Soviet Union. Everyone knows that our President will defend Israel if there is any threat from Iran, and promoting anti Muslim rhetoric or saber rattling publicly is unwise and provocative, and does not make the world safer. Iran knows we are ready to use force if necessary, and that our drone program is always available, and that we have the means to bring them to submission, but ONLY if absolutely necessary! I hope you will avoid reckless rhetoric, as it undermines your viewpoints dramatically, and that is why Progressive Girl has written her sarcastic comment above. Let us NOT lower the level of dialogue!

  6. Juan Domingo Peron January 31, 2013 6:25 pm

    Ronald: You misunderstand me. My point is quite the opposite. Obama is not the equivalent of Ahmadinejad, Castro or Chavez in the sense that they consider him weak in foreign policy thus they may not think twice before making a move. I think that ultimately our foes, like China and Iran to name a few, are convinced almost 90% that Obama will not raise a finger to defend the allies of the US and that is why they are on the move. Now maybe as you say Obama will ultimately defend our allies, and that may be the case, but the issue and the danger is that our foes believe that he will not and thus they act accordingly. This is when we are in real danger.When international thugs miscalculate the attitude of the US is when chances of war are more likely. These misunderstanding cause wars.

  7. A Former Conservative January 31, 2013 6:53 pm

    @Juan

    Obama weak? Ha! Ha! Very funny! Let me remind you that Obama took out Bin Laden.

  8. Progressive Girl January 31, 2013 7:09 pm

    @Former Conservative

    Thanks.

  9. Progressive Girl January 31, 2013 7:23 pm

    Perfect one! %OD

  10. Ronald January 31, 2013 8:26 pm

    Thanks, Paul, for demonstrating how much Chavez and Castro have criticized Obama, and needless to say, Ahmadinejad is no fan of Obama either. This is FOX NEWS and right wing radio propaganda, totally untrue!

  11. Juan Domingo Peron February 1, 2013 11:48 am

    Oh well: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/30/hugo-chavez-says-hed-vote_n_1927024.html
    http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/04/politics/us-cuba-mariela-castro/index.htmlhttp://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tehranbureau/2012/11/dispatch-the-irani-take-on-obamas-reelection.html
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/an-interview-with-irans-president-mahmoud-ahmadinejad/2012/09/23/2a645816-05d3-11e2-afff-d6c7f20a83bf_blog.html
    Ignatius: One more question in this nuclear area: When President Obama speaks to the UN General Assembly this week, I think it’s likely that he will repeat a policy he stated last March, which is that if P5+1 talks are not successful, the U.S. is prepared to prevent Iran from gaining a nuclear weapon—that’s Obama’s ‘red line.’ And I want to ask you how you as president of Iran react to this statement of the red line by President Obama.

    Ahmadinejad: “Do you believe that he [Obama] will repeat such a policy?”

    Ignatius: I haven’t seen his speech, but let’s just take the statement he made before, and not guess, and take that as a statement of policy.

    Ahmadinejad: “I think we should just leave that. If he does repeat it, then our answer will be amply clear. But do you really believe the people of the United States support conflict? Will the people of the U.S. accept meddling and intervention in the affairs of others? I don’t believe so. I don’t believe so. I believe the people of the U.S. are peace-loving people. Throughout the history of the relationship no threat has existed to Iran from the people of the United States [and vice versa]. The people of Iran and the United States are friendly…..

  12. A Former Conservative February 1, 2013 6:57 pm

    sigh…..

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.