NV&GWVC. Political Updates. Opposing Chuck Nagel as Secretary of Defense INSIDE THIS ISSUE

Transcription

1 J a nu a ry, V o l u me 1, Is su e 2 NV&GWVC 2020 Pennsylvania Ave. #961, Washington, D.C address: info@veterans-coalition.org Political Updates By Chairman John J. Molloy The purpose of a newsletter is to provide specialized information to a targeted audience, our veterans and their families. INSIDE THIS ISSUE Political Updates 1 Opposing Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense 2/3 NV&GWVC Opposes John Kerry as Secretary of State 4 It is important that you understand the nature of the NV&GWVC as a 501C4, Political Organization. We have the right to evaluate and endorse national candidates coming up for election and/or re-election, and also the capability and responsibility to bring you the latest in legislation as it pertains to veterans and homeland security. The transmits to you the latest information regarding legislation that interests our organization and that we can apply and respond thereto accordingly. Please feel free to address the author(s) with any questions and/or concerns. Thank you. Opposing Chuck Nagel as Secretary of Defense By Larry J. O Daniel The National Vietnam and Gulf War Veterans Coalition opposes the nomination of Chuck Hagel to the post of Secretary of Defense. While Hagel may match the views of President Obama, and we believe that he does in many instances, the providing of the President with "bipartisan cover" for wrong-headed views, is no reason to accept Hagel's nomination. Hagel is a wrong choice for all the wrong reasons and there are many other choices that would put the Department of Defense into capable and more experienced hands. The main reasons for opposing Hagel are his naive and uninformed views on issues facing the United States Defense Community these days. We are well aware of Hagel's Vietnam service, but that service did not advance his recognition of contemporary life and death issues. These issues include the following: In 2001, Hagel voted against renewing sanctions against two of the then most Please see Opposing on page 2

2 Page 2 Opposing from page 1 notorious terror backing regimes: Iran and Libya. In 2007, Hagel voted against placing the Iran Revolutionary Guards Corps on a list of terrorist organizations. In 2008, he voted against Iran sanctions. above votes, Hagel, in discussing Israel, refused to use highly significant terms like "defensible borders" instead using nebulous terms like "free to live in peace and security." Those with knowledge of UN Resolution 242 know the significance and meaning behind the lack of using the term defensible borders. In October 2000, Hagel voted against a resolution supporting our ally Israel when the Islamist terrorists declared their second Intifada. In 2006, he refused to ask the European Union to label Hezbollah as a terrorist organization. In 2009, he urged President Obama to negotiate directly with the Islamist terrorist organization, Hamas. In line with, or perhaps because of the above votes, he made a thoroughly distasteful statement to former Mideast negotiator, Aaron David Miller that he was not "intimidated" by what he called the "Jewish lobby" because he was a "United States Senator" and not an "Israeli Senator." Any conservative would be disqualified for the position by having public views like this. His Vietnam experience taught him little about the current counterinsurgency strategy against Islamist terrorism. While he had access to classified information behind our overthrowing the Saddam Hussein regime (besides the unclassified WMD reason), he has refused to acknowledge the four casus belli for our war against that terrorist backing regime. Likewise, with Afghanistan, he refuses to acknowledge the Al Qaeda - Taliban cooperation and nexus for our continuation of efforts to thwart terrorist activity in that country. Little, if anything, can be found where Hagel spoke about the intelligence snafu in Benghazi despite the fact Hagel is part of the President's Intelligence Advisory Board Again, in line with, or perhaps because of the Please see Opposing on page 3 Hagel voted against a resolution supporting our ally Israel when the Islamist terrorists declared their second Intifada..

3 Page 3 Opposing from page 2 His views on defense are hugely troubling. Last year, without specifications or justification, Hagel told the Financial Times, the Defense Budget needed cutting, that it was "bloated". Even liberal Leon Panetta, when faced with sequestration on top of Obama cuts said such cuts would be "devastating" to the department. This puts current armed forces personnel in jeopardy. Hagel is a nuclear disarmist and against the United States having missile defenses. Israel is currently showing the logic of having working defenses. However, like President Obama, Hagel is bowing to the Russian, Putin, and his anti-us defense policies on these issues. Perhaps the nomination of Hagel sends Russia the meaning of post-election "flexibility" like it sends to Islamists a message about the true views of Obama on Israel. introduce technology at home, and to the students Obviously, President Obama, after the Rice fiasco, is gambling on the Hagel nomination. Obviously, Hagel enjoys the confidence of Obama. However, for veterans, Hagel is the wrong person for the wrong job with the wrong qualifications. Providing political cover with a "bipartisan" pick for upcoming proposed defense cuts in this time of terrorist danger is unacceptable. The teflon President should state his agenda plainly and likewise should pick qualified personnel from his own party to justify the unjustifiable to head the Defense Department. After the assassination of Usama Bin Laden by the Obama ordered killing, rather than the capture which was highly obtainable, the nomination of Hagel sends the wrong message to the armed forces that assassination and war crimes are to be tolerated (Hagel defended the probable war crimes of then SEAL Robert Kerrey as being an everyday occurrence). Hagel went so far as to even endorsing Kerrey for election in the 2012 contest in Nebraska. Hagel has been so scarred by war that he was quoted as saying "I am going to do everything I can to assure that war is the last resort that we, a nation, a people, calls upon to settle a dispute." While few like war, such a quote means much in light of his other views. Larry J. O Daniel is the author of, Missing in Action: Trail of Deceit Now you can purchase Larry s recent book: Trails of Deceit Buy it online here at the Coalition Store

4 Page 4 NV&GWVC Opposes John Kerry as Secretary of State January 1, 2013 By Larry J. O Daniel The National Vietnam and Gulf War Veterans Coalition stands opposed to the ascendency of John Forbes Kerry to the position of Secretary of State. It would be a disaster for one of our main Mideast allies, Israel. Kerry is on the wrong side of diplomacy there as he has been wrong diplomatically most of his adult life. Benghazi shows that the State Department, as well as most of the Executive Department on foreign affairs, is advancing in the wrong direction. Kerry would accelerate that tendency, if not actually run us off the cliff. Kerry opposes the bedrock foundation of our diplomacy in the Mideast, UN Resolution 242. His meetings in 2009 and 2010 with the Syrian Vice- President and the Qatar Amir shows his utter naiveté about the on ground problems. Or, perhaps, it shows that he really cares little about the security of our ally, Israel. Israel has an absolute right to the Jordan Valley, West Bank, Jerusalem, and the territory it received in the 1967 conflict in which it was forced to fight for its life. It has more than fulfilled any obligation of Resolution 242 in withdrawing from some of that territory in the to date vain attempt to carve a defensible border. In October 1988, 100 retired Generals and Admirals, 7 of 4 star rank, urged Israel not to retire from Judea and Samaria because it would lose its extensive early warning line. "Pressing Israel to withdraw from this line will bring neither peace nor serve America's interests." The opposition, Hamas in particular, refuses to acknowledge Israel and Kerry made it plain he wants Israel to return to the state that brought on the 1967 conflict in the first place. Today, Israel would be in a worse position than then because of the advance of her enemies beyond the "bayonet days" existing when the Joint Chiefs told President Johnson what constituted a minimum defensible border for Israel then. Today, Israel is learning a hard lesson on what happens when too much is given back as rockets rain on her from previously held territory. Kerry would push a "Vietnam" solution on Israel, like when he backed the enemies of the Republic of Vietnam, ensuring her eventual defeat. He learned nothing from his mistakes then. Leaving an enemy in the midst of a friendly country is almost certainly a fatal prescription. Conceding part of Jerusalem to the Islamists and agreeing it was a "non-negotiable" item is not diplomacy, it makes Chamberlain blush in his grave. Kerry would push a "Vietnam" solution on Israel Please see Opposing Kerry on page 5

5 Page 5 We re on the Web! Visit us at: His newly revealed "off the books" diplomacy shows he lacks the most elementary part of the job of Secretary of State, representing the vital interests of the United States, not the private values of an amateur president. Resolution 242 mandates no "right of return" for Islamists. It does mandate defensible borders and Kerry has already privately assured the enemies of Israel he would throw that away. For that reason alone, not to mention hundreds of positions over the years contrary to United States vital interests, beginning with his opposing the foreign policy of the United States, while in uniform, he should be soundly rejected. He now opposes our vital interests, and those of our allies, in tailored suits from an ivory tower. This would require a "stiff spine" vote in the Senate, not often found in a "gentleman's club." Such a rejection would send a message to our allies, we are not fair weather friends. It would also send a huge message to the White House, pick an "honest broker" not one who is predisposed to a sell-out of a long-time friend who watches our back in that part of the world, as it proved in late 2002 in keeping our soldiers safe from an attack prior to going into Iraq. Larry J. O' Daniel is a former Captain, USAR, Military Intelligence. Cross trained in Intelligence, Infantry, Electronic Warfare, Tactical Cover and Deception, and Counterinsurgency, he was a field operative in the Vietnam Phoenix Program. There, he was awarded the Combat Infantryman's Badge, Vietnam Cross of Gallantry with Bronze Star (individual award equivalent to the US Bronze Star with V Device), and other individual and group awards. Pending are the Army Commendation and Air Medal awards. In 2002, he helped jump start an information sharing program in Arizona. He likewise helped jump start an information sharing program in November, 2004 for CENTCOM Iraq. He is the Chairman of the 250,000 member Coalition POW Committee and member of their counter-terrorism committee. Larry can be reached for comment at: