Saturday, October 1st | 28 Elul 5776

Close

Be in the know!

Get our exclusive daily news briefing.

Subscribe
January 3, 2013 8:51 am
5

Chuck Hagel, Obama’s Legacy Destroyer

avatar by Dovid Efune

Email a copy of "Chuck Hagel, Obama’s Legacy Destroyer" to a friend

Chuck Hagel in Kuwait.

If President Obama nominates former Senator Chuck Hagel to replace Leon Panetta as Defense Secretary, it will not only serve as a monumental middle finger to the pro-Israel community, but it will likely secure the destruction of the President’s historic legacy.

In front of about a thousand people at a recent gala for the Iranian American Jewish Federation Professor Alan Dershowitz spoke frankly about some of his recent interactions with Obama, adding that he knew the President from his Harvard Law School days.

Dershowitz confirmed the details of his anecdotes to me in a phone conversation.

Related coverage

September 30, 2016 3:06 pm
0

Shimon Peres, a Leader for All Seasons

Shimon Peres understood the Biblical verse “to everything there is a season.” When he was a young man working for David Ben-Gurion,...

The law professor told the audience that during a recent trip to Israel, he received a phone call on his cellphone from the White House which asked if he could speak to the President. As he found himself at “a very crowded Georgian restaurant” at the time of the call, he asked if they could speak later. Dershowitz dashed to his hotel room to receive the President’s call.

“You are currently in Israel,” the President said, “What are the three things that the Israelis are most thinking about?” “I’ll tell you,” responded Dershowitz, “number one is Iran, number two is Iran and number three is Iran.”

Dershowitz said that in his conversations with the President he brought up a Wall Street Journal article he had published in 2010, where we writes:

“Most people today are not aware that British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain helped restore Great Britain’s financial stability during the Great Depression and also passed legislation to extend unemployment benefits, pay pensions to retired workers and otherwise help those hit hard by the slumping economy. But history does remember his failure to confront Hitler. That is Chamberlain’s enduring legacy.”

Dershowitz concludes:

“…it is Chamberlain who has come to symbolize the failure to prevent Hitler’s ascendancy. So too will Mr. Obama come to symbolize the failure of the West if Iran acquires nuclear weapons on his watch.”

Heading into his second term, the President surely has his legacy on his mind.

When asked by David Gregory on NBC’s Meet the Press about his goals for the next four years, Obama mentioned three. Iran was not on the list.

Politico’s eBook, “The End of the Line,” cites a senior Obama aide describing the President’s attitude toward his re-election: “It was weighing on him how much was at stake,” the aide said, “How much of his entire legacy was on the line. His legacy had not been determined by the previous four years; that wouldn’t matter to history. It was all about the outcome on Election Day.”

How right the aide was, but not because of Obama’s gun control ambitions, or his plans to fix the “broken immigration system,” or even his work to “stabilize the economy and make sure it’s growing,” and the “huge opportunity around energy,” that Obama mentioned to Gregory. The reason why Obama’s entire legacy rests on the next four years is because it is in these four years that Iran will either achieve nuclear capability, or will be stunted by the free world.

Which brings me back to Hagel, who may just be the worst possible candidate for the role of halting Iran’s nuclear advances, and he is no rubber stamp either. Anyone whom I have spoken to who has actually met the man says that he is particularly dogmatic and evangelist in his views.

“I would say that a military strike against Iran, a military option, is not a viable, feasible, responsible option,” said Hagel in 2006.

Hagel’s reference to the “Jewish lobby” and the coldness, bordering hostility that he showed Nebraska’s Jewish community while he was in office, pale in comparison to what his appointment would mean for the Iranian issue.

For Obama to position Hagel in the US government role that will most impact Iran’s nuclear future amounts to a leap in the direction of ensuring that he will forever be remembered as the President that failed to prevent the genocidal Iranian regime from acquiring the tools with which to carry out its maniacal ambitions.

The author is the editor of The Algemeiner and director of the GJCF and can be e-mailed at defune@gjcf.com.


Share this Story: Share On Facebook Share On Twitter Email This Article

Let your voice be heard!

Join the Algemeiner
  • Grantman

    From the article: “… it will likely secure the destruction of the President’s historic legacy.”

    Hahaha! Nothing will destroy his legacy if the MSM continues to be his lapdog and Jews continue to support him by margins shown in the last two elections. I’m almost convinced that if a mushroom cloud was rising above Tel Aviv, American Jews would still find a way to support this man.

    As far as the symbolic middle finger, he’s been giving that to America his whole life. Nothing new here…move along.

    Sigh……..

  • Mr. Obama’s apparent longing for a legendary legacy is undoubtedly due in part to an ego generously endowed, but it’s also understandably human. For instance, when the United States of America finally elect a woman President, I’m certain that she’ll be forgiven for wanting to be known as something more than the first Commander-in-Chief with lady parts.

    The nomination of Hagel would be disconcerting, if only because it would raise concerns (necessary or otherwise) well in advance of any actual diplomacy taking place. Does the Middle East really need more drama?

    Hagel’s nomination, as anything more than a straw candidate, may be proof positive that Mr. Obama still labours under the illusion that Israel needs to be pressured to come to the peace table. I worry that (with no big wins visible on the home horizon) the President may feel the need to force a win on the international front to support his flagging legacy.

  • Mr. Obama’s apparent longing for a legendary legacy is undoubtedly due in part to an ego generously endowed, but it’s also understandably human. For instance, when the United States of America finally elect a woman President, I’m certain that she’ll be forgiven for wanting to be known as something more than the first Commander-in-Chief with lady parts.

    The nomination of Hagel would be disconcerting, if only because it would raise concerns (necessary or otherwise) well in advance of any actual diplomacy taking place. Does the Middle East really need more drama?

    Hagel’s nomination, as anything more than a straw candidate, may be proof positive that Mr. Obama still labours under the illusion that Israel needs to be pressured to come to the peace table. I worry that (without no big wins visible on the home horizon) the President may feel the need to force a win on the international front to support his flagging legacy.

    • please delete this one, thx

  • Fredric M. London

    There is a big difference between Neville Chamberlain and Obama. Chamberlain was acting in cowardly fashion, depending on hope, not logic. Obama, however, has an agenda in mind, the facilitation of the rise of radical Islam. His fear of Iran, if he has any, is minimal. He believes that radical Islam is progressive, and Israel is evil. Unlike Chamberlain, whom, I believe, acted in good faith or at least in good hope, Obama’s motives are obvious. He is not acting out of fear, he is acting in defense of his murderous friends.

Algemeiner.com