Former Sen. Chuck Hagel, testifying at his confirmation hearing to be Secretary of Defense, asserted that all options should be on the table for preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. But in the past, he argued that this would be an irresponsible option.

“I am fully committed to the President’s goal of preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, and – as I’ve said in the past – all options must be on the table to achieve that goal,” Hagel said in his opening statement before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday.

But back in 2006, Hagel stated that, “a military strike against Iran, a military option, is not a viable, feasible, responsible option.” He explained that, “I believe a political settlement will be the answer. Not a military settlement. All these issues will require a political settlement.”

Sign Up for the Politics Today newsletter!

Please enter your email address below to begin receiving the Politics Today newsletter.

You must enter a valid email address in the field above!

Thank you for signing up for the Politics Today newsletter! You should receive your first newsletter very soon.

We're sorry, there was an error processing your newsletter signup. Please click here to visit our Newsletter Signup Center to register for this newsletter.

In his own opening statement, Sen. James Inhofe, the committee’s ranking Republican member, said that Hagel’s reversals on a number of national security issues in the run up to his confirmation hearings were rooted in political expedience.

UPDATE: Under questioning from Sen. Kelly Ayotte, Hagel tried to argue that what he really meant in 2006 was that a military strike wasn’t a “preferable” option.