Return to Washington Examiner Homepage
May 21, 2013 | 02:47 AM
politics
Washington D.C. weather
Politics

Reversal: Hagel says all options should be on table on Iran

January 31, 2013 | 10:47 am | Modified: January 31, 2013 at 1:05 pm
Leave a comment
Photo -

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.”

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.

From WeeklyStandard.com

  • Ideological Revenue Service

    With three different scandals threatening to consume the White House last week—the Benghazi cover-up, the Justice Department’s seizure of the phone records of dozens of Associated Press...

    Read More...

  • The Real Scandal

    Everyone in Washington, except those in the crosshairs, likes a good scandal, and THE WEEKLY STANDARD is no exception. What’s more, in the case of the Obama administration, comeuppance is well...

    Read More...

  • When It Rains, It Pours

    There is no curse on the second term of presidents. When presidents lose credibility, when trust vanishes and their word is no longer accepted, they have only themselves to blame. That was true...

    Read More...