Hagel: "Very Wrong to Put Troops in Danger -- if more than 2600 die."

[Bucky]

That headline is somewhat garbled in translation. Hagel, who didn't seem to have a problem with the war when there were "only" 2000 dead Americans, has now reached his personal tipping point about Iraq. He's told CBS News that "It is very wrong, Bob, to put American troops in a hopeless, winless situation, just keep feeding them in to--to what's going on. That's irresponsible and that is wrong."

I welcome anyone who's seen the light on the Mesopotamian meatgrinder back in to the world of the sensible. But what I don't get is, why now? All the problems we're facing in Iraq, the general direction away from stability and toward murderous chaos, were perfectly plain to see three months ago, six months ago, two years ago. The course of events from March 2003 to today has been perfectly predictable all along. But at all those august points in time, Senator Hagel kept his mouth mostly shut. He's expressed reservations and been cautious; he's offered frequent caveats about our policy there. But otherwise, he has supported the overall policy of the war and the president's leadership of it.

But now it's "very wrong" to put troops in a hopless situation. Some of us saw this problem coming to more or less this state of affairs before the invasion. I can accept that Hagel was snowed by the administration's spurious use of distorted evidence (e.g. "lies") to get the invasion authorized in the first place. In times of danger Americans have traditionally accepted the leadership of their president in foreign affairs. But Americans should never blindly accept leadership... that's what democracy is all about.

But my question comes back to what changed to make Hagel finally understand the obvious, that if there's no plan to win, no plan to exit, and no plan to reduce the numbers of American dead in Iraq, then the whole operation is a literal meatgrinder. I was being chartible in saying what changed in the "far-sighted" senator's mind was that we've reached an unacceptably high number of American casualities.

I think the more logical number to look at is an unacceptably low number of Americans thinking that Bush has his head screwed on right. When Bush is at 40+% in opinion polls, Hagel can ignored the human consequences of this vanity war. When Bush drops below that magic number, it's time to dust of the ol' backbone and see if it can't save Chucky's credibility.

[Hissyspit]

1. The war was ALWAYS wrong. Illegal, immoral, foolish, a scam.

The war was wrong before ONE American soldier died.

[acmavm]

2. Why now? Because he wants to run for Pres in 2008, that' swhy.

Opportunistic swine that he is.

[Sherman A1]

3. Probably

at least he is saying the words..... Even that can be a huge step forward.

[democrank]

4. Hagel knows the horror of combat

unlike the pathetic "bring it on" tyrant responsible for the invasion of Iraq. I`m glad he`s speaking out and I hope he gets louder.

[Toots]

5. Does Hagel want to "cut n run" now?

Lamont really shook them up I guess :shrug:

[DoYouEverWonder]

6. Some people are slow learners

and it very hard to admit that you were wrong when your decisions helped create this mess.

[City Lights]

7. Hagel's been speaking out for awhile.

Hagel did have a problem with the war when there were "only" 2000 dead Americans.

Do some googling and you'll find lots of examples of him speaking out prior to now.

Your question about what changed to make Hagel see the light is a valid one, however, he, at least, saw the light awhile ago, which is more than I can say for some people.

[NNN0LHI]

8. Is Hagel up for reelection this year by any chance? n/t