The heated debate over Chuck Hagel’s nomination as Secretary of Defense has led to the resurgence of the "chickenhawk" meme: the idea that a lot of armchair generals, who never served in the military, are criticizing a Vietnam veteran with two Purple Hearts for "appeasement" of our alleged enemies is grating on many ears. The chickenhawk meme came up in a recent New York Times piece on the controversy surrounding Hagel:
"In [a 2003 interview with the Times, Hagel] took a swipe at [Richard]. Perle, then one of the most visible promoters of the war, saying, ‘Maybe Mr. Perle would like to be in the first wave of those who go into Baghdad.’"
"Mr. Perle had never served in the military. Along with Mr. Hagel’s comment in Newsweek that many of the war’s most steadfast proponents don’t know anything about war,’ his criticism prompted a national discussion about ‘chicken hawks,’ a derisive term for those advocating war with no direct experience of it. And his comments drew a rebuke from The Weekly Standard that Mr. Hagel was part of an ‘axis of appeasement.’"
Go and google "Chuck Hagel chickenhawks" and you’ll come up with a load of commentary linking Hagel’s neoconservative critics to this derisive term. Is it fair?
On the face of it: no. It appears to be an ad hominem argument – that is, a talking point that attacks someone for who they are, rather than what they are actually saying – and it is therefore a logical fallacy. Case closed – or is it?
Well, not quite. Because it’s essential to remember the context in which the chickenhawk meme is making its reappearance. If you recall, during the run up to the invasion of Iraq, an entire platoon of top military brass, active and retired, pushed back againt the Bush regime’s war talk and, as the Washington Post dutifully reported at the time, warned of the coming disaster:
"Despite President Bush’s repeated bellicose statements about Iraq, many senior U.S. military officers contend that President Saddam Hussein poses no immediate threat and that the United States should continue its policy of containment rather than invade Iraq to force a change of leadership in Baghdad."
The generals argued that containment was working, and "Another concern is that Iraq could split up under a U.S. attack, potentially leading to chaos and the creation of new anti-American regimes and terrorist sanctuaries in the region." The Pentagon’s anti-interventionist critique of the neocons’ war plans was eerily prescient: the military brass worried about "How to predict the costs of a post-victory occupation, which presumably would require tens of thousands of U.S. troops, not only to keep the peace and support the successor regime, but also to prevent Iraq from breaking up. Also, officials worry, a large U.S. presence might antagonize Arab public opinion as well as impose heavy financial and human costs on the U.S. military, which already feels stretched by the war on terrorism and peacekeeping commitments in the Balkans."
Retired Marine commander Joseph P. Hoar testified in front of Congress a few days after that piece came out, opening his remarks with:
"When I was a young officer, my government miscalculated the nature of the war in Southeast Asia, and we paid the price. We’re about to do that again in Iraq."
Hagel, who voted for the war authorization but expressed a high degree of skepticism at the time, turned quickly against the Bush war policy and earned the eternal enmity of the neocons for his outspoken stance – the only Republican in the Senate to raise his voice. In Vietnam, as he was being carried off on a stretcher along with his wounded brother, then Sergeant Hagel vowed to oppose unnecessary wars and give voice to the grunts who bore the brunt of the politicians’ folly – and this is the real core of the neocons’ problem with him. Because they can’t really mount a challenge to this kind of critique: Eliot Cohen tried, but his argument urging us to "disregard what appears to be President Obama’s chief case for nominating him: that he served honorably as a sergeant in Vietnam, where he was twice wounded in combat" was pathetically weak:
"What is it, precisely, that one would bring by service as a sergeant in a war more than 40 years past — almost as distant from today as the charge up San Juan Hill was from D-Day, or the Battle of New Orleans was from Gettysburg? It was an important, even searing, life experience, no doubt. But the technology, strategy, tactics and organization now are all utterly different. Today, we have a hardened professional army, not a band of reluctant conscripts caught up in the Big Green Machine.
"Does combat service uniquely produce empathy with the troops, an awareness of the horrors of wounds and violent death? Visits to a military hospital will bring one to that. Did Defense Secretary Bob Gates care any less about the troops because he wasn’t hit by shrapnel during his Air Force service?"
Cohen glides past Hagel’s battlefield epiphany as easily as a snake slithers through the grass, but it’s worth looking at that moment of clarity and how it came about in order to understand why Cohen not only doesn’t want to get, but can’t get it.
Hagel was no "reluctant conscript," he volunteered to be sent to Vietnam. He and his brother were both wounded on two occasions, and the second incident, when a mine went off beneath their armored personnel carrier, had a lasting psycho-ideological effect on the future Senator and SecDef nominee. Hagel suffered severe burns, and the impact knocked his brother out, as Politico reports.
"’He pulled me off, I don’t remember but I was told,’ Tom Hagel said. ‘I was unconscious for a while.’
"Chuck Hagel recalled the incident to the Library of Congress this way: ‘We took the earphones off of him. He had blood running out of his ears and his nose. And I didn’t know if he was dead. So we got him off. I threw him off, and I fell on top of him as we dove off.’
"They escaped under heavy machine-gun fire. After being transported out, Chuck Hagel says he made a resolution.
"’I remember sitting on that track, another track, waiting for the dust-off [helicopter] to come and medical evacuation, and thinking to myself, you know, if I ever get out of all of this, 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,’ he said. ‘The horror of it, the pain of it, the suffering of it. People just don’t understand it unless they’ve been through it. There’s no glory, only suffering in war."
The soft-bodied pencil-necked geeks who populate the op ed page of the Washington Post, with their endless articles demanding we intervene here, there, and everywhere, not only don’t get it – they will never get it precisely because military service isn’t something you’re likely to find in the typical neocon’s résume. Senor Cohen can’t replicate what Hagel went through – and the insight he gained from the experience – by visiting a military hospital, because, after all, nothing comparable has ever happened to him. Is it really necessary to point out that it’s one thing to see someone without a leg, or any arms, and quite another to actually not have a leg or any arms? Apparently the distinction is too subtle for Cohen, the neocons’ major military theorist, to grasp.
No, a military man who’s been wounded and received two Purple Hearts for his or her bravery isn’t necessarily going to be right about whether or not we ought to go to war. During the Vietnam war there were plenty of brass who disdained the "hippies" who were against the war, and insisted we keep fighting until "victory," and they were wrong. In Hagel’s particular case, however, his battlefield insight was proved right, and not just about the Vietnam war: the officers and veterans who opposed the Iraq war and the "surge" were 100 percent correct in their assessment – just as they’re right in their very public opposition to the prospect of war with Iran. This is the verdict the neocons want to reverse, and it is what’s driving their hate campaign against Hagel.
The post-Vietnam military establishment has opposed the neocons’ "regime change" agenda at every turn: in Iraq, and now with the drive to war with Iran. When Gen. Jack Dempsey, head of the Joint Chiefs, took the unusual move of publicly declaring he did not want to be "complicit" in an Israeli attack on Iran, the neocons could barely contain their outrage. For weeks, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had been threatening an Israeli attack on Tehran, which – he implied – would inevitably draw in the US. Dempsey’s dissent – calling into question Bibi’s complacent assumption of unconditional American support — put the kibosh on that one.
The neocons know who their enemies are: not only Hagel, but the old hands of the military and diplomatic community, who have to a man come out swinging in Hagel’s defense. As the squawking of Washington’s chickenhawks threatens to drown out voices of reason, the American people – and their representatives in the US Senate – would do well to ask themselves why that is.
NOTES IN THE MARGIN
I’m on Twitter quite a bit these days, and you might want to follow me here.
Here is the link for buying the second edition of my 1993 book, Reclaiming the American Right: The Lost Legacy of the Conservative Movement, with an Introduction by Prof. George W. Carey, a Forward by Patrick J. Buchanan, and critical essays by Scott Richert and David Gordon.
Buy my biography of the great libertarian thinker, An Enemy of the State: The Life of Murray N. Rothbard, here.
Read more by Justin Raimondo
- Hagel Nomination:
The Revenge of the Realists – January 10th, 2013 - The Hagel Battle:
‘Why is Obama Doing This?’ – January 8th, 2013 - Israel’s Anti-Black Pogrom – January 6th, 2013
- It’s Not All About Israel – January 3rd, 2013
- Predictions, 2013 – December 30th, 2012
The Chickenhawk Meme - Unofficial Network
January 13th, 2013 at 10:05 pm
[...] View original article. [...]
MvGuy
January 13th, 2013 at 10:41 pm
Mr. Raimondo must be feeling better these days or he probably wouldn't be so optimistic and enthusiastic about Hagel….. I sure hope that his faith is rewarded…. and the nomination is successful. Even more I hope Senator Hagel can deflate the "conquer the world" mindset that seems to propel those who wish for him to fail.. Perhaps he could bring the substitution of "broad spectrum dominance" over the "full spectrum dominance" which the "unipolar moment" crew dreams of…. It's looking good for this nomination at this moment to me…..
RickR30
January 14th, 2013 at 12:15 am
I don't see it as an ad hominem attack. You're not attacking the person to divert from the argument. You are engaging the argument and pointing out the repugnant hypocrisy of those who wouldn't dare set foot anywhere near flying bullets. Let alone send their children, grandchildren, cousin's children or anyone vaguely related either. So much better to demand from their comfort of their mansions that others do the dying for their deranged ideas. If that weren't sickening enough, their arguments are fallacy manuals. My favorite is their cheap pathetic self-serving appeal to flattery of America to get Americans to do immoral things. "America is the exceptional, indispensable nation, the sole superpower that has to project leadership, that has been entrusted with the role that only America can fulfill, blah blah"… namely to kill hundreds of thousands of poor, starving, dark skinned foreigners.
Kolya Krassotkin
January 14th, 2013 at 1:11 am
The soft-bodied pencil-necked geeks who populate the op ed page of the Washington Post, with their endless articles demanding we intervene here, there, and everywhere, not only don’t get it – they will never get it precisely because military service isn’t something you’re likely to find in the typical neocon’s résume.
Take heart. People are so sick of the evil the neocons have released upon the country and humanity that the gloves are coming off. They see what sociopaths and slimey cowards Kristol, Krauthammer, Perle and the Kagans have been and they no longer fear to openly call them as such.
It's moments like this I sometimes find myself wishing we were a full-fledged banana republic: Seeing all of them up against the wall before a firing squad or on the scaffold would be a delicious moment and the best any of them deserves.
sherban
January 14th, 2013 at 5:08 am
A week before Philip Giraldi wrote an article which asked rhetorically if US and Israel are going to fascism and you,as Raimondo, remained obsessed with the neocons:Perle,Kagans,Elliots ans still some more.Giraldi's view-if i understood correct-is more realistic:Israeli fascist is pushing American fascists to a permanent war of total hegemony and ,probably,American fascists are pushing Israel to continue her policy of dispossession of Palestinians and of provocation for Arab nations and Islamic religion.I think that is naive to believe that a hand of people and not a complete system grounds on ideology of messianism expressed by formulas as "a nation of leaders and not of followers",are doing all the mess which is the actual politics.
greedrulesinDC
January 14th, 2013 at 6:02 am
Or facing a life sentence in federal lock-up, hopefully guarded by the people who lost sons and daughters in their ridiculous wars.
richard vajs
January 14th, 2013 at 6:55 am
I notice that Mr. Giraldi is to be on a panel discussion to be examining the ties between Christian Zionism and Islamophobia. I applaud his courage. There may only be a limited number of politically powerful neocons but there are millions of Christian Zionists, all of them very useful tools for the neocons. Of all of the forces driving America into a disastrous war on Islam, Christian Zionism with its love of Armageddon and universal death, is in Charles Bukowski's words, "the most leprous hot dog in the pot".
Geraldo Kaprosy
January 14th, 2013 at 6:59 am
The "Neo-com" meme will outlive the "Chickenhawk" meme.
carroll price
January 14th, 2013 at 7:24 am
You will notice that practically every chickenhawk opposing Chuck Hagel's nomination are members of a particular tribe that is known for instigating self-serving wars for non-tribe members to fight. How much longer are the American people going to put up with an alien tribe being in control of their future?
Mark
January 14th, 2013 at 7:43 am
The latest from Carolyn Glick dot com http://www.carolineglick.com/e/2013/01/chuck-hage…
Know thine enemy…
Kolya Krassotkin
January 14th, 2013 at 8:02 am
The neo-con "meme" is rooted in reality. It is why it will persist. If neo-con is a false meme. Then, so, too are n*zi, tea-partiers and bolshevik. To insist that there is no such thing as the neo-cons is the same as insisting La Cosa Nostra never existed.
Bob D
January 14th, 2013 at 8:07 am
You seem to use the term "fascism" the way the Zionists use the word "antisemitism". It is inaccurate on so many levels. And something a neocon would legitimately see as fraudulent. The Israelis don't respect private property to the point of fanaticism the way a fascist would. They bomb Palestinian homes at their leisure without due process. How about "Apartied", at least to describe Israel?
tom dee
January 14th, 2013 at 8:32 am
I look at the chicken hawks and I do not like them. I look at the fiasco in Iraq which would never have happened except for the efforts of the chicken hawks. I realize that I have little power to stop the chicken hawks. I see they hate chuck hagel which is why I support Chuck because he is hated by the chicken hawks. As a wounded veteran is knows what the human cost of war. The chicken hawks have made enough profits from that wars that never should have happened.
abe
January 14th, 2013 at 9:21 am
Yes Carrol Price it is that filthy disgusting warmongering TRIBE, Excellent way to manovoer thru the
censors that Even here ban certain TRUTHS. If this tribe does not want to be assaulted then I suggest the tribe destroy the filth. Oh and guess who are the BIGGEST LOUDMOUTHS for taking America's guns…..Thats right the TRIBE!
Generalissimo X
January 14th, 2013 at 10:07 am
yeh laying there in a ditch he vowed to prevent useless wars..(paraphrased)…well then i would have had more respect for him if he had out right voted no on the war authorization for iraq. he's a brave man, and i'd like to think he'll be a voice of reason, maybe even prevent an iranian invasion (or syria) but the best i can think is time will tell.
as for the neocons…how they have legitimacy and are not literally swinging from ropes for high treason is literally beyond me. i would go so far as to say our entire system and constitution are completely irrelevant as long as these slimey little lying warmongers are allowed to walk free in society.
TimW
January 14th, 2013 at 10:39 am
You are not alone in having that fantasy, Kolya. I have it as well. Except with a slight variation. With bullets being so expensive and precious these days, and with a Civil War 2 about to unfold to free ourselves from a Communist totalitarian cabal who are lusting to disarm law abiding citizens, we must not waste ammunition on these vile monsters. Therefore, my fantasy about the evil neo-cons involves chain saws and wood chippers.
Kolya Krassotkin
January 14th, 2013 at 10:52 am
That the "neocons never existed" or that they were "unimportant in leading us over the foreign policy cliff" are other memes the usual suspects are pushing in order to salvage their rightfully damaged credibility.
While the neocons probably weren't a formal conspiracy, something very hard to prove, we can easily recognize that for at least the last 20 years there has existed a rabble who shared the same views, many of whom were highly placed in government, and who all worked on behalf of drawing the US into bankruptingly expensive and optional wars. (Whether or not they all signed their names in blood on some secret document in some dimly lit backroom in some back alley doesn't matter a whit.)
Or, to put it another way, that swarm of killer bees working to sting you to death aren't acting as a dangerous conspiracy, but the fact that each is trying to kill you independent of the others, (a consensus), continues to make them a real and identifiable threat.
Kolya Krassotkin
January 14th, 2013 at 10:54 am
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
chill1184
January 14th, 2013 at 11:12 am
Chickenhawks aren't just limited to neocons like Bill Kristol, Ted Nugent, Limbaugh, O'Reily, and Pamela Geller for example. There are plenty of liberals who have no problem starting wars for "humanitarian" purposes like the Clintons, Obama, Franken, most if not all the Hollywood left for example.
@charleycaruso
January 14th, 2013 at 11:14 am
I wish evybody wld stop using the term 'neocons' and call them what they are.
It wld explain their enthusiasm for wars everywhere that 'non-necons' fight.
Everything comes to an end. Listening, Mr. Foxman?
omop
January 14th, 2013 at 12:01 pm
As a resident of Southern France Richard Perle has always supported wars to support zionist aims. As mentioned in previous comments its time Americans took over control of their country rather than be ordered by people who hold multiple royalties to other states.
Perle and his ilk are parasites and parasites need pesticides.
Sam
January 14th, 2013 at 12:04 pm
Philip Weiss, MJ Rosenberg, Greenwald , Avreny and many others see it the same way. Peace is far better for all.
john
January 14th, 2013 at 2:22 pm
I served with Chuck Hagel in Vietnam but in another platoon (first). We rotated back home on the same day, Dec. 4, 1968. Very few of us made it through a full tour but I did with severe PTSD. I hope that Chuck Hagel is the voice of reason that he portrays himself to be. Let us never forget that he voted for war against Iraq. I would bet dollars to donuts that our government along with Israel were involved in the WTC. When people still beat Germany for its crimes against humanity I almost vomit at the hypocrisy of the scum of this government.
byrd_bahls22
January 14th, 2013 at 4:15 pm
Rummy and Cheney are probably having hissy fits. They aren't able to snarl, and hiss through clenched teeth on prime time, but you never know….the old coots might just emerge from the muck to have a say.
davidgrayling
January 14th, 2013 at 4:57 pm
MvGuy, the U.S. is full of chickehawks, them and indoctrinated kids who go off to kill and plunder wherever and whenever their officers tell them.
Chickenhawks and Goons, the U.S. is full of them. They are destroying our world, turning humans back into savages.
Evolution has stopped. The Dark Ages are coming back.
Malignant Americans!
gia
January 14th, 2013 at 8:18 pm
looky justin tryin to hide behind a christian looking white man. How cute is that. A republican too. No doubt those fags in the military would want to kill everyone in the middle east or at least make them do things. So cute. Gay people have spent along time trying to prove themselves in the military. Bring a bit of gayness around the world. So cute, maybe Rahm can do a bit of ballet.
Strider55
January 15th, 2013 at 1:25 am
During the 1960s-70s the "Italian Anti-Defamation League" scurried from coast to coast claiming La Cosa Nostra didn't exist. They went totally apoplectic when The Godfather hit the theaters.
Strider55
January 15th, 2013 at 1:41 am
Wow, either great minds think alike or people here are channeling my comments (or both). "Chill1184" has channeled this post, while "abe" and "richard vajs" have channeled this one. It is both flattering and humbling. Keep up the channeling, y'all, and may the Force be with you. ;-)