[T]he real concern on the left is that Obama is filling out his foreign policy team almost exclusively with people whose instincts were wrong on Iraq. That is not promising if the goal is to change the paradigm through which Washington views its foreign policy options.
There is no doubt that there is value in staffing up with some hawks and some ardent pro-Israeli thinkers if your goal is to move in a more dovish direction. It is wise to protect the right flank. But the Democrats run a risk. Since at least the time of McCarthy, Democrats have consistently found it necessary to protect their right flank, which is why they tend to select Republicans to run the Defense Department. It is a structural feature of American politics that the right wing will attack the Democrats as being soft on defense, even going so far as to concoct intelligence and statistics to make their case.
We saw this happen first with the whole 'Who lost China' debate, then the 'Let's Nuke China' debate, then the 'Let's invade Cuba' debate, then the 'Let's invade Vietnam' debate, then the 'The Soviets have established military superiority' debate, and finally the 'Democrats are soft on terror' debate. At some point, we have to stand up and beat back this structural deficit.
Who lost China? - Chiang Ki Chek & company lost China. The state department hands who had been warning of the impending uprising, those who got China "right" were fired or demoted. As if China were "ours" to lose.
Is there any reason to assume Obama wants to do anything other than continue fighting the GWOT, except move the "theater" from Iraq to Afghanistan? Not really.
Is there any reason to assume that Obama will not acquiesce to the wishes of the Israeli government?
Didn't Obama (as well as Clinton and Edwards) say that "nothing was off the table" in regards to possible responses to Iran, nothing off by implication including nuclear options on the table?
ONLY if the enormity of the ongoing financial crisis (shopping malls and hotels starting to default on loan repayments - another load of toxic collateralized waste about to hit the fan) seeps into the frontal lobes of consciousness of the president-elect and his incoming administration in conjunction with the enormity of the repeated failures of the U.S. military to achieve and implement U.S. political objectives in such places as - Korea, Viet Nam, Iraq and Afghanistan will there be any hope of significantly reducing our military's commitments around the globe.
