As reports emerge that the White House is considering former Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., as a permanent replacement for James Mattis as defense secretary, conservative writers continue to make the case that Webb is the best man for the job.
Webb shares “many of Trump’s views on foreign policy,” explains Washington Examiner contributor Ryan Gidursky of the decorated Vietnam veteran. “Webb, like Trump, was a critic of neoconservative foreign policy including the Iraq War and he vehemently disagreed with former President Barack Obama’s decision to intervene in Libya and Syria.”
“Webb has been calling for a smaller U.S. footprint in the Middle East since the Persian Gulf War,” Jim Antle writes at the Week. “Most importantly, Webb would be an adult in the room capable of responsibly and successfully implementing Trump’s ‘America First’ foreign policy vision instead of trying to thwart it.”
Part of President Trump’s problem in trying to implement a more restrained foreign policy is that the overwhelming majority of potential adviser choices within the Washington pool do not favor restraint. The almost uniform hawkish foreign policy establishment believes Trump is wrong and operates or manipulates accordingly.
Among the most zealous hawks in Washington is Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. When Trump announced he planned to withdraw troops from Syria last month, Graham declared the decision a “disaster” that would be a “stain on the honor of the United States” (Graham has since gone to great lengths to try to get Trump to slow the process). Note: Graham never thinks starting a war or carrying out regime change is ever disastrous or dishonorable. Only abstaining from war is.
It was exactly this attitude that Webb encountered when he joined Graham on “Meet the Press” in July 2007. Graham was defending President George W. Bush and the Iraq War, and Webb was making the opposite case — that the war had gone on too long and American soldiers deserved better respect and treatment than what leadership was giving them.
It got heated.
“I think that this has been a botched occupation,” Webb said to host Tim Russert. “We — all of the things that people like myself were predicting would happen if we went into Iraq are the — exactly the sorts of things that the president and the small group of people who have sort of rallied around him are saying will happen if we leave.”
“We were saying that Iran would be empowered, we were saying that international terrorism would be empowered, we were saying that the reputation of the United States would be diminished around the world, and we were saying the region would become more unstable,” Webb said.
(Note: In the wake of the Iraq War, Iran was empowered, ISIS was created, U.S. credibility sunk internationally, and the region became more unstable.)
It’s almost as if Webb knew what he was talking about.
Defending Bush’s surge strategy, Graham insisted, “I want to leave. No American wants to occupy Iraq.” (Note: 12 years since Graham made this statement, he still vehemently opposes American troops leaving anywhere ever.)
The conversation carried on, with Webb eventually saying of an increasingly animated Graham, “It’s been a hard month, Lindsey. You need to calm down, my friend.”
When Webb tried to explain that “the soldiers and the Marines” were being abused due to over-extended tours of duty, an agitated Graham cut Webb off.
Graham said, “Well, they re-enlist in the highest numbers anywhere than the …”
That’s when Webb forcefully interrupted Graham. “May I speak?” Webb asked.
Webb said he objected to “politicians who put their political views in the mouths of soldiers. You can look at poll after poll and the political views of the United States military are no different than the country writ large.”
“Go take a look at the New York Times today,” Webb said referring to a recent poll. “Less than half of the military believes that we should have been in Iraq in the first place.”
The conversation escalated even more. Graham asked Webb, “Have you ever been to Iraq? Have you ever been?”
After Webb explained that he had covered two wars as a correspondent, had been to Afghanistan, and let’s not forget he’s a twice-wounded Vietnam vet who sure as hell knows what war looks like, Graham pressed further.
“Have you been to Iraq and talked to the soldiers?” Graham needled Webb. That’s when Webb really let Graham have it.
“You know, you haven’t been to Iraq, Lindsey. You go see the dog and pony show. That’s what congressmen do,” referring to the special treatment politicians get when they visit soldiers abroad. “I’ve been a member of the military more than the senator’s been a senator,” Webb shot back.
Graham asked again, wanting to know that if the war was going so badly, why do soldiers keep re-enlisting?
“Because they love their country,” Webb bellowed. “They do not do it for political reasons. … They do it because they have a tradition, and it is the responsibility of our national leaders so make sure that they are used properly.” Graham continued to insist supporting the troops meant supporting the war.
Webb continued to tell Graham to stuff it.
I literally stood up in my living room that day and cheered Webb on my television screen. When I think of Jim Webb, this exchange from 12 years ago is still the first thing that comes to mind. His comments were something that desperately needed to be said on a national platform by someone of his military background, especially at that time.
History has shown Jim Webb was right about the Iraq War and the general drift of U.S. foreign policy, as much as it has proven Lindsey Graham wrong.
Today, when it comes to the long overdue need for a major foreign policy reset, there still aren’t many Washington leaders who agree with Trump.
The president would be wise to pick a secretary of defense who always has.
Jack Hunter (@jackhunter74) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog. He is the former political editor of Rare.us and co-authored the 2011 book The Tea Party Goes to Washington with Sen. Rand Paul.
