Hagel pledges "world's strongest military" Chuck Hagel, President Barack Obama's nominee to head the Pentagon, mounted a strong defence of his national security credentials in the face of Republican critics in the Senate accusing him of weakening the US and appeasing its foes. Senate confirmation hearings are staged not unlike grand trials, in high ceilinged wool-panelled rooms, with an arc of imperious senators bearing down on the nominee like judges in a courtroom. Mr Hagel, a Vietnam veteran, might have felt like he was the defendant on Thursday, as he faced the Senate Armed Services Committee, populated with his former Republican colleagues now arrayed in scepticism and sometimes hostility against him. Are you going to answer the question: yes or no? Senator John McCain, a one-time close friend, hissed at one point, pushing Mr Hagel on whether he was wrong to oppose the 2006 "surge" of troops into Iraq. "I am not going to give a "yes or no" answer because things are more complicated than that," replied Mr Hagel, prompting Mr McCain, a former Republican presidential candidate, to suggest he would vote against the nomination. Mr Hagel, a former Nebraska senator, grew close to Mr Obama and earned his trust during the now president's truncated first term in the chamber representing Illinois. But the hearings underlined how Mr Hagel is more than just Mr Obama's nominee to be secretary of defence. H also represents the ongoing schism in US defence and foreign policy which opened in the wake of George W. Bush's decision to invade Iraq in 2003. The war has haunted the Republicans ever since, and many in the party like Mr McCain, who represents Arizona in the Senate, have not forgiven Mr Hagel for breaking ranks to oppose America's role. Mr Hagel has also angered conservatives with his positions on topics like Iran and Israel, the two key policy areas where the defence hawks have been most at odds with the Obama administration. The case against Mr Hagel was made in the opening statement to the hearing by Jim Inhofe, the senior Republican on the committee, from Oklahoma, [Mr Hagel's] record demonstrates what I view as a lack of sound judgment and steadfast support for policies that diminish US power and influence throughout the world, as well as a recent trend of policy reversals that seem based on political expediency rather than core beliefs. In his oral and written testimony, Mr Hagel offered fealty to Israel, saying he had never voted against the US ally in the Senate, and backed tough sanctions against Iran, while keeping a possible military action in reserve. He walked back in detail his past comment that "the Jewish lobby intimidates" many in Congress, saying he should have said "pro-Israel" and "influence." In general, he sought to deflect questions about his past statements by asserting they did not reflect his overall record when taken out of context. It is not a matter of differing objectives. It was a matter of how best to do things," he said. My overall worldview has never changed: that America has and must maintain the strongest military in the world; that we must lead the international community to confront threats and challenges together; and that we must use all tools of American power to protect our citizens and our interests. The run-up to the hearing has been one of the most controversial in recent memory, with a number of anti-Hagel campaign groups spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in television advertisements against him. The groups, funded by anonymous donors, have focused on Mr Hagel's past statements on Iran, Israel and gay rights. Joe Biden, the vice-president, told CNN the notion that Mr Hagel was insufficiently hawkish on defence was "ridiculous." Numerous Republican senators peppered Mr Hagel about his co-authoring of a report from the "Global Zero" movement, which they suggested backed unilateral nuclear disarmament. Mr Hagel denied this, saying all actions were bilateral and negotiated, in line with thinking of US presidents from both parties for decades. "A strong, agile, safe secure, effective, nuclear arsenal for the United States is not debatable," he said.