Clinton And Foreign Policy

[CHUQ]

I have got to get a copy of the magazine and read the entire article. Butr here is a bit of her stand.



WASHINGTON, Oct 15 (IPS) - In her most comprehensive -- if characteristically cautious -- foreign policy pronouncement to date, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton stressed a clear preference for diplomacy and "soft power" in pursuing U.S. interests abroad, but added she would not hesitate to use military force unilaterally if she deemed it necessary.

In a lengthy article entitled "Security and Opportunity for the Twenty-first Century", published in Foreign Affairs magazine, the clear front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination for 2008 pledged to expand the U.S. armed forces and consider military action against Iran if it did not abandon its nuclear programme.

"Iran must conform to its nonproliferation obligations and must not be permitted to build or acquire nuclear weapons," she wrote. "If Iran does not comply with its own commitments and the will of the international community, all options must remain on the table."


LINK (http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=39663)

[Pete]

Why doesnt she stfu and let let those organizations that oversee Irans desire for nuclear energy, like the UN Security Council, the NPT, IAEA.
Has not a lesson been learned from Iraq when those most qualified were saying "no wmds" .
Who was most qualified to present evidence, When Scott Ritter, a UN inspector that had spent time in Iraq and stated. we will lose American lives for nothing as there is no wmds in Iraq. Yet CNN.s Arron Brown in a frustrated posture refusing to hear him out, red faced and angerd blurted out " why are you doing this" , in short not wanting to hear the truth.
If these Organizations findings are not going to be acceptable facts then scrap them and the next US president can dictate who can and cannot have nuclear energy.
Hillary may be trying to show a posture of strength but she would be more advised to show that she can deal with these organizations and diplomacy when addresing Irans nuclear desires.

[CHUQ]

IMO, the media is crowning her as the democratic nominee already and she is believing it and trying to appear presidential. She again IMO, has NO clear stand.

[iris in stones]

Her social position is very close to that of the Bushes. In fact, I have a friend who refers regularly to "House Clinton" and "House Bush."
And I think he's right.
In fact, if you look at the social and economic positions of these people, you must realize that their political interests usually follow these realities.
In other words, if you want more of what you have, vote for Mrs. Clinton.
Unlike her husband, she's old money.
Bill was a "new man." She is cut from an ancient sheet.
And they all think only in terms of empire, money, resource control, betrayal of the American productive sector and destruction of American infrastructure.
These things are what House Clinton & House Bush represent to me.

[Sonny]

One can only hope that Americans will wake up and recognize, more of the "Bush" rationale to US policy is going to sink America in to a third world nation.
I expect a very nasty recession in the US, perhaps that may be a wake up call.

[iris in stones]

I think they should be publicly accused of trying to turn the U.S. into Brazil.
I'd like to just say to them, "Oh, and while you're turning my country into Brazil, when are you fucking going to get us out of Iraq?"

[CHUQ]

LO! Well said Iris. I cannot add anything to that comment. Well done!