Obama's Team - Hilary as SoS..
President elect Obama introduced his team yesterday.
A strange mix, but the focus was on Mrs Clinton..
Obama says that he wants greater use of diplomacy and greater emphasis on building alliances around the world.
Can this really be possible with Mrs Clinton who has very hawkish views on Iran and the Palestinian state?
Oh yeah, I forgot that issue along with several others!! My bad :?
Hilary is looking pretty sane to me!
Let's see, we have Iran's dictator Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who vows to destroy America and says that the Holocaust is a myth...Hmmmm.
And we have North Korea's dictator(or god), Kim Jong il, who has practiced testing a nuclear bomb and who keeps his citizens shut off from the rest of the world...Hmmm.
When you're dealing with wackos, it is sometimes necessary to talk tough. Although, as I stated previously, Hilary is going to have to be a little more subtle and incorporate some "Obamaisms" with her new duties as secretary of state.
The political science comment was because you seem awfully confused about posturing in a political landscape. It was simply a suggestion, sorry to offend you.
I see nothing wrong with wanting to protect Israel. Frankly if someone was threatening Canada with nuclear annihilation I would want the US or someone else step in to defend us to. Once again, the glory that is global politics.
I haven't attacked anyone. I'm simply disagreeing. BTW I'd like to introduce you to Kettle, it's black too.
So she was pretty clear that IF Iran should ever threaten the US with nukes, she would not be opposed to possibly, maybe striking them first.
Wow. She's crazy.
You seem to be very confused about exactly what Hilary said. I suggest you take Political Science 101. Might clear things up a little.
Yes of course everyone knows that Abu, it will never come to a nuclear attack. However the posturing must still be made. God Bless politics.
I'm sorry, where did she say she was MOST DEFINITELY going to nuke Iran?? She said she was not ruling out a preemptive strike, should it appear that Iran was going to attack the US or Israel. Pretty standard posturing if you ask me.
And when did all the people of the US say they want to nuke Iran?
Regardless Brit, all Hilary is saying is that IF Iran were to threaten the US with a nuclear attack, she would consider making a preemptive attack. It's a hypothetical situation.
Iran may not like the USA, but it has never threatened it militarily. The sabre rattling has been going on for a while, but it is the USA or its reprentatives that have used the more aggressive tone , especially regarding nukes..
If that nations populace intends to nuke yours would be good enough reason for me.
What's your definition of justification? Iran has never made any secret of its dislike of the US, and it's an unstable nation at best. I think it would be foolish to say you wouldn't be keeping an eye on them and prepared to take drastic measures if necessary.
saying that you wouldn't "rule out" a preemptive attack and actually planning a preemptive attack are two entirely different things.
This is a new job which entales a new job description for Hilary. The "I want to be your next president and I will...." persona is very different than the secretary of state position she will begin in January. We will have to wait and see how she will be able to incorporate her "hawkish" personality with the visions of Barack Obama in handling the delicate affairs with Iraq, Iran, Isreal, North Korea, etc.
I, for one, will miss Condoleezza Rice...she once said in an interview that her "dream job" would be to be the commissioner of the NFL (National Football League). I don't think that Roger Goodell is stepping down any time soon. I think that dealing with footbal teams/players and other NFL affairs would be a whole lot easier than dealing with world affairs.
To Condoleezza and Hilary "YOU GO GIRLS!!!"
...because it's too early to be the otherwise.
and...
hawkish? yeah tell me about it.
dialogue & precaution...
...diverse means, same ends.
I'm all for dialogue, but I'm also for precaution. While some might say Hilary comes off as "hawkish" I think she's come off as more "pensive" and "wary" which isn't necessarily a bad thing.
In her previous comments , especially as senator, she has shown a marked bias towards the Israeli stance. Also, Obama , during the election said that he wanted dialogue with Iran, whereas Hilary has been very hawkish.
Not a good starting point for dialogue and conciliation.
Hilary has a much more reasonable stance on Iran and Palestine if you ask me. Obama needs her experience to even out his own naivety.
ask an AMERICAN to define DIPLOMACY,,, and you'll be able to answer your question.