Hillary Clinton Can't be Trusted on Iraq

[Orwellian_Ghost]

Hillary Clinton Can't be Trusted on Iraq
By Stephen Zunes, Foreign Policy in Focus. Posted December 13, 2007.

Clinton's position on Iraq is almost indistinguishable from Bush's.


Public opinion polls have consistently shown that the majority of Americans -- and even a larger majority of Democrats -- believe that Iraq is the most important issue of the day, that it was wrong for the United States to have invaded that country, and the United States should completely withdraw its forces in short order. Despite this, the clear front-runner for the Democratic Party nomination for president is Senator Hillary Clinton, a strident backer of the invasion who only recently and opportunistically began to criticize the war and call for a partial withdrawal of American forces.

As a result, it is important to review Senator Clinton's past and current positions regarding the Iraq War. Indeed, despite her efforts in response to public opinion polls to come across as an opponent of the war, Hillary Clinton has proven to be one of the most hard-line Democratic senators in support of a military response to the challenges posed by Iraq. She has also been less than honest in justifying her militaristic policies, raising concerns that she might support military interventions elsewhere.

Pre-War Militarism

Senator Clinton's militaristic stance on Iraq predated her support for Bush's 2003 invasion. For example, in defending the brutal four-day U.S. bombing campaign against Iraq in December 1998 -- known as Operation Desert Fox -- she claimed that "he so-called presidential palaces ... in reality were huge compounds well suited to hold weapons labs, stocks, and records which Saddam Hussein was required by UN resolution to turn over. When Saddam blocked the inspection process, the inspectors left." In reality, as became apparent when UN inspectors returned in 2002 as well as in the aftermath of the invasion and occupation, there were no weapons labs, stocks of weapons or missing records in these presidential palaces. In addition, Saddam was still allowing for virtually all inspections to go forward at the time of the 1998 U.S. attacks. The inspectors were withdrawn for their own safety at the encouragement of President Clinton in anticipation of the imminent U.S.-led assault.

Senator Clinton also took credit for strengthening U.S. ties with Ahmad Chalabi, the convicted embezzler who played a major role in convincing key segments of the administration, Congress, the CIA, and the American public that Iraq still had proscribed weapons, weapons systems, and weapons labs. She has expressed pride that her husband's administration changed underlying U.S. policy toward Iraq from "containment" -- which had been quite successful in defending Iraq's neighbors and protecting its Kurdish minority -- to "regime change," which has resulted in tragic warfare, chaos, dislocation, and instability.

....

http://www.alternet.org/audits/70416/

[Echo In Light]

1. No kidding

[liberalnurse]

9. I totally disagree.........

President Elect,Senator Clinton and or Senator Biden are the ONLY ones who can clean this mess up. Just pulling out and walking away is neglectful.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

14. That's a myth

Can anything be done to lead Iraqi out of this savage civil war even if it is now too late to stop it? Friction among Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds was always likely after the fall of Saddam Hussein. But what has divided the communities most is their differing attitude to foreign occupation. Ending that is essential if this war is to be brought to an end.

http://truth_addict.blogspot.com/2006/07/civil-war-wont-end-until-troops-leave.html

It's not only "neglectful" for US troops to saty it's grossly irresponsible and in fact criminal. I'ts a criminal and colonial occupation. Anyone who supports continuation of this is complicit.

[bvar22]

19. ...

:thumbsup:

[Cha]

22. Precisely!

It's the killing and the maiming, Stupid!

[Evergreen Emerald]

2. Her stance on Iraq is the same as every other democratic candidate

except Kuchinich. End the war now. Begin bringing the troops home immediately. Leave a few behind for Al Queda. Start political process.

[redqueen]

3. That's what I thought... that they'd all keep troops there indefinitely. (nt)

[Evergreen Emerald]

7. No. that is not accurate.

[redqueen]

8. But... I was agreeing with you.

:wtf:

They'd all keep them there, except Kucinich.

Is that not correct? Would Gravel also not leave troops there indefinitely?

Or is it the "indefinitely" part that is not correct?

A little detail would be appreciated along with the notice that what I said was incorrect.

[Evergreen Emerald]

10. Thanks

There would be a few troops left on the borders (or across the borders) to quell any attempts at Al Queda (I can never spell it right) to infiltrate. But, not indefinitely.

And the focus would be political. I would hope the world would join in to fix this mess, although Bush has made so many enemies, Clinton has the clout with many leaders to gain support.

[liberalnurse]

15. I don't agree with it only because I'm still stuck

in "We should of never invaded Iraq". But now, I have to try and look at the real options for the future.

We compromise every day in Medicine.....Prevention is best but some times you have to deal with a Chronic issue/illness the best you can.


30,000 feet over Iraq..........

[redqueen]

18. Do you listen to patient feeback?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3106895

[tabasco]

28. Leave a few behind for Al Queda.

I'm alerting for that dumbass statement.

WTF is wrong with you?

[mmonk]

4. We'll see.

Many democrats unfortunately are willing to let colonialism stand. But I have to have something definitive from the campaign itself before making a definitive determination. That's what's frustrating about politicians talking around issues or triangulating.

[Brother_1969]

5. I'm more concerned about her position on Iran

She can't be trusted there either. With her already voting for a new illegal war with Iran, you have to assume that she's in bed with the arms industry and Big Oil.

[Cha]

23. I'm fucking pissed about Iraq and

Iran..hillary can be trusted to do the military complex, corporatewhore killing thing.

It's all about the power..who cares in the clinton's book ..who gets killed?

[Bitwit1234]

6. And I'd hate like the devil to trust Obama

on Iran. After all he, of all the candidates bought into bush's nuclear weapons in Iran and wanted to bomb bomb bomb Iran. He and McCain damn that's a pair.

[VenusRising]

11. Maybe their policies are indistinguishable because

Bush is advising Hillary on Iraq.

http://www.examiner.com/a-953145~Bush_quietly_advising_Hillary_Clinton__top_Democrats.html

[Cha]

24. Yeah, bushits know

so much..but they got the power, eh? Too bad papy bush won't go around telling the world(like bill wanted him to) what a rotten situation his son made of it..

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

12. Oh, I trust her. To keep the war going as long as it's politically expedient to do so.

And, to do anything else necessary to realize her ambitions.

[liberalnurse]

16. Iraq has turned into a terminal illness.........

We need to be compassionate in regards to troop withdrawal.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

17. Hillary Clinton on Military Policy

Hillary Clinton on Military Policy

Stephen Zunes | December 12, 2007

While much attention has been given to Senator Hillary Clinton’s support for the U.S. invasion of Iraq, her foreign policy record regarding other international conflicts and her apparent eagerness to accept the use of force appears to indicate that her fateful vote authorizing the invasion and her subsequent support for the occupation and counter-insurgency war was no aberration. Indeed, there’s every indication that, as president, her foreign policy agenda would closely parallel that of the Bush administration. Despite efforts by some conservative Republicans to portray her as being on the left wing of the Democratic Party, in reality her foreign policy positions bear a far closer resemblance to those of Ronald Reagan than they do of George McGovern.

For example, rather than challenge President George W. Bush’s dramatic increases in military spending, Senator Clinton argues that they are not enough and the United States needs to spend even more in subsequent years. At the end of the Cold War, many Democrats were claiming that the American public would be able to benefit from a “peace dividend” resulting from dramatically-reduced military spending following the demise of the Soviet Union. Clinton, however, has called for dramatic increases in the military budget, even though the United States, despite being surrounded by two oceans and weak friendly neighbors, already spends as much on its military as all the rest of the world combined.

Mama Warbucks

Her presidential campaign has received far more money from defense contractors than any other candidate – Democrat or Republican – and her close ties to the defense industry has led the Village Voice to refer to her as “Mama Warbucks.” She has even fought the Bush administration in restoring funding for some of the very few weapons systems the Bush administration has sought to cut in recent years. Pentagon officials and defense contractors have given Senator Clinton high marks for listening to their concerns, promoting their products and leveraging her ties to the Pentagon, comparing her favorably to the hawkish former Washington Senator “Scoop” Jackson and other pro-military Democrats of earlier eras.

....

Nuclear Weapons

Particularly disturbing has been Senator Clinton’s attitudes regarding nuclear issues. For example, when Senator Obama noted in August that the use of nuclear weapons – traditionally seen as a deterrent against other nuclear states – was not appropriate for use against terrorists, Clinton rebuked his logic by claiming that “I don’t believe that any president should make any blanket statements with respect to the use or nonuse of nuclear weapons.”

....

http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/4811

[Cha]

25. Right...hillary only cares

about her political ambitions, the expedient YEAs on bushit policy, and not a twit about the "expendable lives" of our Soldiers.

[Stephanie]

13. Chalabi is a neocon who went to Univ of Chicago with the rest of them

He emigrated to the US at the age of 11 or so - he was raised HERE. He's a charlatan. Remember his little crew of Iraqi "rebels" during the initial invasion? How they turned up at the border and then the same guys were in the fake photo-op of tearing down the statue? He was just a tool of the neocons. He was a follower of Wohlstetter at Univ of Chicago just as Wolfowtitz was.

[BenDavid]

20. SSDD....So you hold HRC responsible for the entire Iraq

conflict? Did you forgive edwards when he sheepishly apoligized for his vote. Did you forgive Kerry his vote. forgive cleland his vote? What is it you want HRC to do? Grovel? She is not going to do that, so get over it....She is not like Kerry who knew well in advance the press was going to ask him, "if you knew then what you know now would you still vote the same way?" Kerry standing there at the grand canyon, answered YES! Undamnbelievable......Now when HRC was asked the same question, she answered NO! That was good enough. She does not need to apoligize and when rressed to defend her Iraq war vote, Hillary Rodham Clinton said "there are no "do-overs in life"

One of the many reasons why I support her: "When you are attacked, you have to deck your opponent,{and} I have been through the political wars longer than some of you have been alive. We've got to be prepared to hold our ground and fight back." Yes, she is a fighter and unlike Gore and Kerry/Edwards this nominee will fight back....She will be playing offense more then defense and I am of the strong opinion she will use tom delay's words against her right wing opponent. "This whole thing about not kicking someone when they are down is BS -- Not only do you kick him -- you kick him until he passes out -- then beat him over the head with a baseball bat -- then roll him up in an old rug -- and throw him off a cliff into the pounding; surf below!!!!!" well maybe not to that extreme about using a bat....

Ben David

[Orwellian_Ghost]

26. How beautiful

The other day, when Rep. John Murtha of Johnstown, Pa., called for a withdrawal from Iraq, and obviously did so with half the Pentagon behind him, Hillary said, no, we shouldn't pull out at this time. Oh, it would cause so much violence.

We must stay. It takes a national Alzheimer's for her to be able to try to get away with things like this.

If Hillary Clinton wants this war to go on, then she should send her daughter to fight in Iraq.

We have had in New York as United States senators, Robert F. Kennedy, Jacob Javits and Daniel Moynihan.

We now have Hillary Clinton blowing on her fingers as she goes about cracking the combination to another safe. If the one hand glistens, it is from the wedding ring that she has used to hypnotize the public so far. Beautiful.

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1130-35.htm

[K Gardner]

29. Bravo... n/t

[AtomicKitten]

21. Exactly.

[tabasco]

27. We already know she kowtows to the warmongers.

We can trust her to do all the wrong things.