Hillary Clinton has the same exact views on Iran as Edwards and Obama

[Herman Munster]

So all the criticism of her comments are bullshit. Every other democrat has the same views!

You will not find one serious presidential candidate that will remove from possibility going to war against Iran.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

1. two words

bull & (what comes out of it after feeding)

Hillary is becoming an AEI/AIPAC puppet, and that alone justifies doing everything in my power to prevent her from being our candidate.

[SaveElmer]

2. Three words...

President Hillary Clinton!!

Ahhh...I like the sound of that!!!

[Herman Munster]

6. bullshit?

John Edwards on Iran:

http://www.totallyjewish.com/news/world/?content_id=5400

In his speech, Edwards criticised the United States' previous indifference to the Iranian issue, saying they have not done enough to deal with the threat.

Hinting to possible military action, Edwards stressed that "in order to ensure Iran never gets nuclear weapons

Barack Obama on Iran:

Recently, the Democratic Party's rising "progressive" star Barack Obama said he would favor "surgical" missile strikes against Iran.

As Obama told the Chicago Tribune on September 26, 2004, "he big question is going to be, if Iran is resistant to these pressures , including economic sanctions, which I hope will be imposed if they do not cooperate, at what point ... if any, are we going to take military action?"

He added, "aunching some missile strikes into Iran is not the optimal position for us to be in" given the ongoing war in Iraq. "On the other hand, having a radical Muslim theocracy in possession of nuclear weapons is worse." Obama went on to argue that military strikes on Pakistan should not be ruled out if "violent Islamic extremists" were to "take over."

[originalpckelly]

15. I am unfamiliar with Obama's position on Iran, but Edward's has the same position...

as Hillary, and it makes him a totally unsatisfactory candidate, just as it does Hillary. Obama may also be unsatisfactory if he feels the same way.

[bowens43]

3. Doesn't matter, Hillary is unelectable.

[Adelante]

4. Not every other Democrat

Certainly the same as Edwards. I don't know enough about Obama's views on Iran to say.

[Robbien]

5. Except Clinton tries not to say definitely what her stance exactly is

she hides behind mushy words trying to triangulate the voters.

I would be less irritated by her if she would just say exactly what she means without relying on everyone else to say such things as "Hillary Clinton has the exact views as . . .". She needs supporters such as yourself to firm down her opinions because she herself won't confirm them.

[OKNancy]

7. Feingold "grave threat to the region, to Israel..."

I love to post his:

Congressional Record Statement of Senator Russ Feingold
On Iran’s Efforts to Obtain Nuclear Weapons and the Need for Concerted International Action

January 31, 2006

Mr. FEINGOLD

Mr. President, as a known sponsor of international terrorism, and in light of the president of Iran’s recent apocalyptic statements calling for the destruction of Israel, Iran must not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. The international community must respond quickly and decisively to Iran’s gross disregard of international treaties and obligations and to its concerted and malicious efforts to develop the capability to create nuclear weapons.

The international community must take concerted and decisive action to prevent Iran from furthering its nuclear research and technology development. In its forthcoming meeting on February 2, 2006, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Board of Governors should heed the calls by Russia, China, the European Union, and the United States to reaffirm its findings that Iran has blatantly violated its international obligations, recognize the grave nature of Iran’s recent actions, and refer Iran to the United Nations Security Council. The Security Council should then speak with one voice to condemn Iran’s actions and send a clear signal that continued defiance of the international community will not be tolerated.

It is essential that the Security Council approve specific actions to prevent the furthering of Iran’s nuclear capabilities. The Security Council specifically, and the international community generally, must recognize the potentially devastating link between the violent and defiant rhetoric of Iran’s president and his regime’s determined effort to undermine approved and transparent methods of developing civilian nuclear technology for energy use.

Congress can also take steps to help stop or slow Iran’s acquisition of nuclear and other WMD-related technology, including adding teeth to export control legislation such as the Iran and Syria Nonproliferation Act. The Iran Nonproliferation Enhancement Act (S.1976) that Senator Kyl and I introduced late last year would do just that. It would toughen the ISNA by requiring rather than merely authorizing sanctions on proliferators, extending sanctions to the parent companies, and increasing the types of sanctions that apply to proliferators. By adopting this legislation, we would be sending a crystal clear message to would-be proliferators: if you choose to assist Iran in developing nuclear or other WMD-related capabilities, you are also choosing to forgo doing business with the United States.

History teaches us that we cannot ignore the stated intent of those who seek to destroy nations. A nuclear-armed Iran would pose a grave threat to the region, to Israel, and to the entire international community. A concerted international effort is needed to prevent Iran from procuring the technology and materiel needed to develop a nuclear weapon. This effort must begin now, and it must be comprehensive.

http://feingold.senate.gov/~feingold/statements/06/01/2006131CR.html

[Tellurian]

8. I don't care who's views end this war.

If there isn't 60 votes in the Senate to end this War,
it won't happen any time soon!

We need Hillary and her pressuring the holdouts to get the vote!

[goodhue]

9. guess I'll be supporting the unserious candidates as usual

[MaggieSwanson]

11. I like that kind, too.

[John Q. Citizen]

21. Yep, it's vote for insanity, or vote for change. I'm voting for change for a change!

Of our current field, Kucinich is the only one I can vote for.

[Dr.Phool]

14. Looks like I'll be joining you too.

I know Kucinich is a long, long shot, but he's the only one I can support in good conscience. So far.

[burythehatchet]

17. winning them over one at a time...welcome aboard

[robertpaulsen]

18. Amen! I'm voting with my conscience in the primary.

And voting with my nose plugged most likely afterward.

Go Dennis!

DENNIS KUCINICH ON PEAK OIL: I’M READY TO LEAD THIS NATION
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=266x2266

[illinoisprogressive]

10. Hillary has supported every war since 1975. Every one.

[Luckyduck]

12. Kucinich is already working to prevent a war in Iran

He has been warning everyone since the beginning.

Congressman and Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) issued the following statement tonight in response to President Bush's nationally televised address to the American people. "President Bush appears to be setting the stage for a wider war in the region. He has blamed Iran for attacks on America. The President is vowing to disrupt Iran. He is going to add an aircraft carrier to the shores off the coast of Iran. He has promised to give Patriot missiles to 'our friends and allies.' Isn't one war enough for this President? It is time the media and the Congress began to pay attention to this President when he talks aggressively about Iran and Syria. "It is imperative that Congress step up to its constitutional responsibility to restrain this abuse of executive authority by notifying the President that we will no longer agree to fund the war in Iraq.

[karynnj]

13. Dodd has sounded better

He also went to Syria with Kerry.

[conscious evolution]

16. Don't worry

I won't be voting for them either.

[phiddle]

19. This is why we need Wes Clark---

the only possible democratic candidate with a record of minimizing war.

[Clarkie1]

20. All Democrats do NOT have the same views re: Iran.

Clinton may or may not have the same views as Edwards and Obama, but I know for a fact Clark does not see Iran as the threat that Edwards does. Edwards appears to see war with Iran as inevitable, and equates the entire country with one man. That's the same kind of mistake he made when he voted for the Iraq war.

[WinkyDink]

22. But not the same on Iraq, and there's the rub.

[Gloria]

23. See this thread: American Prospect interview with Edwards....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x113980

He sounds a heckuva lot like Clark when he has a full discussion. He is most definitely not a warmonger.