winthrop

I meant I hesitated to use the term "hypocrisy" in this context.
I am not here to defend Hillary Clinton specifically, certainly since it
is a moot point.
Still, you seem to be suggesting her position on foreign policy was more
akin to Bush's than Mr. Obama's. This is from her web site:

Use our military not as the solution to every problem but as one element in a comprehensive strategy. As president, I will never hesitate to use force to protect Americans or to defend our territory and our vital interests. We cannot negotiate with individual terrorists; they must be hunted down and captured or killed. Nor can diplomacy alone stop the perpetrators of genocide and crimes against humanity in places such as Darfur. But soldiers are not the answer to every problem. Using force in lieu of diplomacy compels our young men and women in uniform to carry out missions that they may not be trained or prepared for. And it ignores the value of simply carrying a big stick, rather than using it.

Make international institutions work, and work through them when possible. Contrary to what many in the current administration appear to believe, international institutions are tools rather than traps. The United States must be prepared to act on its own to defend its vital interests, but effective international institutions make it much less likely that we will have to do so. Both Republican and Democratic presidents have understood this for decades. When such institutions work well, they enhance our influence. When they do not work, their procedures serve as pretexts for endless delays, as in the case of Darfur, or descend into farce, as in the case of Sudan's election to the UN Commission on Human Rights. But instead of disparaging these institutions for their failures, we should bring them in line with the power realities of the twenty-first century and the basic values embodied in such documents as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Ensure that democracy delivers on its promises. Gnawing hunger, poverty, and the absence of economic prospects are a recipe for despair. Globalization is widening the gap between the haves and the have-nots within societies and between them. Today, there are more than two billion people living on less than $2 a day. These people risk becoming a vast permanent underclass. Calls for expanding civil and political rights in countries plagued by mass poverty and ruled by tiny wealthy elites will fall on deaf ears unless democracy actually delivers enough material benefits to improve people's lives. The Bush administration's policy in Iraq has temporarily given democracy a bad name, but over the long term the value of democracy will continue to inspire the world.

Stand for and live up to our values. The values that our founders embraced as universal have shaped the aspirations of millions of people around the world and are the deepest source of our strength -- but only as long as we live up to them ourselves. As we seek to promote the rule of law in other nations, we must accept it ourselves. As we counsel liberty and justice for all, we cannot support torture and the indefinite detention of individuals we have declared to be beyond the law.

While she states she would have never "hesitated to use force" when
necessary, she goes on to extoll the use of diplomacy as the
preferred first course. This is different from Mr. Bush's intentions
coming into office to start war with Iraq, and searching for (and
being delivered, via his celebrated "trifecta") for an excuse.
It is too simple to just label either Democratic candidate as a war
hungry maniac or a peace loving hand holder.

__________________
Countdown to The Great Bush-Out...
Meanwhile, panem et circenses!

DanS.

yes I still believe that about HC...her propaganda does not change my mind.

ocealdia

Uh..uh. here's my post in a thread started 5-13-08.

"I did not like her remarks about Iran either - but this action was contingent on Iran nuking Israel, ONLY. I would hope that would never happen, but if it did, what else would we do? They could nuke us eventually. Does anyone here really have a problem with that?

Iran offered their help with Iraq after 9-11 but Bush ignored them. They should have been consulted with then. Iran and other counties do not like to be ignored, it makes them more dangerous. Definitely, diplomacy should be used and will be used first with Iran, not with McCain, but who knows?"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OMG....foreign policy?

OldManOnFire

[quote=lollipop;207777]I think that's a fair assumption however, I don't feel this it to be the reason for America's strong support of Israel.

I was thinking that most Americans DON'T have tolerance or acceptance for the religion of Islam.

Aren't these 'ethnic' differences due in large part to their respective religions?

If you might achieve utopia by removing 'all' religions, then why wouldn't this help if all of the Middle East, including Israel, was without religion?

__________________
Did you know both our problems and the solutions can be found simply by looking in our mirrors...and...Never confuse the extraordinary stuff I think and write with that of a well-balanced person...

OldManOnFire

Based on Obama's statements to Israel that he will do everything...everything...everything to protect Israel and keep Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons...

And, assuming that everything...everything...everything can include an unprovoked and preemptive attack on Iran...

Then I sure as hell would like to know what percentage of Democrats support this Bush-Cheney war-mongering Obama policy position????????????

__________________
Did you know both our problems and the solutions can be found simply by looking in our mirrors...and...Never confuse the extraordinary stuff I think and write with that of a well-balanced person...

OldManOnFire

Gee golly whiz DRS...I didn't know this thread was about Hillary Clinton??

One day Obama is going to have tea with Iran's president and the next day he's telling Israel that if Iran does not do what the USA wishes then Obama will do an unprovoked and preemptive attack on Iran???

And Obama calls this a change from the current Bush-Cheney-Rice war-mongering bully tactics?? This is exactly why we are stuck in Iraq and obviously you have learned nothing from this debacle!

If you have any balls at all, here's a question for you; If Obama 'thinks' Iran might attack Israel, or if Obama 'thinks' Iran might be making nuclear weapons, and full knowing how bastardized US intelligence has been, under these pretenses, DO YOU AGREE TO AN UNPROVOKED AND PREEMPTIVE ATTACK ON IRAN??

__________________
Did you know both our problems and the solutions can be found simply by looking in our mirrors...and...Never confuse the extraordinary stuff I think and write with that of a well-balanced person...

OldManOnFire

I'm not bashing anyone...just saying why Jews question Obama. One is the FACT that Obama has favored Palestine, one is that Obama said he would have tea with Iran's president and chat, and then there are the rumors which cast more doubt.

Regarding Obama's war-mongering talk to Israel, and that Obama approves of an unprovoked and preemptive attack on Iran; I'll bash this all day long!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

__________________
Did you know both our problems and the solutions can be found simply by looking in our mirrors...and...Never confuse the extraordinary stuff I think and write with that of a well-balanced person...

OldManOnFire

So what you are saying in bold red is that Political Groove is now an Obama-only site and that you will censor any conflicting speech that gets in the way of this?????

That your users are not entitled to question the righteousness of Obama no matter how flawed Obama's position might be??

Obviously, which is what this thread is about, you support an unprovoked and preemptive attack on Iran for reasons no different or better than those used to attack Iraq!!!!!!!!!!

__________________
Did you know both our problems and the solutions can be found simply by looking in our mirrors...and...Never confuse the extraordinary stuff I think and write with that of a well-balanced person...

OldManOnFire

I agree which is why I mentioned the State Department who has held Israel on a pedestal since it's inception.

And I don't find too much fault for doing this, but Israel has done some bad things and the US should have come down hard on them. And I wish the US tried as hard with all Middle Eastern nations as they have with Israel.

__________________
Did you know both our problems and the solutions can be found simply by looking in our mirrors...and...Never confuse the extraordinary stuff I think and write with that of a well-balanced person...

DanS.

First of all who said anything about censor? I said I would move it to the proper forum per the new rules...and Second, yes...you trying to insuate that Obama is a Muslim falls into that catagory.

Oh...and one more thing. Get over it. Hillary lost. You can just READ the bitter hatred in your posts for it that your girl lost to a candidate that you didn't even take the time to learn about.

Move on with your life man...life is too short.