“I want the Iranians to know that if I’m the president, we will attack Iran,” Clinton said in an interview on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”
“In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them,” she said.
“That’s a terrible thing to say but those people who run Iran need to understand that because that perhaps will deter them from doing something that would be reckless, foolish and tragic,” Clinton said.
Her vote in support of invading Iraq followed the typical lies at the time:
“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort and sanctuary to terrorists including Al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security. This is a very difficult vote. This is probably the hardest decision I’ve ever had to make. Any vote that might lead to war should it be hard, but I cast it with conviction.”
WASHINGTON, April 22 (Reuters) - Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton warned Tehran on Tuesday that if she were president, the United States could “totally obliterate” Iran in retaliation for a nuclear strike against Israel.
On the day of a crucial vote in her nomination battle against fellow Democrat Barack Obama, the New York senator said she wanted Iranians to know what she was prepared to do as president in hopes of deterring an Iranian nuclear attack on Israel.
“I want the Iranians to know that if I’m the president, we will attack Iran,” Clinton said in an interview on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”
“In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them,” she said.
Nice omission of context there, pal. Clinton has always had liberal hawk credentials, but I don’t see a realistic circumstance where she would have ever launched a ground invasion of Iran.
In addition, you’re going back to the 2008 primary there.
You think Netanyahu, who managed to string Trump along to attack Iran, wouldn’t have managed the same with a much more Hawkish Clinton? Israel wants the US to go to war with Iran since quite a while. It would have been much easier to push Clinton to commit to full blown war, than with Trump, who for the most part pulled troops out of the Middle East. Also we saw that Trump, after the bombing immediately wanted the whole thing to be done, claimed huge success and got a ceasefire between Israel and Iran going.
It is a low bar to meet, but Clinton would have made sure to drill a tunnel to pass through under it.
You think Netanyahu, who managed to string Trump along to attack Iran, wouldn’t have managed the same with a much more Hawkish Clinton?
More hawkish? Debateable in the context of Israel. In any case, this is an argument for them being the same, not different. And “attacking Iran” is not the same as occupying it as you initially claimed.
Also we saw that Trump, after the bombing immediately wanted the whole thing to be done, claimed huge success and got a ceasefire between Israel and Iran going.
And how do you know Clinton wouldn’t do this as well? What has Clinton said about Iran post-2016?
Saleh@feddit.org is an idiot. Clinton would have never have blown up Obama’s Iran nuclear deal like Trump did which directly lead to the missle exchange between Israel and Iran and the bombing of Iran’s nuclear facilities.
He clearly can’t understand the difference between tough talk and actual intentions.
What part of unilaterally bombing a nuclear facility in a country historically hostile to the US is restraint?
I can’t tell if you think that’s a good idea or not.
Compared to a full blown invasion, boots on the ground, two decades of occupation it is.
I am not saying that Trump has shown restraint. He only has shown restraint relative to Clinton
When exactly did Clinton commit to an invasion of Iran?
In her primary race against Obama:
https://www.reuters.com/article/economy/clinton-says-us-could-totally-obliterate-iran-idUSN22243327/
“I want the Iranians to know that if I’m the president, we will attack Iran,” Clinton said in an interview on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”
“In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them,” she said.
“That’s a terrible thing to say but those people who run Iran need to understand that because that perhaps will deter them from doing something that would be reckless, foolish and tragic,” Clinton said.
Her vote in support of invading Iraq followed the typical lies at the time:
https://awpc.cattcenter.iastate.edu/2017/03/09/hillary-clinton-iraq-war-vote-speech-oct-10-2002/
“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort and sanctuary to terrorists including Al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security. This is a very difficult vote. This is probably the hardest decision I’ve ever had to make. Any vote that might lead to war should it be hard, but I cast it with conviction.”
WASHINGTON, April 22 (Reuters) - Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton warned Tehran on Tuesday that if she were president, the United States could “totally obliterate” Iran in retaliation for a nuclear strike against Israel.
On the day of a crucial vote in her nomination battle against fellow Democrat Barack Obama, the New York senator said she wanted Iranians to know what she was prepared to do as president in hopes of deterring an Iranian nuclear attack on Israel.
“I want the Iranians to know that if I’m the president, we will attack Iran,” Clinton said in an interview on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”
“In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them,” she said.
Nice omission of context there, pal. Clinton has always had liberal hawk credentials, but I don’t see a realistic circumstance where she would have ever launched a ground invasion of Iran.
In addition, you’re going back to the 2008 primary there.
You think Netanyahu, who managed to string Trump along to attack Iran, wouldn’t have managed the same with a much more Hawkish Clinton? Israel wants the US to go to war with Iran since quite a while. It would have been much easier to push Clinton to commit to full blown war, than with Trump, who for the most part pulled troops out of the Middle East. Also we saw that Trump, after the bombing immediately wanted the whole thing to be done, claimed huge success and got a ceasefire between Israel and Iran going.
It is a low bar to meet, but Clinton would have made sure to drill a tunnel to pass through under it.
More hawkish? Debateable in the context of Israel. In any case, this is an argument for them being the same, not different. And “attacking Iran” is not the same as occupying it as you initially claimed.
And how do you know Clinton wouldn’t do this as well? What has Clinton said about Iran post-2016?
Saleh@feddit.org is an idiot. Clinton would have never have blown up Obama’s Iran nuclear deal like Trump did which directly lead to the missle exchange between Israel and Iran and the bombing of Iran’s nuclear facilities.
He clearly can’t understand the difference between tough talk and actual intentions.
My brother in Christ, you need to put the pipe down before logging on.