NYT interview with Hillary Clinton on Iraq

[DeepModem Mom]

If Elected ...
Clinton Says Some G.I.’s in Iraq Would Remain
By MICHAEL R. GORDON and PATRICK HEALY
Published: March 15, 2007

WASHINGTON, March 14 — Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton foresees a “remaining military as well as political mission” in Iraq, and says that if elected president, she would keep a reduced military force there to fight Al Qaeda, deter Iranian aggression, protect the Kurds and possibly support the Iraqi military.

In a half-hour interview on Tuesday in her Senate office, Mrs. Clinton said the scaled-down American military force that she would maintain would stay off the streets in Baghdad and would no longer try to protect Iraqis from sectarian violence — even if it descended into ethnic cleansing.

In outlining how she would handle Iraq as commander in chief, Mrs. Clinton articulated a more nuanced position than the one she has provided at her campaign events, where she has backed the goal of “bringing the troops home.”

She said in the interview that there were “remaining vital national security interests in Iraq” that would require a continuing deployment of American troops.

The United States’ security would be undermined if parts of Iraq turned into a failed state “that serves as a petri dish for insurgents and Al Qaeda,” she said. “It is right in the heart of the oil region,” she said. “It is directly in opposition to our interests, to the interests of regimes, to Israel’s interests.”

“So it will be up to me to try to figure out how to protect those national security interests and continue to take our troops out of this urban warfare, which I think is a loser,” Mrs. Clinton added. She declined to estimate the number of American troops she would keep in Iraq, saying she would draw on the advice of military officers....

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/15/washington/15clinton.html?ex=1176696000&en=e6963d5587b9dc87&ei=5070

[snowbear]

1. ...

[Tom Joad]

2. My nephew has not entered his teens yet. But if Hillary is elected, i have no

doubt he, or his contemporaries, will be sent off to iraq.

[mtnsnake]

3. Why is that, Tom? Because she promised to immediately end the war if she's elected?

Good gawd

[Tom Joad]

4. She has promised continued US occupation. Please read the original post.

[ElizabethDC]

6. Did you listen to her portion of the MoveOn Town Hall meeting?

She has said that there will be a residual force for a limited period of time. She does not want a permanent occupation or permanent bases. Also, she has promised time and time again to end the war when she becomes president.

Here's a link that has a transcript and video from the MoveOn Virtual Town Hall: http://www.hillaryclinton.com/blog/view/?id=3529

[mtnsnake]

8. Notice how they love to twist around what she says & how they avoid the truth

like the plague. Don't expect to get too many answers to your rebuttal, Elizabeth, unless it's straight out of Spinorama 101.

[MannyGoldstein]

5. End The War... But Don't End It *Too* Much

We must stay in the middle at all times.

[mtnsnake]

9. She said she'd end the war, period, Manny. I challenge you to prove me wrong

BTW, having some troops remain for a while is something that ANY Democratic president is going to have to consider, unless they live in Ga Ga Land like you and so many other people. Wake up to reality.

[IndianaGreen]

7. Hillary will keep the war going with less troops, and she will nuke Iran

Hillary is warmongering when she crawls on her knees and grovels at the AIPAC conference telling them that "all options are on the table" when it comes to Iran, the same words that George Bush has used before he attacked Iraq, and is saying now about Iran.

It is shameful and criminal for a Presidential candidate to say that the first use of nuclear weapons on Iran is acceptable. For Hillary and others to embrace a Hiroshima solution to solve a non-existing WMD problem in Iran is despicable and unacceptable.

Published on Thursday, April 12, 2007 by CommonDreams.org

Awful Truth About Hillary, Barack, John… and Whitewash

by Norman Solomon

The Pentagon’s most likely next target is Iran. Hillary Clinton says “no option can be taken off the table.”

Barack Obama says that the Iranian government is “a threat to all of us” and “we should take no option, including military action, off the table.”

John Edwards says, “Under no circumstances can Iran be allowed to have nuclear weapons.” And: “We need to keep all options on the table.”

A year ago, writing in The New Yorker, journalist Seymour Hersh reported: “One of the military’s initial option plans, as presented to the White House by the Pentagon this winter, calls for the use of a bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapon, such as the B61-11, against underground nuclear sites.”

For a presidential candidate to proclaim that all “options” should be on the table while dealing with Iran is a horrific statement. It signals willingness to threaten — and possibly follow through with — first use of nuclear weapons. This raises no eyebrows among Washington’s policymakers and media elites because it is in keeping with longstanding U.S. foreign-policy doctrine.

This year, with their virtually identical statements about “options” and “the table,” the leading Democratic presidential candidates — Clinton, Obama and Edwards — have refused to rule out any kind of attack on Iran.

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/04/12/467/

[mtnsnake]

10. Only to YOU would "keeping all options on the table" mean she's going to nuke Iran. lol

When it comes to their positions on Iran, it's already been proven right here on DU that her "keeping all options on the table" statement is the least hawkish sounding of the big three candidates, Obama, Hillary, and Edwards.

Yet according to you Hillary's going to nuke them....because she sounds presidential by saying she'd keep all options on the table. What you and your minions fail miserably to admit is that "all options" includes diplomacy.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

11. What is her position on Reid-Feingold?

And what is her Nixonesque "secret plan" to end the war which she will only share with us after we turn the keys over to her for four years in 1/20/09?

[IndianaGreen]

13. Hillary ducked when she was asked about Feingold/Reid

Hillary also allied herself with the Latin American elites when she said that their values were her values during a fund raiser with our own elites.

Hillary sided with the exploiters against the workers, and she will continue to do so as President.

[mtnsnake]

14. as did Edwards. Dodd is the ONLY Dem candidate who supports the bill.

[bigdarryl]

12. shes trying to have it both ways. she said if Bush doesn't end the war she....

will if elected. then she gets in front of other crowds OR being interviewed and say we have to keep some troops in Iraq to fight off Al Qaeda. sense when is it our job to fight off Al Qaeda IN Iraq. I though they supposed to nbe training there own military force. plus MRS. Clinton if you hadn't voted and supported this war in the first place we wouldn't be in Iraq.the bottom line hear is if she's President we will still be loosing our boys and girls.