Reply #87: Geez, read her speach before the Senate [View All]

[Jai4WKC08]

It's pretty obvious that she intended to give the president the ability to use force, to help get the inspectors back in.

Let me tell you something. Tom never writes without evidence, but I think he has come to realize you don't really want to hear it as your mind is made up. Me, I'm not as smart as he is.

Yes, Hillary believes in using "coercive diplomacy." It's what we used to stop Milosevic from killing Muslims in Kosovo. You think we could have just asked him nicely? Fact is, we tried that. He would agree, then go ahead with the killing. It wasn't until the bombs started falling, and until he could be sure that NATO would not stop dropping them, that he capitulated. And something like 1.5 million people are alive today that might not be if we hadn't.

The difference between Clinton and Bush, and it's a BIG one, is that Clinton will only use force as a last resort. Another big difference is that she will not act unilaterally unless absolutely necessary. Bush prefers to act alone, with only token participation by other nations and no international organizations unless they subordinate themselves to him. And a final big difference is that her "last resort" will usually have something to do with saving lives, either here or abroad. It won't be to steal another country's resources or to generate profits for political cronies.

But let me ask you something. Why do you think Obama is any different? He may not use the foreign policy jargon, because frankly it's not in his repertoire. But he did talk about deploying troops into Pakistan to get bin Laden, even without the Pakistani government's permission. I'd bet you Hillary wouldn't do that, not without UN approval and/or NATO participation.