WWHD

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

The arrogance and obvious psychosis reminds me of a villan in a James Bond movie .

And this is the problem. If you think she's an evil villain you'll just see everything she does under that lens. This is what got us into Iraq.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

And this is the problem. If you think she's an evil villain you'll just see everything she does under that lens. This is what got us into Iraq.

You have it backwards. She created the evil villain not I .
She voted for going to Iraq so actually she helped get us there .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

And this is the problem. If you think she's an evil villain you'll just see everything she does under that lens. This is what got us into Iraq.

If memory serves, she was a huge proponent of invading Iraq. Your criticism of the hawks seems, well, quite selective, does it not?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

If memory serves, she was a huge proponent of invading Iraq. Your criticism of the hawks seems, well, quite selective, does it not?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Your memory fails you. Perhaps you never understood it to begin with?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Your memory fails you. Perhaps you never understood it to begin with?

Again, an insult with no facts, shocker. You're saying I'm wrong that supported the invasion?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Again, an insult with no facts, shocker. You're saying I'm wrong that supported the invasion?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Don't you remember? She voted for it before she didn't vote for it.

Again - reading Gates: Duty (interesting book BTW) in a meeting with Obama and Hillary, they both admited to their stances on Iraq in the initial invasion and for Hillary, the Surge, as being political votes to keep happiness in their party, above the best interests of the country.

Personally - too many politicians from both sides play that game, putting our kids at risk for political gain. Just because politicians have been doing it for thousands of years does not make it right.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Again, an insult with no facts, shocker. You're saying I'm wrong that supported the invasion?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'm saying you're wrong that she was a "huge proponent of invading Iraq."

She certainly voted to authorize the use of force, but that bill was conditional on a failure of inspections and sanctions which were working to the disappointment of the Administration. Clinton also said clearly that she didn't feel that the US invading without a proper coalition was justified.

If anything her vote was to make an invasion more difficult.

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by spence

I'm saying you're wrong that she was a "huge proponent of invading Iraq."

She certainly voted to authorize the use of force, but that bill was conditional on a failure of inspections and sanctions which were working to the disappointment of the Administration. Clinton also said clearly that she didn't feel that the US invading without a proper coalition was justified.

If anything her vote was to make an invasion more difficult.

The IAEA inspections were working? There was some agreement on the status of atomic research by the Iraqis but not on Chem or Bio, where they were being stonewalled.

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnR

The IAEA inspections were working? There was some agreement on the status of atomic research by the Iraqis but not on Chem or Bio, where they were being stonewalled.

There was certainly stonewalling on inspections but the IAEA said they could get the job done if given time. The sanctions absolutely were working...

That why they couldn't put it up for another UN vote, they couldn't make the case.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

I'm saying you're wrong that she was a "huge proponent of invading Iraq."

She certainly voted to authorize the use of force, but that bill was conditional on a failure of inspections and sanctions which were working to the disappointment of the Administration. Clinton also said clearly that she didn't feel that the US invading without a proper coalition was justified.

If anything her vote was to make an invasion more difficult.

wow...that's an impressive steaming pile

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I'm saying you're wrong that she was a "huge proponent of invading Iraq."

She certainly voted to authorize the use of force, but that bill was conditional on a failure of inspections and sanctions which were working to the disappointment of the Administration. Clinton also said clearly that she didn't feel that the US invading without a proper coalition was justified.

If anything her vote was to make an invasion more difficult.

"I'm saying you're wrong that she was a "huge proponent of invading Iraq"

Who said this...

"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. 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 be hard, but I cast it with conviction"

Who said that?

a) #^&#^&#^&#^& Cheney
b) Atilla The Hun
c) Sean Hannity
d) Hilary Clinton

Now go to the Huffington Post and ask your fellow world travelers how to respond when you have backed yourself into a corner from which there is no escape.

"With conviction" means you are convinced that it needs to be done. That means you are not wishy-washy on the decision. It's the opposite of undecided.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Who said this...

Source?

I mean a credible one, not the made up quote you posted.

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by wdmso

WTH does Israel have to do with Hillary's email server?

they are on the short list of potential Countries who got the supposed hacked emails

True: Russia, China, Iran, and Israel are all reported to have accessed her illegal server. Of those four, Israel is the only one that would consider us friendly, no matter how poor relations had gotten over the past 8 years*. I would also guess that they were both grinning ear to ear (friendly nation states do spy on friendly nation states) alternating with a lot of WTFs.

Suspected of having some access and for having told US Intelligence groups: Germany, UK, and a few other countries. I would assume Israeli contacts would say the same thing off the record to US intelligence folks over a beer.

Other reports (harder to verify) have it that the entire contents of her server - more than what the the FBI and State have - are available for sale on the darkweb.





* Currently reading Bob Gates: DUTY