Friday, August 10, 2007

Oh Yeah, About What I Said, Nevermind

Over the past few weeks, the Clinton camp ahas been attacking the foreign policy statements of Sen. Obama as naive. They specifically hit Obama for taking nuclear weapons off the table as part of an attack strategy. Only one problem - Sen. Clinton said almost the exact same thing. This seems like a rookie mistake for someone who likes to tout her "experience."

Obama recently said when it comes to terrorist targets in Afghanistan or Pakistan, nuclear weapons are off the table, comments pounced upon by Clinton at a press conference.

"I think presidents should be very careful at all times in discussing the use, or non-use, of nuclear weapons," she said. "Presidents since the Cold War have used nuclear deterrence to keep the peace. And I don't believe that any president should make any blanket statements with respect to the use or non-use of nuclear weapons."

But in an April 2006 interview with Bloomberg News' Al Hunt, Clinton took the use of nuclear weapons off the table when discussing possible U.S. military options against Iran, if its leaders continue to pursue nuclear weapons.

"Senator, you sit in the Armed Services Committee," Hunt said. "There were reports this weekend, the 'Washington Post' and elsewhere, that the United States is considering a military option against Iran if it won't relinquish any ambitions to nuclear weapons. The 'New Yorker' even said that we're considering using nuclear — tactical nuclear weapons. Should those options be on the table when it comes to Iran?"

"I have said publicly no option should be off the table," Clinton said, "but I would certainly take nuclear weapons off the table. And this administration has been very willing to talk about using nuclear weapons in a way we haven't seen since the dawn of a nuclear age. I think that's a terrible mistake." The seeming contradiction was first reported by The Associated Press' Beth Fouhy.

4 Comments:

At 12:11 PM, Blogger GottaLaff said...

Good catch, BC.

 
At 3:54 PM, Blogger Corinne said...

I hate to rain on the BBQ but yes, there's a big difference:

"But in an April 2006 interview with Bloomberg News' Al Hunt, Clinton took the use of nuclear weapons off the table when discussing possible U.S. military options against Iran, if its leaders continue to pursue nuclear weapons."

Iran and terrorists are two different things. There is no evidence that Iran should be nuked or that this is the way to deal with Iran. Nuking Iran serves none of our interests and nobody benefits from it.

 
At 1:13 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

台北酒店經紀人 ,酒店工作 ,酒店公關 ,酒店兼職,酒店經紀, 酒店上班,酒店喝酒,台北酒店,酒店上班,酒店打工

 
At 1:13 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

台北酒店經紀人 ,酒店工作 ,酒店公關 ,酒店兼職,酒店經紀, 酒店上班,酒店喝酒,台北酒店,酒店上班,酒店打工

 

Post a Comment

<< Home