Article

2006-12-19 Home Front: Politix

Hillary Clinton Says She Wouldn't Have Voted For Iraq War

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by .com 2006-12-19 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11131 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 You are always free to believe that you can be Commander in Chief if you could not be for something before you were against it. Afterall, they told me I could be an astranaut :)

Posted by closedanger@hotmail.com">closedanger@hotmail.com 2006-12-19 01:12|| 2006-12-19 01:12|| Front Page Top

#2 Well she is running for the democratic nomination.

Posted by Danking70 2006-12-19 01:32|| 2006-12-19 01:32|| Front Page Top

#3 Madame ROYAL - Segolene, my Segolene, let me count the ways???

Posted by JosephMendiola 2006-12-19 02:03|| 2006-12-19 02:03|| Front Page Top

#4 Good ... now someone can ask her about her husband's declarations concerning the dangers of Saddam, the WMD's, and best of all, the Iraq Liberation Act. One of the best cases for OIF was actually made by Bill From Chapaqua.

Posted by doc 2006-12-19 06:49|| 2006-12-19 06:49|| Front Page Top

#5 "One of the best cases for OIF was actually made by Bill From Chapaqua."

Such as this speech, here, before the Joint Chiefs of Staff on February 17, 1998. Very inconvenient for the "Bush Lied, People Died" crowd...

Posted by Dave D.">Dave D. 2006-12-19 07:14|| 2006-12-19 07:14|| Front Page Top

#6 "Damn! We wuz all confused by Bush's Jedi Mind Tricks"

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2006-12-19 07:50|| 2006-12-19 07:50|| Front Page Top

#7 saying that she "wouldn't have voted that way" if she knew everything she knows now

So completely idiotic that it defies commentary.

Oh, and I'm sure the Red Sox would never have traded Ruth if they knew then what they know now. Sheesh!

Posted by mcsegeek1 2006-12-19 08:52|| 2006-12-19 08:52|| Front Page Top

#8 Her office must be near the Jr. Senator from Mass. office. Been huffing on the same goofy gas.

Posted by TomAnon 2006-12-19 08:59|| 2006-12-19 08:59|| Front Page Top

#9 Think she would've married the Dope from Hope if she knew what she knows now?

Posted by tu3031 2006-12-19 09:04|| 2006-12-19 09:04|| Front Page Top

#10 The lying bitch.

Posted by Excalibur 2006-12-19 09:39|| 2006-12-19 09:39|| Front Page Top

#11 "Obviously, if we knew then what we know now, there wouldn't have been a vote," she said in her usual refrain before adding, "and I certainly wouldn't have voted that way."

You mean you'd ignore these chemical weapons?

Posted by Glinemble Grolung7203 2006-12-19 09:44|| 2006-12-19 09:44|| Front Page Top

#12 Rhetorical flourish, signifying nothing. Null data set.

Bullshit, in plain language.

Posted by mojo">mojo 2006-12-19 10:35|| 2006-12-19 10:35|| Front Page Top

#13

Posted by bigim-ky 2006-12-19 10:44|| 2006-12-19 10:44|| Front Page Top

#14 Hillary is tossing a bone to the Kos Kids. It's her way of saying: "Hey, I'm with you too. Vote for me in 2008!"

Posted by Mark Z">Mark Z 2006-12-19 12:57|| 2006-12-19 12:57|| Front Page Top

#15 hillary voted yes when it counted. Today she says she would oppose a troop surge IF its not accompanied by a change of strategy - a conditional that is absent from the opposition of most Dems, and of quite a few Republicans.

So she threw a rhetorical bone to the left - she cant avoid that to get through the Dem primaries.

Anyway as to this

"Rather than wasting their time trying to avoid killing people, they move from city to city within Iraq, demanding surrender. Surrender involves giving up all the resident bad guys and the city remaining responsible for the absence or good behavior of any bad boyz who aren't given up."

I think this misses the fact that AQ and other forces in Iraq would LOVE to see a city destroyed, since it helps unite all Sunnis behind them, and would harm the US throughout the Sunni Muslim world. If youre going to do that, you CANT do it one city at a time, or you lose everyplace else, and your supply lines become unsustainable. You have to do it everywhere at once - oh, and you can count on Sadr, DESPITE his killing of Sunnis, to take advantage to go after you to.

IE you cant do it with 140,000 troops (not all of them combat troops) Or even 180,000. Youre going to need upwards of 300,000, Id hazard a guess.

And then, arguably you'll win Iraq. You can expect the Brits and Canadians and so forth to depart Afghanistan the next week though, since they'll be afraid youll try the same thing there, and they wont want to be a part of it. You can forget about cooperation from Pakistan(Yeah, i know, thats limited now, but still) Kuwait may let you stay, cause theyre so small and vulnerable, but expect violence there. And KSA to blow apart. And the Sunni muslims in Lebanon to depart the anti-syrian side. Major hassles all over the world.

And dont expect Iraq to stay friendly after youve left, either.

Posted by liberalhawk 2006-12-19 14:44|| 2006-12-19 14:44|| Front Page Top

#16 While I like how perfectly cruel .coms plan is, It's a little to intricate for me. Of course, what else can you expect from an evil genuis like .com?

"More warheads on foreheads." Starting with Taters' is simple enough for me to get behind.

Posted by Mike N. 2006-12-19 15:11|| 2006-12-19 15:11|| Front Page Top

#17 Mike N - That's Fred in the Yellow highlights, He's the evil genius, lol.

Posted by .com 2006-12-19 15:15|| 2006-12-19 15:15|| Front Page Top

#18 She was too busy baking cookies..............

Posted by anonymous2u 2006-12-19 15:24|| 2006-12-19 15:24|| Front Page Top

#19 Do we honestly care what traitor Hillary says? Besides, I'm more curious if she checked with her Chinese handlers before voting.

Posted by Silentbrick">Silentbrick 2006-12-19 20:09|| 2006-12-19 20:09|| Front Page Top

#20 It depends on what the meaning of "support" is

Posted by Captain America 2006-12-19 20:25|| 2006-12-19 20:25|| Front Page Top

#21 And she has certainly been a supporter.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-12-19 20:30|| 2006-12-19 20:30|| Front Page Top

#22 hillary voted yes when it counted. Today she says she would oppose a troop surge IF its not accompanied by a change of strategy - a conditional that is absent from the opposition of most Dems, and of quite a few Republicans.

Oh good freaking grief. What part of 'stepping away from her 2002 vote' are you missing?

Hillary wants credit for a principled willingness to stand by her vote without having to deal with the political fallout from that vote.

Posted by Pappy 2006-12-19 22:12|| 2006-12-19 22:12|| Front Page Top

12:30 FreePalestins
12:29 FreePalestins
23:24 tu3031
23:18 gorb
23:17 JosephMendiola
23:14 Cyber Sarge
23:11 JosephMendiola
23:02 JosephMendiola
22:52 gorb
22:47 gorb
22:45 gorb
22:44 Glenmore
22:43 gorb
22:43 Free Radical
22:40 gorb
22:35 JosephMendiola
22:31 JosephMendiola
22:19 wxjames
22:14 JosephMendiola
22:12 Pappy
22:09 JosephMendiola
22:01 Zenster
21:54 Zenster
21:54 Frank G