When did so many DUers decide that Iran was an urgent threat?

[redqueen]

How did so many so quickly decide to start banging those drums of war?

What did the NIE say? Do we now think it's incorrect?

Israel has nukes. AND second-strike capability. What in the name of God has people suddenly so worried that Iran will threaten Israel with nukes that this talk of "obliterating" the country is considered not just necessary but responsible talk for a leader to engage in?

on edit: To repeat that, for clarity, cause it's been missed: That is what's been used as a "defense" for her reckless talk about obliterating countries - deterrence against this threat. So if she was talking like a non-cowboy-George-Bush wannabe about it in the past... what's made her change her tune... and more importantly... what's made all these DUers change theirs


Seriously... :wtf:

[global1]

1. Hillary Started Talking About Iran And Invoking The Fear Card......nt

[PoliticalAmazon]

69. Agreed. When Hillary threatened Iran with a nuclear attack, it became every...

...American's problem.

It is clear that she meant a nuclear attack because that is the only type of attack that could obliterate the population of an entire region.

In addition, she has promised to bring our troops home from Iraq. Clearly, her new nuke-Iran policy is in direct conflict with this so-called plan.

"Attacking and obliterating Iraq" and "bringing our soldiers home" are mutually exclusive concepts: one cannot be true unless the other is false.

She is just freaking scary. She is clearly unstable to say such dangerous and stupid things.

I haven't talked to my Iranian friend (who is in Geneva) and her family (who are orchardists in Iran) yet about this, but I can imagine they will be alarmed. And I will be humiliated, yet again, by an American politician's stupid and ignorant comments about Iran.

[bdamomma]

2. I think Pakistan is more of a threat than Iran is.

but I wouldn't suggest bombing the hell out of them either.

[PoliticalAmazon]

75. She's not even talking about a plan to keep the U.S. safe!...

...She's talking about retaliation for an attack on Israel, and this loony plan of hers will greatly increase the security risks in America.

[Catherina]

3. Hillary came into this race anti-Iran

so the prowar, anti-MoveOn Dems naturally gravitated to her. They've been banging those drums of war for years, it's just that she's too desperate to keep the volume down now since the rest of us are on to her. She's just being more open about what she really is.

Her vote to call the Iranian Guard a terrorist organization made it pretty clear.

[Diamond Dog]

4. When Her Royal Excellence Hillary I of Nukonia decided they were. n/t

[PoliticalAmazon]

71. She is clearly unstable. This is a stupid policy, worse than any of Bush Jr's debacles n/t

[0007]

5. Is the testosterone a little to much for a woman to have?

[redqueen]

10. WTF are you talking about?

Testosterone?

Are you frickin serious?

[roguevalley]

61. I think that was a bad attempt at satire, queen.

[redqueen]

73. Oh.

:blush:

Thanks.

[kenny blankenship]

13. I'm sure the problem has less to do with glands and secretions

than with a calculating brain, unmoved by normal glandular passions for years, that decides that fearmongering, racism, and fascist imperialism worked for Bush, so it can work for others too. "Why not me? I can threaten mass murder as well as any man."

[mrreowwr_kittty]

6. Around the same time they also decided

Unions are bad.

WalMart is awesome.

We need a capital gains tax cut.

Etc.

So now Iran is a threat? Of course it is, and the only reason us Obamamites don't understand that is because we are under the thrall of our closet Muslim leader who refuses to wear a flag pin and knows a guy who planned to blow up stuff back when he was 8.

[Justitia]

49. Man, no kidding. All that cognitive dissonance reminds me of the Bush Braindead 20%.

It's really been instructive to watch what her supporters will hypnotize themselves into believing just to support a particular person. War and torture have just been the obvious ones.

I think we could throw out just about any normally un-Democratic position, tell them Hillary is in favor of it, and they would adopt it as the best thing since sliced bread.

Hell, they've embraced Richard (Clinton Body Count) Scaife and all kinds of hate-wing media, while throwing their actual defenders (activists, MoveOn, etc) under the bus, so they now have their own propaganda machine too.

I visited some of the other "Hillary" sites mentioned on DU and was floored to see that they post daily Rush Limbaugh stuff, Drudge, Newsmax and others - as POSITIVE SOURCES.

If they are ever going to regain their senses and want to re-join the fold, it's going to take some serious de-programming. It may be too late. Seriously.

[atreides1]

7. Some would call it support of their candidate

I tend to call it for what it is, blind loyalty, with emphasis on the word blind!

[MonkeyFunk]

8. Around the same time

Obama fans decided that "deterrence" was some brand new policy, thought up by Hillary Clinton.

[redqueen]

14. This is not deterrence.

Deterrence is Israel's 200-400 nuclear warheads, some on subs. Deterrence is the common knowledge that we back Israel.

This is beating the drums of war, and make no mistake about it.

[MonkeyFunk]

29. Of course it's deterrence

and it's nothing new, and it's no different from the policy that will exist under an Obama administration.

[redqueen]

35. What other president or presidential candidate

has threatened to "obliterate" a country, over a threat that isn't even a threat?

[MonkeyFunk]

40. True to form

you're being dishonest about her position.

[redqueen]

42. How?

[roguevalley]

63. and you are nuts:

Said Clinton on Good Morning America, "I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran. In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them."

tell me how redqueen is nothing but on the point.

[MattBaggins]

76. You don't get it do you?

It has to do with that whole diplomacy idea. Some things don't have to be said particularly if they are understood to be true. Of course we have a policy of military support for Israel as we should, but your candidate needs to tone it down.

The only thing she was missing there was a shoe to bang on the table.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

38. Going on TV and saying essentially "We'll nuke those sandn*****s back to the stone age!"

Is not what I'd call an effective deterrence policy. It's called pandering to the bigoted ignorant armchair commando vote. Something your candidate does so well.

[MonkeyFunk]

51. OF course

that's not the policy she's espousing.

Doesn't it ever concern you that the only way people support Obama is to lie constantly?

[Phillycat]

52. No shit.

You'd think that would send up a red flag or two.

[redqueen]

56. ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5617427

[redqueen]

55. ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5617427

[roguevalley]

64. and you are still not saying how this exact quote is not what it is:

Said Clinton on Good Morning America, "I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran. In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them."

[roguevalley]

62. murder for political gain is not deterrence. we already have one

idiot who is going to the hague. why have another? our reputation for murder and terror and lying and stealing is bad enough right now without another neocon asshole ramping it up.

[QC]

9. When did so many DUers decide that a nuclear attack on a U.S. ally

is no big deal?

Can anyone name for me a president who did not hold that nuclear attacks on U.S. allies would be met with overwhelming force? This is not something new.

[ProSense]

17. Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapon. Are you and Hillary getting information from the same source?

Do you believe it's responsible for a presidential candidate to saber rattle using non-existent weapons?

[Clintonista2]

60. She was actually asked the question

Be reasonable when you lie please.

[roguevalley]

67. and this is not what it is?

Said Clinton on Good Morning America, "I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran. In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them."

since all the agencies in the world have said they have no nukes, its a provocation by a complete neocon asshole. by the way, hope it never happens. death clouds don't stop at borders.

[redqueen]

19. Who said it was no big deal? Why all the strawmen?

Why do you think a nuclear attack on Israel is an urgent threat?

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

20. So who's threatening nukes?

Not Iran.

[bowens43]

21. There has been no attack and it's not likely there will be.

this is just more insane bullshit from the hillary campaign to keep her lemmings marching toward the cliff.

[Phillycat]

34. This kerfuffle just has no legs.

I can't believe they're even going with it.

[redqueen]

37. Kerfluffle?

She jumps on the "Iran is an urgent threat" bandwagon and you call that a "kerfluffle"?

[Phillycat]

47. She was ASKED THE QUESTION.

For the love of god! You're not stupid, come on now. Obama gave a non-answer when he was asked (par for the course); Hillary answered directly. Of course we would respond with overwhelming force if Israel were attacked with nukes. Are you all being this deliberately obtuse, or are you hoping stupid people will read these ridiculous threads and be convinced because they can't read the second part of a sentence??

[redqueen]

50. I know she was asked the question.

Obama didn't give a non-answer. He gave an answer like she gave before. Did you see her previous take on this?

As for your accusations about my being "deliberately obtuse"... or hoping "stupid people" will read this thread and be convinced... I'm not going to say anything at all. I'm just gonna quote you a little, for posterity.

[roguevalley]

70. hey, nukes are the end of the fucking world. As for Israel, nothing

wrong with them using their own NUKES. They have them. Let them commit them. We've killed enough ME people.

[Shakespeare]

83. "We will obliterate them" is just a bit much, though.

Indeed, she was asked. She went WAY over the top with her answer, though.

[roguevalley]

68. this is a kerfluffle?

Said Clinton on Good Morning America, "I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran. In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them."

I will try and remember that when mothers are picking up their children's ashes. Oh, that doesn't matter.

[Phillycat]

79. So Hillary invented deterrance?

Deliberately obtuse.

[high density]

58. If Israel is attacked we'll deal with it then

Until then we don't need to talk about nuking Iran into the middle ages. They already know we can do that without one of our presidential candidates wielding it about in this crazy belligerent manner like a kid with a squirt gun.

[eridani]

100. It's no big deal because is isn't possible

If it were possible, that would be a different matter.

[crankychatter]

11. some folks are so propoganda sotten...

... they don't need softening up... their response is Pavlovian.

Hill said it. I believe it. That settles it.

wtf indeed.

Evidentally we're going to War with Iran

Gonna git us some mo' of them dang turrists.

You, I think, may have noticed.

on edit:: I only WISH that this was Jingoism or showmanship on her part.

unfortunately... this is the plan, or the War Profiteer owned media, and certain (ahem) "Public" Servants... wouldn't be repeating known bullshit.

[QC]

22. There's another Pavlovian response that is equally stupid:

Hill said it. THAT MEANS IT'S A GODDAM FUCKING LIE!!!1!11!! SHE'S WORSE THAN SATAN!!11!!!!1!11!!!

[redqueen]

24. What are you saying that we're calling a lie?

WTF are you talking about NOW?

[redqueen]

23. Have so many REALLY learned SO LITTLE?

:crazy:

[crankychatter]

32. well it IS getting better out there...

Obama's ascension is evidence the old game's failing somewhat

so that's good news

and the way they revved it up the last few months?

Well, they think it will help Clinton. I suspect they're going to have a quickie "incident" and "precision" bombing... unlike the build up to Iraq.

The pervasiveness of media control is astounding right now though, eh?

Even FOX was more subtle during Iraq, than the ABC debate... they just spew lies willy nilly...

[crankychatter]

26. iggie are you stalkin me?

honey if you want a date you should just send a little private note.

you're creepin' me out.

[PVnRT]

12. When Hillary decided that she needs to be a cowboy like Bush

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

15. When all else fails, erect a bogeyman, wave the flag and bluster.

“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” H.L. Mencken

[redqueen]

25. I can't frickin believe what I'm seeing here...

I honestly can't...

[bowens43]

16. When hillary told them to think so.

Lemmings.....

[helderheid]

18. to the greatest with you

:wtf: is right!!

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

27. Iran became a threat

when we executed Saddam.

Before then, there was a "balance of power" to keep a lid on.

Now, we have a "surge" keeping a lid on.

When we leave, the lid blows off, all hell breaks loose. Iran is just part of that hell.

:hi:

[redqueen]

39. ... cause it's next on the PNAC's list?

[LSK]

48. ahhh, the standard right wing excuse of why we must stay in Iraq

:hi:

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

66. Yep, I hear you.

The right-wing says that we have to prevent reaping what we have sown. As if we can.

Me, I think it's pretty much inevitable. We broke it. We can't fix it. We might as well just get the hell out. I see no fix for what we did.

In hindsight, we should have let Saddam have Kuwait, and just stayed away. Seventeen years. Sooner or later it'll start looking like a quagmire.

[guruoo]

28. They're not, they won't, we won't. End of argument. n/t

[onehandle]

30. What DUers said that?

Iran needs to be monitored (just like any country has nuclear plants), but I haven't noticed a DUer say that they were an "urgent threat."

[redqueen]

41. Not directly... but they're defending the "we'll obliterate them" comment...

by implying that that kind of cowboy talk is a necessary deterrent to such an event.

[ProSense]

31. Clinton's Iran Threat Contradicts Previous Position on Making Such Comments

Clinton's Iran Threat Contradicts Previous Position on Making Such Comments

April 22, 2008 9:50 AM

Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, told Chris Cuomo on GMA this morning that should Iran attack Israel with nuclear weapons, "I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran...In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them."

The comment seems to contradict previous statements Clinton has made on the subject -- not so much about her willingness to attack Iran, but about the wisdom of discussing such a move.

During a debate on MSNBC last October, moderator Brian Williams asked Clinton what her "red line" would be "concerning when to, if to attack Iran? What would make it crystal-clear in your mind that the United States should attack Iran?"

Clinton at the time wouldn't answer the question, even when pressed by Williams, who had to come back at her after she gave a lengthy non-responsive answer.

"Respectfully, Senator," Williams said, "same question though: Do you have a threshold…?

Clinton would only say, "I want to start diplomacy….I am not going to speculate about when or if they get nuclear weapons."

Her current remarks are quite a contrast from that cautiousness.

Moreover, at the AFL-CIO candidate forum last August after Sens. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, and Chris Dodd, D-Conn., got into a heated exchange about Obama's pledge to attack targets within Pakistan -- with or without the Pakistani government's permission -- should he as president get actionable intelligence of high-value al Qaeda targets in that country.

Clinton at that time scolded her colleagues for having the discussion.

“Well, I do not believe people running for president should engage in hypotheticals," she said. "And it may well be that the strategy we have to pursue on the basis of actionable intelligence -- but remember, we’ve had some real difficult experiences with actionable intelligence -- might lead to a certain action."

more

[redqueen]

45. See... her previous talk... THAT's what I expect from a Dem and responsible leader.

Now this George Bush cowboy bullshit...

:wtf:

[BlooInBloo]

33. FEAR! TERRA! FEAR! TERRA!

[TragedyandHope]

36. Fear mongering and saber rattling are what we are trying to get away from

There is a difference between fanning the flames of international tensions for political gain and a pragmatic security policy which includes military action as a last resort after all other avenues are exhausted.

Rove's "War President" is the one who got us into the mess we're in today. We don't need more of the same.

[City Lights]

43. They've bought into the Hillabush talking points. nt

[LSK]

44. their Cult leader - on orders from Cheney - told them to

[Laura PourMeADrink]

46. I don't think so ! el Baradi (who I trust) said they were'nt close. He's

the one who tried to tell Cheney the yellowcake deal was a forgery
and Cheney didn't return his calls until after the SOTU.

[IndianaJones]

53. I think it happened about the time so many DU'ers decided pandering to bigots is ok...

and a certain oppressed minority should just STFU.

[redqueen]

54. You mean Christians? The anti-gay bigots? The ones Clinton pandered to PERSONALLY in 96?

Is that what you mean?

[IndianaJones]

57. no...I'm talking about the candidate that used poll results to identify and pander...

to a rather large group of bigots in SC around 6 months ago.

And the subsequent defense and outright embrace of this tactic by a large number of his supporters.

[redqueen]

59. I'm not interested in playing "gotcha" with you today.

Today the subject is not who's pandering to bigots... but who's pandering to warmongers / neo-cons.

[roguevalley]

80. what a stupid and non specific whine. anything to detract from this:

Said Clinton on Good Morning America, "I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran. In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them."

[burythehatchet]

65. It is simply meant to drive the Jewish vote away from Obama. There is nothing

more to it than that. Basically "I'm the bigger Likudnik" is her strategy. She a frickin pathetic DINO

[Rosa Luxemburg]

72. It has gallons of oil

:evilgrin:

[Beaverhausen]

74. She was asked a hypothetical question at the debate last week

should Iran get nukes and nuked Israel, what would you do?

[redqueen]

78. Why do people keep pointing out that she was asked?

Does that make her comments less reckless, somehow?

[Beaverhausen]

81. do you know what hypothetical means?

Iran isn't getting nukes anytime in the near future, so chill.

[redqueen]

82. Yes... and it still doesn't matter...

a leader still should not be talking about OBLITERATING countries.

Hillary HERSELF admitted this... but now she's either changed her mind or she was being dishonest then.

So much seems to have changed.

[Cali_Democrat]

77. When Hillary started warmongering

nt

[Forkboy]

84. Right around the same time they decided BillO was better than KeithO.

There's a trend in the behavior of some of them that's easy to predict.

[Shakespeare]

85. I know what you mean. She sounded like freakin' Cheney this morning.

"We will obliterate them?" What the fucking fuck???

Obama did his best to give a measured answer without being rude to Robin Roberts ("your question is inflammatory bullshit"), and it wasn't a non-answer. Then Annie Oakley goes WAAAAAAYYY over the top with "we will obliterate them."

The reaction of Hillary supporters on this is the best example yet of how they will excuse ANYTHING their candidate says, even if it goes directly against sentiment they've previously expressed here (i.e., let's stop the sabre-rattling against Iran).

Un-fucking-believable.

[Occam Bandage]

86. The instant that Hillary W. Clinton decided to borrow TERRA TERRA TERRA.

[redqueen]

87. Borrow?

She seems to have been on board since day 1... echoing those Iraq/Al Qaeda connection lies in her IWR speech.

[Occam Bandage]

89. She appeared to be sane from 2005-Jan. 2008. Now that she's under stress

it seems she's slowly reverting to 2003 Hillary.

I first noticed it with her "It's 3AM. I will protect you from the foreigners. Obama will let your sleeping children die."

Now it's unmistakable. As Elton John said, "the (attractive and intelligent candidate of peace)* is back."


*comment censored to prevent cries of sexism.

[redqueen]

91. *snort*

[Lilith Velkor]

88. Around the same time you stopped beating your wife.

[redqueen]

92. Really?!

[IndianaJones]

90. Given the continuing war in Iraq, the United States is not in a position to invade Iran,

but missile strikes might be a viable option

[frylock]

97. i'm gettin a hard on just thinking about it!!

please jeebus, let president mcclinton bomb the living shit outta them iranians despite them not having any nuclear capability in their arsenal. amen.

[IndianaJones]

99. thats cool...Obama said that by the way. lmao. nt.

[tekisui]

93. Wes Clark jumped on board, too.

Saying we need to "threaten Iran, while we talk to them".

[redqueen]

94. Wow... really?

When did he change his tune?

[tekisui]

95. Just recently. He still said we needed to talk to them.

But, that we also need to "threaten them". Bizarre.

[Texas Hill Country]

96. she is talking about preventative DETERRENCE... not war.

[IsItJustMe]

98. Hillary says nuke em, and her supports say, HELL YEAH. LOL