Skip to comments.Pentagon slams Clinton on Iraq
Posted on 07/19/2007 10:55:36 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
Pentagon slams Clinton on Iraq
By DEVLIN BARRETT, Associated Press Writer 19 minutes ago
The Pentagon has issued a stinging rebuke to Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton, arguing that she is boosting enemy propaganda by asking how the U.S. plans to eventually withdraw from Iraq.
Under Secretary of Defense Eric Edelman wrote a biting reply to questions Clinton raised in May, urging the Pentagon to start planning now for the withdrawal of U.S. troops.
A copy of Edelman's response, dated July 16, was obtained Thursday by The Associated Press.
"Premature and public discussion of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq reinforces enemy propaganda that the United States will abandon its allies in Iraq, much as we are perceived to have done in Vietnam, Lebanon and Somalia," Edelman wrote.
He added that "such talk understandably unnerves the very same Iraqi allies we are asking to assume enormous personal risks."
Clinton, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, has privately and publicly pushed Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs Chairman Peter Pace two months ago to begin drafting the plans for what she said will be a complicated withdrawal of troops, trucks and equipment.
"If we're not planning for it, it will be difficult to execute it in a safe and efficacious way," she said then.
Clinton spokesman Philippe Reines called the response "at once outrageous and dangerous."
"Redeploying out of Iraq with the same combination of arrogance and incompetence with which the Bush administration deployed our young men and women into Iraq is completely unacceptable, and our troops deserve far better," said Reines, who said military leaders should offer a withdrawal plan rather than "a political plan to attack those who question them."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
A patriot she ain't.
About time someone spoke out.
No it isn't, the only one that is "at once outrageous and dangerous." is your mistress...
Hillary couldn’t care bleep about what the enemy does or how she helps them, as long as she gets in power.
...”Clinton spokesman Philippe Reines called the response “at once outrageous and dangerous.””...
“Philippe Reines”? This must be some kind of neutered metrosexual to be Hillary Clinton’s “spokesman”. More like “spokeseunuch”...
“Clinton, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, has privately and publicly pushed Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs Chairman Peter Pace two months ago to begin drafting the plans for what she said will be a complicated withdrawal of troops, trucks and equipment.”
I like the position they’re trying to wiggle out of. If they want to withdrawal and retreat, they have to develop a plan for it and take responsibility for it.
I’ll bet that has her doing extra laps on her broomstick.
She ain't F'n president yet.. who in hell does she think she is pushing the defense dept to draft anything.. this is adequate proof of "aid and comfort to the enemy", what more4 proof do you need... get a pair George and cite these POS, for TREASON
I love this quote and sums up exactly what the Democrats are offering regarding a way forward in Iraq
“a political plan to attack those who question them.”
the pubbies oughta do an analysis of the clintons’ foray into albania.
celebrated is the travelogue of robert d. kaplan “balkan ghosts”.
the newer editions brag that the clintons read his book before invading the former yugoslavia.
kaplan’s book is lightweight imo. it’s fashioned after rebecca west’s “black lamb and grey falcon”, a classic picture of the balkans, but is not equal.
if kaplan’s book were the reason for invading the balkans by america’s first black president, then it was a pretty shallow reason.
did she listen to me? No!
Say there honey in the second row, how about we do some peace
negotiating of our own after the show.
About time the Pentagon comes out and says what most of America knows; the Democrats are betting on defeat in Iraq and are doing everything they can to make it happen whether it gets soldiers killed or not.
This will hurt Hillary in the debates........good!!
And, this jacka*& wants to lead the US? If she does not, even in her campaign, respect the basic US military and foreign policy facts of life, what the he^% will she do in office?
The issue of exit strategy (or ANY strategy for that matter) is not and cannot be public information, even I know that. For her to press publicly for answers to sensitive strategy matters means that she is either ‘playing stupid’ or else knows very well that the people she is publicly pressing for answers are honor bound to keep the that information confidential, (whether she IS stupid or just playing stupid).
In any case, her ‘public’ recognizes no such distinction and instead, sees her as some kind of fire-eating crusader looking out for the public good.
The US public is no more entitled to that kind of sensitive information than are the enemies of the US. Add to this, that the MSM makes her out to be some kind of political savior and the conscience of wronged Americans and it’s enough to make you throw up!
The reply should have been: "you can have your Pentagon do that planning if you are elected. This Administration is concentrating on victory, not retreat"!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.