Posted on 07/26/2009 3:43:56 PM PDT by Steelfish
July 27, 2009
Your nuclear pursuit is futile, Hillary Clinton tells Iran
Tim Reid in Washington, Sheera Frenkel in Jerusalem
Hillary Clinton's comments came as US officials arrived in Israel for peace talks
Hillary Clinton sought to calm Israeli fears about a nuclear-armed Iran yesterday after she appeared to suggest last week that the Obama Administration was resigned to Tehran getting the bomb.
Israeli officials expressed concern after the US Secretary of State said in Thailand that a nuclear-armed Iran could be contained by a US “defence umbrella”. Her words went beyond the Obama Administration’s publicly stated Iran policy, which is focused on preventing Tehran from acquiring weapons of mass destruction.
Speaking on the NBC programme Meet the Press yesterday, Mrs Clinton said that Iran’s pursuit of a nuclear weapon was “futile”. “What we want to do is to send a message to whoever is making these decisions that, if you’re pursuing nuclear weapons for the purpose of intimidating, of projecting your power, we are not going to let that happen,” she said.
Mrs Clinton spoke as America’s leading Middle East envoy and a succession of senior officials headed for Jerusalem in an attempt to achieve an Arab-Israeli peace settlement.
(Excerpt) Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...
Translation: Lets make some noises the Israelis want to hear, so we can get them agree to a settlement freeze.
Unfortunately, there is no teeth or even coherent strategy behind these words—so they are just so much hot air.
Someday the U.S.A. and all of its citizens may tire of being Israel’s lapdog, but not for the moment apparently.
” “What we want to do is to send a message to whoever is making these decisions that, if you’re pursuing nuclear weapons for the purpose of intimidating, of projecting your power, we are not going to let that happen,” she said. “
When what you ARE doing is sending a message that this administration has no idea what its policies are, or how to go about achieving them. I’m wondering if Lord Barry has lost the nuclear codes faster than Slick Willie did. They are probably somewhere “safe”, along with his marbles.
I don’t for a second believe that this Administration would do one meaningful thing if Iran nuked Israel. Any “defense umbrella would be so much rhetoric. And, doesn’t BHO want to get rid of missile defense anyway?
What they would do is make verbal condemnations and sponsor UN resolutions. This would all be show to continue to get contributions from the Jews left in this country. Sadly, I think most Jews would continue to carry water for the Dems, even after the destruction of Israel.
The most likely outcome is that both Iran and Israel (and perhaps a good chunk of the Middle East proper) would be destroyed. If anything, the US would pressure the remnants of the Israeli government not to retaliate.
If anything, its the other way around. The US is trying to get Israel to commit slow suicide. Its been that way since Bush I.
If we have better allies in the Middle East, please tell us who they are? Perhaps you think the Saudis are trustworthy? [/sarc]
How could this be when our foreign policy is based solely on what’s good for Israel? Please, you cannot be serious. Do you have any idea the amount of foreign aid that goes to Israel? And the amount of times we have stuck our neck out for them? We do all of this for what exactly? What kind of an “ally” is Israel? What a joke!!! Please be serious with your next reply.
So what is your idea of a good ally? I’m sure if we asked Israel for troops, they would provide them. But we don’t ask for political reasons.
If Iran nuked Israel, I don't have the slightest doubt that the US would retaliate against Iran regardless of who is in the WH. And it would probably be a moot point since Israel would have already responded with a nuclear attack of its own.
What they would do is make verbal condemnations and sponsor UN resolutions. This would all be show to continue to get contributions from the Jews left in this country. Sadly, I think most Jews would continue to carry water for the Dems, even after the destruction of Israel.
Disagree. Nuclear warfare would be the threshhold for our involvement. A conventional attack may draw the kind of response you describe.
The most likely outcome is that both Iran and Israel (and perhaps a good chunk of the Middle East proper) would be destroyed. If anything, the US would pressure the remnants of the Israeli government not to retaliate.
Israel will do whatever is best in its national interest.
If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
‘Talk is cheap’. . .and the currency more than undervalued when Hillary speaks.
‘Talk is cheap’. . .and the currency more than undervalued when Hillary speaks.
I wonder if Iran has the equivalent of the Jon Stewart Show.
They could just play the Hillary tape over and over and die laughing.
Who the hell says we need an ally there? Why is that automatically assumed? What if Israel didn’t exist at all? Would you propose we kiss Saudi Arabia’s ass more? Every country in that region hates every other country and if left alone they would all destroy themselves soon enough.
“Israel will do whatever is best in its national interest.”
As we should do.
The Iranian dictatorship will not pay attention to the likes of Hillary’s meaningless hot air, considering the main country to feel Obama & Company’s verbal wrath is Iran’s principal enemy — Israel.
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.