Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

IF ISRAEL STRIKES IRAN FIRST, WILL HILLARY NUKE IRAN?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 11:59 AM
Original message
IF ISRAEL STRIKES IRAN FIRST, WILL HILLARY NUKE IRAN?
Edited on Tue Apr-22-08 12:07 PM by leveymg
Exactly what does Hillary Clinton mean when she says, “I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran"? Clinton told ABC, "In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them."

But, what if Israel launches that first-strike -- or, Israel strikes Iran after some third-party provocation -- which is the more plausible scenario. What then, Madam Commander-in-Chief? Are we bound by your pledge to “obliterate” Iran, even if Iran doesn’t fire the first shot?

Is that the message we want to send to a country that started a preemptive war with its neighbors in 1967? And, by that, I don't mean Iran.

Did you think this through, Hill, or is that exactly what you want us to expect during the Hillary Clinton Presidency?

***

If elected President, Hillary Clinton appears to tie the fate of the United States to that of Israel, no matter who or what starts the hypothetical (G-d forbid) Israel-Iran war.

Here’s a not unlikely scenario in the all-too-near future. It is April 22, 2010. In her first State of the Union Address, just a few months before, President Hillary Clinton had identified Iran’s nuclear program as the “single greatest threat” to U.S. national security, and pledges that “any attack on Israel by Iran, or its proxies, will be treated as an attack on the United States, and will be dealt with as such.”

At 10:06 am, a large radiological dirty bomb is detonated in downtown Tel Aviv. There are hundreds of casualties. Live cable news coverage shows a towering black pillar of radioactive smoke over the city and scenes of bloody, charred victims. Shortly thereafter, the international wire services receive calls from someone claiming to represent a Palestinian group that has in the past received some assistance from the Iranian al Quds Brigade. CNN and Fox immediately go on the air and announcers repeat, over and over, a “nuclear attack in Israel has been carried out by terrorists linked to Iran who claim responsibility.”

At 10:22 am, in the Straits of Hormuz, Iranian speed boats approach a convoy of three US Navy destroyers. The Iranians are unaware of what has happened in Tel Aviv. This is just another day out in the sun for the young Iranian Guards, jumping wakes in their ski boats, making obscene gestures at the giant grey American warships. As the Iranian vessels close to within a quarter-mile, the Captain of the lead U.S. vessel receives a flash message about a nuclear detonation inside Israel and initial intelligence reports of a possible Iranian role – he opens fire on the Iranian boats when they come within 300 yards. The small fiberglass vessels and their crews are obliterated by gattling guns.

Watching this through binoculars from the eastern shore of the Persian Gulf, an Iranian base commander tries to reach his headquarters for instructions. His radio and optical fiber communications systems haven’t been working since he received a short, confusing message about a nuclear explosion in Israel. Assuming his communications have been jammed, and that war has started, he orders the launch of his mobile battery of anti-shipping missiles. The first wave of twelve Chinese-made C-802 supersonic missiles skim over the waves. Within seconds, two of the U.S. destroyers are struck, and begin sinking almost immediately. All up and down the coast as far as he can see, the commander watches the fiery streaks of missiles flashing back and forth and large explosions.

At 10:46 am, the Prime Minister of Israel is on a secure line with the White House Situation Room. He tells President Hillary Clinton that he is prepared to launch Israeli missile and air strikes to destroy Iran’s nuclear, air and ballistic missile facilities, along with decapitating bunker-buster strikes against Iran’s command and control installations that have already been effectively blinded by Israeli electronic counter-measures.

If any Iranian retaliatory strike Israel with nuclear, chemical or biological warheads that get through Israel’s ABM shield, he tells her, Israel will launch a counter-force strike with some of its own nuclear weapons. Israel reserves the bulk of its nuclear arsenal, he warns, for later use against any other nation that might ally itself with Iran or try to avenge Iran.

What does he expect President Clinton will tell him? What do you think she will do? How would this situation be different with President Obama on the red phone two years from today?


***

Compare Hillary Clinton’s threats yesterday on ABC to Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ statement delivered Monday evening at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y.: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/WireStory?id=4698444&page=1

"Another war in the Middle East is the last thing we need and, in fact, I believe it would be disastrous on a number of levels.”

By comparison, Mrs. Clinton makes the Bush Administration (except Mr. Cheney) sound like paragons of restraint and reason.

Even with Gates’ obligatory nod to keeping all options on the table, given what he calls “the destabilizing policies of the regime and the risks inherent in a future Iranian nuclear threat . . .” there’s still quite a difference in emphasis here.

But, calculations of war and peace are all about incremental logic and small steps add up to giant leaps into a deep, permanent dark place.

***

Let’s look at an alternative future. Barack Obama has been elected President. Even before he is sworn into office officially on January 20, 2009, the President-Elect and his national security team have already had numerous meetings and conversations with high officials from Israel and Iran.

The message that has been conveyed is the U.S. will have no part in a preemptive war against Iran. America will not be prodded and tricked into another disaster, as it was in Iraq.

All parties should stand down their forces.

There will be no U.S.-Israel-Iran War. Not on President Obama's watch.

***
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DerekJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 12:03 PM
Response to Original message
1. Simple answer: Yes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suston96 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
2. Great post but .......
Edited on Tue Apr-22-08 12:11 PM by suston96
This is what is reported Hillary actually said:

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton warned Tehran on Tuesday that if she were president, the United States could "totally obliterate" Iran in retaliation for a nuclear strike against Israel."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080422/pl_nm/usa_politics_iran_dc



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. The original ABC News report:
Here it is: http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Vote2008/story?id=4698059&page=1

Clinton on an Iran Attack: 'Obliterate Them'

Clinton further displayed tough talk in an interview airing on "Good Morning America" Tuesday. ABC News' Chris Cuomo asked Clinton what she would do if Iran attacked Israel with nuclear weapons.

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

Watch the full interview with Sen. Hillary Clinton on "GMA" Tuesday.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Diamond Dog Donating Member (271 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 12:05 PM
Response to Original message
3. No. She's beholden to the fundamentalist morons that make up a proportional percentage of her votes.
Ergo, she will hold this particular rogue state as America, Junya. Nothing would be done, except perhaps a formal reprimand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucky 13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 12:06 PM
Response to Original message
4. "President Hillary Clinton" - the very idea scares me.
:scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. Madame President..or President Clinton...either is correct..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucky 13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Hey, call her whatever you like... still scares me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. The only reason to be afraid is if Obama gets the nomination..
then for sure there will be another Republican president!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucky 13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 02:10 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. WHA?
Tell me which policies of his are like Republicans? We keep hearing Hillary and Barack's policies are 95% similar, so... what am I missing?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #15
33. McCain and the Republican machine will shred him like a head of cabbage..
Too much baggage...no way to defend it.. thats what is sad!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucky 13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-23-08 10:24 AM
Response to Reply #33
34. You didn't answer my question
How SPECIFICALLY is he like the Republicans?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-23-08 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #34
35. Not what I meant..
I meant the Republicans will destroy him in the General Election and we will have a Republican president for the next 4 yrs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucky 13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-23-08 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. oh i see.
still disagree with you tho. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PoliticalAmazon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #8
23. Queen Hillary of Nukonia is the correct term. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #8
25. actualy, only the later ever will be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
5. Hillary goes along with the loudest crowd, like a teenager who doesn't value character
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
invictus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Exactly! The Clintons have no ethics. They will do anything, including propose mass murder. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
11. She's scaring me, leveymg. Rec'd! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. Thanks! She scares me, too.
Used to think she was a fairly smart, responsible person. Not after this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PoliticalAmazon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #14
24. She actually appears more sane than McCain. This nuke business is scary. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 02:07 PM
Response to Original message
12. It will depend on the polling that day?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. That was Bill's thng
I think Hill's overheated and exhausted - just like she might be in a crisis.

She's not showing real good judgment under pressure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. My unsubstanciated theory is that there is something going on with Bill
Edited on Tue Apr-22-08 02:27 PM by sfexpat2000
medically that has been affecting his own judgement and so, he hasn't been able to rein in Hillary's tone deafness -- as he probably did for their whole partnership.

I have nada to base this on. But, it's the only explanation I can come up with that accounts for both his missteps and her behavior. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. Open heart surgery often has a psychological effect.
You may be right about that.

Sad really. Not so long ago, I revered both of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. I never revered the Clintons but I did admire their fight
and their accomplishments.

We'll know soon enough. I only hope that Bill Clinton gets to enjoy some of his well earned retirement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #22
27. I was so happy in early November, 1992.
My wife and I watched the final election returns at one of the Democratic events in DC, and then walked over to the White House. As we stood outside the darkened mansion at midnight, we believed it was the start of a new, better time for America.

In some ways it was. I'm really saddened by the nasty turn of debate during the last few months.

Now, Hill says things that are really, really scary and foolish. She must feel the end of her political career is near. Such a person shouldn't have her hand on the button.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PoliticalAmazon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #20
26. Whatever the reason, he shouldn't be speaking in public if he is that unstable....
...He has been very divisive, especially racially. This is terrible for our party and our country. He is also destroying his own legacy.

I understand if he has psychological issues, but if that is the case they should have the good sense to sideline him until he can get things sorted out for himself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #26
31. Sometimes these situations creep up on a family very slowly
and very subtly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eurobabe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 02:08 PM
Response to Original message
13. Hillary sounds just like another NEOCON n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
walldude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 02:15 PM
Response to Original message
18. The fact that this is even a consideration is sickening.
Well Bush has managed to do one thing, he's managed to get the word NUKE back into daily life, making it that much easier to fool people into thinking that DROPPING A FUCKING NUCLEAR BOMB is actually a reasonable thing to do. :puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 02:17 PM
Response to Original message
19. Is Iran our ally? Oh, but you knew that answer before posting, did you not?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 02:27 PM
Response to Original message
21. Well
Edited on Tue Apr-22-08 02:33 PM by DemocratSinceBirth
"Is that the message we want to send to a country that started a preemptive war with its neighbors in 1967? And, by that, I don't mean Iran."


The Egyptians Closed The Straits Of Tiran In 1967...That was an act of war... Throw in the fact that Gamal Abdul Nasser was threatening Israel for months and amassing his forces on the border ,the Israelis because of their lack of strategic depth and vast numerical inferiority had no alternative but to strike first...

As to the present instance Hillary Clinton said the United States wouldn't sit idly by if Israel was nuked... That's been the implicit or explicit policy of every American president since Harry Truman...

But nobody is nuking anybody...The whole scenario is far fetched...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 02:46 PM
Response to Reply #21
30. So, she should have simply repeated the usual platitudes, not
threatened to "obliterate" Iran if she's elected. What kind of a message does that send in an already tense situation?

Unfortunately, start of hostilities due to third-party manipulation and miscommunication is not so implausible. It's part of a serioously dangerous strategy of provocation.

Come on, you know her statement was over the edge.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 02:38 PM
Response to Original message
28. If Israel strikes Iran first, she'll obliterate Israel, of course. She just wants peace. Right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
crankychatter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
29. Israel never strikes first... She only "retaliates"
doncha watch CNN n stuff?

therefore, the answer is "yes"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-22-08 04:47 PM
Response to Original message
32. Prez Hillary would totally destroy the alliance with the UK with
such folly. As it is her standing in the EU is pretty low and I can't see this Iran nuke rant making her any new fans.

A recent BBC TV Newsnight feature found 70% Europeans polled thought her a bossy fright and a ballsbreaker/potential Lorena Bobbit if cornered.

I thought her reaction to the Iran nuke poser really showed her immaturity as a statewoman.

Obama's judgement certainly seems more measured. Brits still don't seem to know much about him though. But I reckon if he gets in to the White House he'd get huge support over here and not just because so much of the UK loathes Bush and the GOP.

Good thread, leveymg, enjoyed reading.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobthedrummer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-25-08 04:45 PM
Response to Original message
37. Kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 02:19 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC