Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Compare & contrast: Condiscending Rice vs. Hillary Clinton

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 (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 01:46 PM
Original message
Poll question: Compare & contrast: Condiscending Rice vs. Hillary Clinton
(A disclaimer: I thought Joe Biden, John Edwards and Barack Obama - in that order, would make fine presidents. I was not a fan of Hillary's)

Sex State Condiscending Rice managed to irritate the Russians, the Turks, the Palestinians, the Iranians, the Iraqis, the French, the Poles, the Chinese, the Brazilians, the Syrians, the Swiss, the Libyans, the Germans, the Japanese, the South Africans, the North Koreans, the South Koreans, the Venezuelans, the Egyptians, the Yemenis, the oh, hell. Fill in the blank.

In just one month, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has managed to pick up relations with the Palestinians, make peace with Russia, have the Syrians anxious to talk, and now,
THE IRANIANS ACCEPT HER INVITE to discuss Afghanistan.

Which begs the question: Who best serves the interests of the United States?

Sorry, polls are turned off at Level 3.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Mass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 01:50 PM
Response to Original message
1. No question, but this also has a lot to do with the skills of the president, as he
Edited on Sat Mar-07-09 01:52 PM by Mass
defines foreign policy. Whatever her skills, Rice would not have been able to do anything with Bush as president. That is as simple as that).

This said, Clinton is doing a great job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pansypoo53219 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 05:17 PM
Response to Original message
2. well, the rite wing starts closeminded.
you can't talk when there is no discussion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 06:11 PM
Response to Original message
3. You're mistaken about Syria - Kerry's been the key person dealing with Syria
Edited on Sat Mar-07-09 06:30 PM by blm
Kerry maintained a relationship with Assad throughout Bush's terms and even as both Clintons were sided with Bush on his Syria policy. Bill Clinton even advocated military action against Syria.

I have no doubt Syria's leaders are well aware of who sided with who and who reached out and listened to them over the years. Syria is open to solutions for their region, but, certainly no thanks to Clintons and their proBush position.

This page from Clinton's Daily journal was scrubbed since last week when it was posted here at DU, but, others copied it - Clinton was on the same page as Bush and would have helped sell war n Syria with the same vigor he helped Bush sell war in Iraq.

http://billclintondailydiary.blogspot.com/2005/03/i-can...


Friday, March 04, 2005


I can't sleep


I can't sleep. I took two sleeping pills. They didn't work. I can't take any more, because I'm also using heart medicine. I tried
playing internet poker, but I can't focus. Right now there is nothing I can do. I have to wait till after the speech, which is at
about lunch time here on the West coast. After that I have the meeting with the former police officer.

There is something I wanted to say a long time ago, but I didn't have the time, because of my visit to Asia.

I would like to offer my deepest condolences to the family of my close friend and former prime minister of Lebanon, Rafiq Hariri.
His death was a shock to me. I was horrified. I know exactly who did it and why. More about that later.

I called his family to tell them how shocked I was. I wanted to be present at the funeral, but the secret service vetoed that idea.
It wasn't safe, especially not with Hezbollah still armed to the teeth.

Mr. Hariri, lovingly called Mr. Lebanon by his fellow countrymen, was the driving force behind the reconstruction of Lebanon after
the civil war. Lately he was also the driving force behind the movement to ask the Syrian government to pull its soldiers and secret
service agents out of Lebanon.

That's the reason the Syrians killed him. If Syria has to pull out of Lebanon, it will be pretty much encircled by enemy states.
NATO member Turkey to the north, American troops in Iraq to the East, pro-American Jordan to the south (By the way Syria is
occupying a large amount of Jordanian land, which King Abdullah wants back) and Israel to the south west.

The Syrian government killed Rafiq Hariri, because they are afraid that Lebanon would not just be sovereign if they pulled out their
forces, but might in time be dominated by another power, be it Israel or the US, which is more likely.

Another reason is strategic depth. The capital of Syria is just a few miles from the border of Lebanon. And also just a few miles
away from the Israeli occupied Golan Heights. Which is probably the reason Israel chose to occupy the Golan Heights. Standing on the
mountains of the Golan Heights you can see Damascus in the distance. The Syrians know this. It's a great deterrent against any
Syrian adventurism.

This is the reason the Syrian government always uses the Hezbollah, a Lebanese group to attack Israel instead of attacking Israel
itself.

Aside from a national defense dimension there is also the economic dimension. Syria has a hybrid half communist, half capitalist
economic system. Syria is bankrupt and has been ever since the end of the Soviet Union. Without the economic power of Lebanon, Syria
will fall apart economically.

Syria is also under economic sanctions by the US. Lebanon isn't, so products Syria needs are bought by Lebanon, then transferred to
Syria. There are also one million Syrians working in Lebanon. If they have to go back to Syria, Syria will see a lot of social
problems with these unemployed young men.

In other words, without Lebanon, Syria will be boxed in from a military point of view and an economic point of view. Syria without
Lebanon would be weak and exposed.

>From the Syrian's point of view Rafiq Hariri had to die, because he wanted them to leave. And he as a billionaire had the clout to
gather international support for this idea. He was the one who asked the US and France to support United Nations Security Council
Resolution 1559, which calls upon Syria to leave Lebanon.

Some US commentators say the Hariri murder might have been organized by Syria's old guard without the knowledge of Syria's young,
inexperienced president Bashar Assad. This is an old myth dictators create to deflect responsibility.

Go back into history and you will see texts in old Roman books saying, the emperor had raised taxes for instance and the population,
who didn't want or dare attack the emperor for his mistake, they would say the emperor's underlings had made the mistake without the
emperor knowing.

I read books in which Germans, whose family members had been hauled off to concentration camps by the Nazi's, said "If only Herr
Hitler knew about this situation, he'd do something about it". Well Herr Hitler knew about it and had actually ordered it.

It's an old trick. The dictator can make mistakes and deflects taking responsibility by giving the impression he isn't his own man
and the population can criticize the dictator's policies without criticizing him personally.

Bashar Assad ordered the death of Rafiq Hariri. Bashar Assad is in control of Syria.

People in the media should stop making up infantile excuses by saying the real power behind Bashar Assad killed Hariri. Assad is the
power.

There are also people, who think you need to give Bashar Assad incentives to behave more responsibly, to make him stop supporting
terrorists in Lebanon and Israel. This is nonsense. It took me almost eight years to understand that our way of thinking is not
their way of thinking. Their way, I mean a country's dictator's way of thinking.

A dictator wants to stay in power. That's all. A dictator doesn't care about his population, war, peace. He only wants to stay in
power. Everything else is negotiable.

You have to understand the Syrian tyranny. Syria's president Bashar Assad belongs to a minority religious sect called the Alawis, a
sub-group of Islam. The top government and army officials belong to the same sect, which only 10 percent of Syria belongs to. In
other words 10 percent of the population is lording over the 80 percent of Syrians, who are Sunni Muslims.

Syria can not be a normal country, because that would mean, the minority Alawis giving up power to the vast majority of Sunnis. This
is the reason, why Syria has to be always in a state of turmoil if Bashar Assad and his cronies want to stay in power.

As long as there is an external enemy, like Israel occupying the Golan Heights, as long as there is Turkey "occupying" according to
Syria the province of Hatay, the Biblical Antioch, there are external enemies, which focus the majority populations' attention on
these external enemies.

Were these external enemies to disappear, the majority would have the time to consider their own plight. That is a dictator's worst
nightmare, because thinking about a problem and thinking about ways to solve the problem are very closely connected. This is the
reason a minority government like Bashar Assad's Syrian dictatorship needs chaos and turmoil to exist. It doesn't want peace with
its neighbors. It doesn't want its people to be prosperous and content and have time to think about their situation.

The only way to stop Syria from being a constant threat and stop them from spreading chaos is to topple the minority government of
Bashar Assad and let the majority of Syrians rule.

President Bush did this in Iraq and now that the majority Shia are in power, Iraq is looking inwards, trying to make the lives of
its people better. That is what democracies do, they look inward instead of threatening their neighbors, the United States or Israel
or the oil supply and with that the world economy. Majority rule means peace. Minority rule, like Bashar Assad's dictatorship means
chaos, terrorism and war.




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 Wed Aug 27th 2014, 10:33 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) 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