Obama, Clinton In New Flap, Over Nuclear Weapons

[Purveyor]

Source: Reuters

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama found himself embroiled in a new foreign policy flap with rival Hillary Clinton on Thursday, this time over the use of nuclear weapons.

Obama ruled out the use of nuclear weapons to go after al Qaeda or Taliban targets in Afghanistan or Pakistan, prompting Clinton to say presidents never take the nuclear option off the table, and extending their feud over whether Obama has enough experience to be elected president in November 2008.

Sen. Barack Obama speaks at the Woodrow Wilson Center, where he described an anti-terrorism policy that he says he would pursue if elected president. Some of his Democratic opponents criticized his speech.

Obama, a first-term senator from Illinois, told a reporter after a Capitol Hill event that he would not use nuclear weapons in those countries, an aide said.

"His position could not be more clear," said Obama spokeswoman Jen Psaki. "He would not consider using nuclear weapons to fight terror targets in Afghanistan and Pakistan."


Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/02/AR2007080201868.html

[BushOut06]

1. Hey, let's see who has the biggest penis!

Seriously, is that what this is, trying to see which Democratic candidate can be "tougher" than the rethugs?

[Rage for Order]

17. Hey, let's see who has the deepest vagina!

Nah, that doesn't work. It's equally sexist, but it doesn't quite have the same ring to it.

[truthisfreedom]

2. Why do we need nuclear weapons to go after terrorists?

Hillary is turning herself into bush-lite to the Obama supporters, and Obama is turning himself into a wimp to the Hillary supporters.

This is really negative stuff that needs to stop.

[karynnj]

20. How would you ever even use a nuclear weapon for that

purpose? That is insane. 1) It seems you need something far more targeted. 2) We avoided actually using nuclear weapons since WWII - that was a major accomplishment.

I want to see the full context - as this is beyond scary if that is what she really said. The problem is that this is not a game - and it will make it harder for us to regain any credibility in the world.

[yava]

28. impact of such statements on non-profilaration?

When candidates for the US highest office contemplate nuking entire regions because of a few terrorists, what comes of the non-prolifiration treaty and the Iran debate?
Are we to nuke just in case they may want to blow up an airport?
Yes or no?

[karynnj]

33. I choose "NO"

This is extremely dangerous, especially given all that has happened in Iraq. I try not to imagine how we look to countries in that region - it sickens me.

[humbled_opinion]

46. Right WIngs Can't Wait To Use Nukes...

Look Bush asked for a new program for Bunker Buster Nukes. Specifically to fight terrorists that hang out in Mountainous terrain.. Bombs that bury themselves a mile underground and then go boom..

[BeyondGeography]

3. Nuking civilians is on the table...how 20th century of you, Hillary

[earthlover]

22. Seriously, how would nukes target terrorists? Sounds naive and irresponsible on her part

[IndianaGreen]

4. Hillary "Hiroshima" Clinton wants to displace Hitler as mass murderer

Hillary believes in first use of atomic weapons, a radical and reckless concept that breaks with what has been US foreign policy since 1945.

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Connie_Corleone]

5. Why in the world would nuclear weapons be considered for Al Qaeda and the Taliban?

That's overkill to use nuclear weapons in order to kill a "few" people. It's not like Al Qaeda is the government of Pakistan. The Taliban is no longer the government of Afghanistan. We didn't need nuclear weapons to take out the Taliban in 2001.

[sniffa]

6. i hope some other dem hops in the race

the way they're attacking each other, another candidate couLd possibLy get some traction. :sigh:

i just don't understand - our primaries can handLe 8 candidates at the minimum.

[humbled_opinion]

47. To Bad most Democrats ignore the only realist in the group...

Dennis Kucinich.

[still_one]

7. sure wish Gore was running /nt

[Dj13Francis]

8. Hillary is a progressive?

I remember Hillary in the last Dem debate, when asked if she would define herself as a liberal, she responded that she instead would define herself as a progressive. All I can say is, if Hillary Clinton is a progressive, I must be a kangaroo.

[RBInMaine]

9. She's damn progressive compared to the R's!!

She's a progressive compared to the R's and would be tiptoe through the tulips compared to Bush or any damn R!! Train your fire on THEM instead of one of our's if you please.

(And I say this being for Edwards who I think has the best chance to win the general election.)

[IndianaGreen]

11. Not when she advocates first use of nuclear weapons!

Her advocacy of nuclear first strike makes her reckless and dangerous and unfit for higher office.

[maximusveritas]

12. She's not really advocating it; just saying the option should be on the table

I'm not saying I agree with her, but we should try to be accurate when describing her position.

[IndianaGreen]

13. Since the Truman Administration, first use of atomic weapons has never been on the table

By God, do the Hillaristas have even a clue as to what they are defending?

[maximusveritas]

19. I thought the Bush administration changed that policy in 2002

The 2002 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) said nuclear weapons could be used as offensive instead of just defensive weapons.
So Hillary is just continuing that policy.

[karynnj]

23. Even if Bush did - I would think pre-emptive war

and first use of nuclear weapons - should be the first thing publicly rejected by a Democratic President.

The second thing would be to undo by executive order any unitary President provision or other enlargement of the Presidency at the expense of Congress. (I seriously wwant this to be a debate question.)

[IndianaGreen]

26. Hillary = Bush on first use of atomic weapons!

Damn both of them!

[Zhade]

53. "So Hillary is just continuing that policy."

Uh, isn't that a pretty big red flag?

[Kahuna]

18. Bullcrap. Our continuous threats to other countries (Iran, N. Korea)..

will insure that they never give up the quest for nukes. Other countries will also desire them when they see that in this world, might is right. I really admire O'bama's courage in saying what no other candidate dares to say because they want to be seen as macho and strong. Gimme a break.

[earthlover]

25. That's like saying rape is only an option on the table....except rape is not so crazy

Wouldn't it be a bit more SANE to acknowledge that nukes is NOT an option any more than genocide would be (as if there were a difference....)

[humbled_opinion]

49. Please.. Every Right Winger out there can't wait for the first Nuke to light up

i.e., there are small tactical nukes that can obliterate say 25 square miles with minimum fallout...
Minimum collateral damage if you will... (Sarcasm).

The entire option is insane and Obama is the only one progressive enough to understand that.

[John Q. Citizen]

14. Hillary is a dangerous whack job. Next she will be retaining the nuclear option for

drug runners.

Sorry if that upsets your sensibilities but she's gone over the edge.

Hillary has gone bananas, even if she puts a D behind her name.

[IndianaGreen]

10. Hillary has been channeling General Curtis LeMay, former head of SAC

who at the height of the 1962 October Missile Crisis advised President Kennedy to launch a preemptive nuclear strike on Soviet Union.

None of us would be alive today had JFK listened to LeMay.

[karynnj]

24. He was a lunatic - haven't thought of him for years.

[Zhade]

52. No. She is not.

NT!

[Inuca]

15. This is getting absurd!

How on earth can she say something like that? Trying to differentiate yourself is one thing, but I honestly do not undersatnd these kind of comments.

[Kahuna]

16. Oh brother. Hillary makes me sick with her machismo. You'd think

she would have learned better than that by now. :eyes:

[rodeodance]

21. Pelosi needs to LEARN that you never take your OPTIONS OFF THE TABLE!

[TankLV]

27. I prefer Obama's SANE policy - oh my god - that's three in a row I agree with him...

hmmmm...

[Tyler Durden]

29. I am SO sick of all of this.

This fucking election and the fallout from November are about to turn me from a Socialist to a Card Carrying Communist.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

38. Ya, cause that was so great for the little people. n/t

[Tyler Durden]

39. Wake up any time you like.

The "little people" here are getting raped, and the "wealth gap" is far worse than it ever was in the USSR.

You already live in a FASCIST state. From where I sit, a lot more than a touch of Socialism would be a big step up.

[BestCenter]

57. Yeah,

I'm sure that the little people just responded so well to the siren call of a dictatorship by the proles.

[HuffleClaw]

30. future headline: 'Clinton uses Crest, Obama uses Colgate'

like these are the ONLY two 'presidential hopefuls' who don't agree COMPLETELY ON ALL ISSUES ????!!!!

this is getting so silly

[MrPrax]

31. Surprising the subject is even being mentioned...

I guess the 'war children' HAVE left the house...

Bonus points to Obama to be firm about not nuking people and stuff, I guess...

Pretty sick shit...

[Emillereid]

32. What's wrong with Hillary -- nuclear weapons should not even exist!

That she would consider using them ever -- is INSANE -- I don't care who the target is. Thank God Barack is assured enough in his manhood not to leave such diabolical weapons on the table. This is just about Hillary needed to sound TOUGH! We've had enough TOUGH guys in our history -- we certainly don't need a TOUGH woman.

[potone]

34. Obama is right.

It is irresponsible and immoral to suggest using nuclear weapons first. How anyone could suggest that they should remain "on the table" to fight terrorists I cannot imagine. :wtf:

[Wiccan Warrior]

41. Obama is still a joke. n/t

[DrFunkenstein]

35. I Have Now Vowed to Oppose Clinton at Every Turn

My God, how could anyone be so wrong about so crucial an issue? The nuclear option should never be considered at all, and I am not Mr. Kumbaya. Instead of making political calculations to make herself "tough," she should have attempted to grasp some of the core moral issues of our generation.

Seriously, though, what strategic usefulness would the threat of nuclear weapons be to suicidal jihadists? To win the hearts and minds of the Arab world? What would nuclear bunker busting accomplish in anything but the most short-sighted of goals?

Sen. Clinton used to simply make me uneasy about her caluculated machismo, but now I am genuinely outraged. Outraged. Outraged.

[sandnsea]

36. I think that's the ballgame

This is the America that we remember. We don't need to bully the world. Our IDEAS and HOPE are what make us Americans.

[killbotfactory]

37. Has she gone insane?

What good could possibly come from nuking a terrorist cell?

[IndianaGreen]

40. Like Cheney, Hillary advocates nuking Iran with tactical atomic bunker buster bombs

The radioactive cloud will kill a lot of Iranians, and as the winds carry the radiation East, it will put at risk a billion people in Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, Southeast Asia, and so forth.

Hillary's lack of concern about human suffering resulting from American collateral damage, puts her in the same sociopath category as Bush, Cheney, and Madeline Albright.

[watercolors]

42. I'm thru with these two already

I have only Biden and Dodd left on my list of possibles!

[DemNoir]

43. DU doing it's duty again!

Circulating and amplifying right wing spin is what you guys do best. Your rubes, sad little rubes.

[Imperialism Inc.]

45. Ummm, it is spelled you're not your.

Granted, I, and many others, make that mistake all the time on the internet, but if you are going to be calling people rubes you should probably get it right.

[humbled_opinion]

50. I may be a little awkward and may not be sophisticated

but these posters have valid points and are not amplifying right or left spin.

Just because we have opinions of Hillary that differ from your love lust for her does that mean we should just be silent?

Will a Hilary Administration mean that dissent with her nuclear policies makes those protesters enemies of the state?

Does Hillary support supression of free speech or labeling those that speak their minds as right wing nuts?

Hmmm lots more to Hillary then I really understood then.

If Hillary is nothing more then Bush lite then why would you vote for her?

[Zhade]

54. Pointing out that nuking terrorists is insane is hardly spin.

What an idiotic assertion on your part!

[Doctor_J]

48. Meanwhile, Willard and Rudy are firing on them and Edwards

get ready for 4 more years of reactionary rule.

[Zhade]

51. Obama's position here is clearly more sane than Clinton's.

You don't nuke COUNTRIES to get at the tiny 1% (if that) of terrorists within their borders. See, that's called terrorism.

[IndianaGreen]

58. Hillary thinks that becoming a nuclear terrorist is a valid option to fight terrorism

Anyone that advocates first use of nuclear weapons is reckless and dangerous. Until Hillary said that first use was a legitimate option in her testosterone-filled table, Bush had been the only one that had wanted to use an entire new arsenal of tactical nukes.

[daleo]

55. You have to take some things off the table

The only use for nuclear weapons is MAD. Anything else is psycho.

[illinoisprogressive]

56. Obama was right about Iraq when the establishment thought the opposite.