Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Intercept: Hillary Clinton Has Long History of Collaboration with GOP on Foreign Policy
https://theintercept.com/2016/03/13/hillary-clinton-has-long-history-of-collaboration-with-gop-on-foreign-policy/
“No Difference Between Our Policies”
Consider the not-too-distant history. Back in the 1980s, the U.S. enjoyed a close relationship with Saddam Hussein, even though it was by far the most vicious period of his rule. The Reagan administration provided Iraq with financial, military and diplomatic support in its brutal war with Iran, stymieing any international attempts to hold Hussein to account for his use of mustard and nerve gas on Iranians and his own citizens. And the admiration was definitely mutual: when Donald Rumsfeld visited Iraq as Reagan’s envoy in 1983, Iraq’s foreign minster went “out of his way to praise Rumsfeld as a person.” Hussein himself, while in U.S. custody years later, called Reagan “a great man” and “honorable leader” whom he wished he could have met in person.
But by the time Bill Clinton was elected in November 1992, Hussein had been transformed into our greatest enemy because he had he defied (or misunderstood) the U.S. and invaded Kuwait. Clinton’s predecessor George H.W. Bush led the war that pushed Iraq out, and while he overruled generals who wanted to push on to Baghdad, he subsequently announced that U.S. policy was that Saddam absolutely must be forced from power.
Just before his inauguration, Clinton sounded a more equivocal note: “The people of Iraq would be better off if they had a different ruler,” he told Thomas Friedman of the New York Times. “But my job is not to pick their rulers for them. I always tell everybody I am a Baptist. I believe in death-bed conversions. If he wants a different relationship with the United States and the United Nations, all he has to do is change his behavior.”
Consider the not-too-distant history. Back in the 1980s, the U.S. enjoyed a close relationship with Saddam Hussein, even though it was by far the most vicious period of his rule. The Reagan administration provided Iraq with financial, military and diplomatic support in its brutal war with Iran, stymieing any international attempts to hold Hussein to account for his use of mustard and nerve gas on Iranians and his own citizens. And the admiration was definitely mutual: when Donald Rumsfeld visited Iraq as Reagan’s envoy in 1983, Iraq’s foreign minster went “out of his way to praise Rumsfeld as a person.” Hussein himself, while in U.S. custody years later, called Reagan “a great man” and “honorable leader” whom he wished he could have met in person.
But by the time Bill Clinton was elected in November 1992, Hussein had been transformed into our greatest enemy because he had he defied (or misunderstood) the U.S. and invaded Kuwait. Clinton’s predecessor George H.W. Bush led the war that pushed Iraq out, and while he overruled generals who wanted to push on to Baghdad, he subsequently announced that U.S. policy was that Saddam absolutely must be forced from power.
Just before his inauguration, Clinton sounded a more equivocal note: “The people of Iraq would be better off if they had a different ruler,” he told Thomas Friedman of the New York Times. “But my job is not to pick their rulers for them. I always tell everybody I am a Baptist. I believe in death-bed conversions. If he wants a different relationship with the United States and the United Nations, all he has to do is change his behavior.”
11 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
"...Is it fair to say Hillary Clinton agreed with her husband and the Republican Party on Iraq during the 1990s? Here’s what we know:
When asked in 2002 about the Iraq Liberation Act, Hillary declared, “I agreed with it in 1998. I agree with it [now].” In her 2003 book, Living History, she quotes her own remarks to the press “as bombs fell on Iraq” during Desert Fox: “I think the vast majority of Americans share my approval and pride in the job that the President’s been doing for our country.”
Those close to her have long made the case that she is more militaristic than Bill Clinton. The late diplomat Richard Holbrooke once said, “She is probably more assertive and willing to use force than her husband...”
When asked in 2002 about the Iraq Liberation Act, Hillary declared, “I agreed with it in 1998. I agree with it [now].” In her 2003 book, Living History, she quotes her own remarks to the press “as bombs fell on Iraq” during Desert Fox: “I think the vast majority of Americans share my approval and pride in the job that the President’s been doing for our country.”
Those close to her have long made the case that she is more militaristic than Bill Clinton. The late diplomat Richard Holbrooke once said, “She is probably more assertive and willing to use force than her husband...”
A Hillary Clinton presidency will usher in a new war within her four year reign!!
Take that to the bank!
