OK so Hillary is prepared to Nuke Iran, so what else could we get

[barack the house]

mean, think of each one of us here, on the board. I don't feel in good conscience we would nuke a nation. With good logic, we know Iran wouldn't sacrifice their econimic growth and oil to nuke Israel, so that one has no credibility. So, with good conscience we woudn't wipe out millions of human life, just because one time an Iranian leader was misquoted. Just as much, as we wouldn't expect the same in return for hillary's remark on nuking. But, what else will we get from her potential presidency, we know now of stories of tagging things like passports and licences they can track us from space(reported on Jeff Farias in the last 2 days). Sen. Obama as a constitutional law graduate respects, and honors Americans privacy, he voted to protect us, in immunity against telecom companies. Fundamentally, I personally feel we are safer under Senator Obama than Senator Clinton.

It's the constitution, cupid. In love of the document that is America.

[tekisui]

1. I don't need a Democratic Candidate beating their chest and talking about

obliterating any country.

[barack the house]

2. Just on its face value it demeans the Democratic party who have a great diplomacy record worldwide

since Carter. Our words should be measured in world affairs in order not to create tensions that wre never there initially.

[MyNameGoesHere]

3. hey if they are both on the ticket then we can nuke Iran and invade Pakistan too.

I mean your candidate, who espouses unity, hope and change would go uninvited into other countries following those bad bad turrists.

[tekisui]

4. We already have been doing that in Pakistan.

And isn't Pakistan where Al qaeda is?

I don't need any obliterating talk. She talks like we're in a new Cold War.

[MyNameGoesHere]

5. Sure the candidate of hope, change, and unity

will continue the policy of invading sovereign nations, just like * I say we go for it, a nuker and a invader on the same ticket.

[bronxiteforever]

6. The one guide we have for Clinton's foriegn policy is the Iraq War vote

In the House 61% of Democratic Reps voted against it
In the House 42% of Democratic Senators voted against it
Clinton voted for it

[harun]

7. A HRC presidency would get us GW'rs 3rd term, same as McCain (n/t)

[aquarius dawning]

8. There's no need to nuke Iran.

Conventional weapons would work just fine. At the same time, the use of nuclear weapons is, unfortunately, an event that any President needs to be aware of and prepared for. I don't doubt for a second that Obama is just as prepared to use these weapons in certain circumstances as was every President before him since FDR. Any Presidential candidate that is not prepared for such a thing probably doesn't need to hold the office.