Posted by
Cary Wesberry on Tuesday, May 06, 2008 5:31:43 PM
Hillary Clinton has made statements recently concerning retaliation against Iran if they were to use nuclear weapons to attack Israel. This is fascinating considering we haven't heard a Democrat Presidential candidate speak seriously about defending our country since JFK. Let's remember though that liberals specifically, and Democrats in general, will say virtually anything to get elected. Unfortunately, when you take into account who the GOP nominee is; I can now say the same thing about either party's candidate for President.
All that being said, Hillary is the only candidate out of the three who has made both an appropriate and coherent statement concerning the Iranian threat towards Israel. She's said that her administration would "obliterate" Iran if they attacked Israel, and then more recently clarified and affirmed her previous statement by saying there would be "massive retaliation" against Iran if they were to carry-out their threats. These are certainly strong words coming from Hillary.
I for one have no problem whatsoever with this sort of language in dealing with Iran. Even George Bush hasn't gone so far as to use language such as "obliterate"... at least publicly. Regardless, it's safe to say most conservatives and Democrats like John McCain (apparently along with Hillary supporters) agree that blowing Iran off the face of the Earth in the event of a nuclear attack upon Israel is perfectly justifiable, but there is one candidate for President who does not see "massive retaliation" as an appropriate response if Jerusalem or Tel Aviv were made uninhabitable for generations to come. That candidate is of course B. Hussein Obama.
Obama's response to Hillary's policy of destroying Iran in the event of an attack on Israel was to accuse her of "stirring-up an international incident". Now, I'm hardly a foreign policy expert. Hell, I'm not even up to the level of being a completely useless political scientist. However, the way I see the hypothetical; if Iran was to commit a nuclear strike upon Israel it would be Iran who is "stirring-up an international incident" not Hillary Clinton. Anyone who understands that we exist in the constraints of space and time can see that one event comes after another. Iran tells the world it is initiating a policy focused on the destruction of Israel, Iran carries-out said policy and attacks Israel with nuclear weapons as promised, and then Hillary responds by "obliterating" Iran in a "massive retaliation". Most five-year-olds can grasp the basic principles of cause and effect. The question with regard to B. Hussein Obama then becomes: why does a man who feels he should be President of the United States believe that "massive retaliation" against Iran after they destroy Israel is somehow Hillary Clinton "stirring-up an international incident"?
The answer lies at the heart of Obama's liberal ideology and complete absence of any foreign policy experience. The fact that Obama hasn't even studied foreign policy theory is apparent in his response to Hillary's take on Iran. B. Hussein Obama is so terribly misguided and lacking when it comes to dealing with our enemies that he makes Hillary Clinton look like Margaret Thatcher. Obama's response when asked how he would respond if the United States were attacked again such as we were on 9/11 was to say he would send in ambulances. This leads one to wonder if he would even send food to Israel if they suffered a nuclear attack from Iran. Obama is an empty liberal to the core. He's a pacifist, and that is extremely dangerous in the reality we live in.
If you elect B. Hussein Obama to the Presidency you are literally taking your life into your own hands, because B. Hussein Obama won't help or protect you. America is a safer place if the Presidential race is between John McCain and Hillary Clinton. Ultimately either one of them will retaliate if we are attacked. I tend to believe Hillary will be twice as aggressive when it comes to foreign policy and fighting our enemies simply because she would be the first female President with a great deal to prove as Commander in Chief. Hillary Clinton knows politics and she knows preservation. She will not under any circumstance allow herself to go down in history as the first female President who lost the War and caused defeat for America.