Clinton the new Iron Lady?

[Goofball]

C'mon... DevDave, Xiahou, Gawain, CR...

You can't tell me this kind of thing doesn't make you warm up to her a little bit:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...rnational/home

Specifically:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

"We cannot negotiate with Hamas until it renounces violence, recognizes Israel and agrees to abide by past agreements. That is just, for me, an absolute," Ms. Clinton said, echoing the long-standing policy of the Bush and previous U.S. administrations.

Heck yes!

At least this removes a bit of the ambiguity that seemed to be coming from Obama about negotiating with bad guys...

[Devastatin Dave]

Actions speak louder than words. I shall wait and see.

[Spino]

Blah blah blah. Talk is cheap and Boomer politicians corner the market on that commodity. I'd sooner put money on Arnold cleaving some California Democrat in two with that Atlantean sword he used in Conan than Billary's hot air carrying any kind of weight.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

She's undermining Obama, and making it more difficult for him to offer Hamas conciliations in order to stop the rocket attacks and end the fighting. Note particually "for me", she's saying that when she's sent to the Middle East to broker the peace deal it will be under duress.

[Vladimir]

Blah blah blah. Talk is cheap and Boomer politicians corner the market on that commodity. I'd sooner put money on Arnold cleaving some California Democrat in two with that Atlantean sword he used in Conan than Billary's hot air carrying any kind of weight.

That's what "clarifications" are for.

[Incongruous]

She's undermining Obama, and making it more difficult for him to offer Hamas conciliations in order to stop the rocket attacks and end the fighting. Note particually "for me", she's saying that when she's sent to the Middle East to broker the peace deal it will be under duress.

Obama has already made it quite clear that he is on Israel's side, what Obamian peace talks will do is create yet more oportunities for Israel and its friends in the West cast the Palestinians as unrelenting fanatics who will resist " peace" at all costs.

[drone]

If Obama sends her to Gaza, maybe she'll get that chance to dodge sniper bullets.

[Goofball]

Obama has already made it quite clear that he is on Israel's side, what Obamian peace talks will do is create yet more oportunities for Israel and its friends in the West cast the Palestinians as unrelenting fanatics who will resist " peace" at all costs.

Quite honestly, the Palestinians really don't need any help in that department. They do a good enough job portraying themselves that way...

[Crazed Rabbit]

She's a Clinton - words are so much hot air. I'll believe actions when I see them.

Though I'll admit the initial stance is certainly nice.

CR

[Devastatin Dave]

Quite honestly, the Palestinians really don't need any help in that department. They do a good enough job portraying themselves that way...

Agreed. I will not pass judgement upon my new President or his picks for cabinet until their actions are in full view. The Palestinians on the other hand have played their card too many times and only the most blind among us cannot see these people are only bent on destruction: whether it be upon themselves or others.

President Elect Obama and Mrs Clinton have my support until they betray my trust. Until then I will give them the benifit of a doubt until their ACTIONS speak otherwise.

[CountArach]

Saw it coming. The Obama team is not going to stop Israel...

[Devastatin Dave]

Saw it coming. The Obama team is not going to stop Israel...

And that's a bad thing?

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

I'm enjoying Obama proving his biggest fans wrong.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

A few reasons why Israel will not be "stopped" by the USA:

1. Israel is an ally of long-standing, it is poor form to yank their chain a lot (at least publicly).

2. There is a significant pro-Israel domestic lobby in the USA. Strong opposition to actions by Israel involve a political price. Incoming administrations really WANT the traditional "honeymoon" afforded a new administration, and are unlikely to play hardball that way (at least at the outset).

3. Israel is a signifcant source of US intelligence in the ME -- since they actually have HUMINT in some volume in that region -- and cutting off Mossad's shared information would make US intelligence in the ME even less accurate than it currently is (scary thought that).

4. Hamas, Hezbollah, et al are organizations that have, and do, sponsor terrorism, not just make guerilla attacks upon the IDF etc. As such, taking their side is less than appealing to the USA.


So, Rabbit is correct. The "introduction" seems good, but we shall see what real policies develop over the first 6-12 months. Then we'll know the stance for the future.

[Devastatin Dave]

I'm enjoying Obama proving his biggest fans wrong.

Its high noon on my sun dial as well. I guess things are a little different when someone prys you away from a teleprompter and shows you the actual intelligence of the circumstances the civilised world is in. I'm waiting to see the excuses for Messiah the fans come up with.

[Incongruous]

I'm enjoying Obama proving his biggest fans wrong.

I will enjoy it more when Obama is finally seen as the real Bush III, and the Democrats as even greater warmongers than the Republicans. Tbh Clintons elevation has pretty much secured the coffin...

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I will enjoy it more when Obama is finally seen as the real Bush III, and the Democrats as even greater warmongers than the Republicans. Tbh Clintons elevation has pretty much secured the coffin...

Don't hold your breath. Obama will shift US policy back towards a more Clinton-era model. I think he's too hardnosed a pol to take it back to Jimmy Carter's approach (which the EU crowd would adore). This shift will be 6-18 months in happening.

My point was that anyone expecting a policy shift to happen no later than Jan 23rd is being unrealistic.

[Incongruous]

Don't hold your breath. Obama will shift US policy back towards a more Clinton-era model. I think he's too hardnosed a pol to take it back to Jimmy Carter's approach (which the EU crowd would adore). This shift will be 6-18 months in happening.

My point was that anyone expecting a policy shift to happen no later than Jan 23rd is being unrealistic.

I respect the view, and I would almost agree with it, were it not for a few unfortunate talks about commiting the USA to more "important" wars.

But even if you are right, Clinton for me was one of the worst Presidents, simply beacuse he got away with it

But we can both agree on the unrealistic hopes people have pinned upon the 20th.

Hmm seems I got hat one wrong, I was of coarse talking about the symbolism of the 20th...

[Lemur]

I'm sorry if I'm being dense, but what is the special significance of January 23rd?

[Goofball]

I'm sorry if I'm being dense, but what is the special significance of January 23rd?

It's the day I will have gone 18 days without a cigarette.

*returns to biting fingernails down to bloody stumps*

[Devastatin Dave]

It's the day I will have gone 18 days without a cigarette.

*returns to biting fingernails down to bloody stumps*

Oral fixations are hard to break, right Lemur...

[CountArach]

It's the day I will have gone 18 days without a cigarette.

*returns to biting fingernails down to bloody stumps*

Good luck.

@ Lemur - I assume he is just saying that those who want radical transformation from the very start (Day 3 of the Obama Administration being the absolute latest - ie Jan 23rd) will be sorely disappointed. Which is true.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Lemur: Arach has the right of it.

Bopa:

As a symbol, the 20th is one of my nation's greatest. The outgoing "leader of the free world" sits there quietly while another takes the oath and supplants him. All the power shifts, and nobody is lined up and shot, the reprisals are limited to patronage jobs, and the nation continues.

Louis:

That means we DON'T change republics like we change socks (You lovable frog you).

[Beren Son Of Barahi]

I think this line is quite predictable; any dialog with Iran/Hamas will come from a hard lined very low level approach. I think the new administration might be willing to put more pressure on Israel and give more incentives to the Iranian /Palestinians then the last administration but nothing drastic and certainly nothing very public.


my prediction is NATO will pull some of its troops and resources out of Afghanistan and will have international/ EU/ Egypt/nato forces/peace keepers (makers)/observers in and around gaza and the west bank at some stage in the next four years.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I'll reserve my judgement on Obama, but I believe that Clinton is an empty shill. I listened to the hearing. She brings garbage to the table and it is a sad thing to see here in the drivers seat of anything. She reads and repeats - and has nothing to offer of value. A political appointment who has a pretty good memory of what might trick people into thinking that she has any business in the position.

I hope she chokes on her new title and disgraces herself out of office sooner rather than later.

Obama is a talent. I'm suprised that he is draging her along for the ride, but I'm glad it gets her out of New York's hair.

[LittleGrizzly]

This is a surprise ?!

I could have told you this a while back, Obama was never going to change american foriegn policy completely or even alot, it will be a little better but anyone expecting wholesale changes is going to be dissapointed (or pleasently surprised depending on your views)

Infact i think i have said several times that Obama won't be that much different from bush, and ive said it again..

I will be surprised when he actually changes course on american foriegn policy, USA continuing its policy on israel is as surprising as the sun rising...

[ICantSpellDawg]

This is a surprise ?!

I could have told you this a while back, Obama was never going to change american foriegn policy completely or even alot, it will be a little better but anyone expecting wholesale changes is going to be dissapointed (or pleasently surprised depending on your views)

Infact i think i have said several times that Obama won't be that much different from bush, and ive said it again..

I will be surprised when he actually changes course on american foriegn policy, USA continuing its policy on israel is as surprising as the sun rising...

I'm not suprised that U.S. foreign policy won't change, just that he is giving such an obvious hack such an enourmous mouth piece.

I never thought that we would be out of Iraq much sooner than we would have been under McCain. I never thought of Obama as a dove. I thought that he was wrong on Iraq, but not because he was a peace fairy - just because he beleived that it was a foolish direction of resources that would better be used elsewhere in lieu of the circumstances.

Not one legitimate candidate would have budged foreign policy. Maybe Paul or kucinich because they are insane, but no viable candidate would have.

[Watchman]

All the change I really want Obama to make is bringing sanity back into US policies. Anything more is just a bonus.

[Xiahou]

Agreed. I will not pass judgement upon my new President or his picks for cabinet until their actions are in full view.

Well, he's picked some dandies so far. A Commerce Secretary nomination that's likely to be indicted by a grand jury, a Treasury Secretary who didn't know he had to pay taxes, and a Secretary of State nominee who sees nothing wrong with her husband accepting foreign "donations" while she is in office. Add to that, a long-time politician with no intel experience getting the nomination for CIA chief- this is particularly ironic considering how Bush had been criticized for allegedly politicizing intel.

Then there's the AG nominee who recommended Marc Rich's pardon... but, imo, that's less sexy than the other stories.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Add to that, a long-time politician with no intel experience getting the nomination for CIA chief- this is particularly ironic considering how Bush had been criticized for allegedly politicizing intel.

I've read both left and right commentators point out that the CIA may need an outsider to set it straight, so I wouldn't use that guy against Obama.