WaPo: Bernie Sanders sides with Obama and against Clinton on no-fly zone in Syria

[jkbRN]

BOSTON — Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said Saturday that he opposes a unilateral American no-fly zone in Syria, offering a less hawkish stance on the war-torn region than Hillary Rodham Clinton, his chief rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, and a position more in line with President Obama.

“We must be very careful about not making a complex and dangerous situation in Syria even worse,” Sanders said in a statement to The Washington Post. “I support President Obama’s efforts to combat ISIS in Syria while at the same time supporting those in that country trying to remove the brutal dictatorship of Bashar Assad.”

But, Sanders added: “I oppose, at this point, a unilateral American no-fly zone in Syria, which could get us more deeply involved in that horrible civil war and lead to a never-ending U.S. entanglement in that region.”

In a television interview broadcast Thursday, Clinton advocated additional air power to protect civilians in the multi-front war, in which Syrian rebels and international advocates have said that air patrols in Syria’s north could give civilians a refuge from Assad’s bombing raids.

"I personally would be advocating now for a no-fly zone and humanitarian corridors to try to stop the carnage on the ground and from the air,” the former secretary of state said in the interview broadcast late Thursday by NBC affiliate WHDH in Boston.

In the portion of the interview released by the news station, Clinton did not elaborate on which countries should impose the no-fly zones or say precisely that she would commit U.S. forces to the task. But discussion of no-fly zones when she was in office and afterward have presumed that the United States would have to lead or be a major player in the effort.

Clinton’s position puts her in the same camp as some Republican contenders for the presidential nomination, including former Florida governor Jeb Bush and Ohio Gov. John Kasich.

In a news conference Friday, Obama said Clinton "is not half-baked in terms of her approach to these problems." But he said that "there's a difference between running for president and being president. And the decisions that are being made and the discussions that I'm having with the joint chiefs become much more specific and require, I think, a different kind of judgment."

Obama said that "if and when she's president, then she'll make those judgments," adding that "these are tough calls."

Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/10/03/bernie-sanders-sides-with-obama-and-against-clinton-on-no-fly-zone-in-syria/

[Comrade Grumpy]

1. Forget emails. It's Hillary's foreign policy positions that scare me. Too much of a war hawk.

I don't know if she's really a war hawk or just thinks she has to act like one to prove she's tough, but the results are the same.

[jkbRN]

2. Yep,

I totally agree. Her FP choices have been absolutely horrendous.

[Metric System]

3. "Syrian rebels and international advocates have said that air patrols in Syria’s north could give

civilians a refuge from Assad’s bombing raids."

An important argument to consider. Also, she's not advocating a "unilateral American no-fly zone."

[Comrade Grumpy]

4. Well, at least Hillary has some fine company:

"Clinton’s position puts her in the same camp as some Republican contenders for the presidential nomination, including former Florida governor Jeb Bush and Ohio Gov. John Kasich."

And don't forget raving lunatic Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) and Mr. Never Met A War He Didn't Want to Start Sen. John McCain (R-AZ).

Fine company indeed. Is Henry the K whispering in her ear?

[David__77]

6. Who would rule in such a zone?

A geographical area with people (refuge, or otherwise), always has some kind of government.

Would that include Nusra?

What military force and government is it that the US would be (intentionally or not) protecting?

[Motown_Johnny]

7. So American planes should be shooting down Russian planes?

Spin this all you want, that is what it comes down to.

We should all be thankful that Hillary is not President right now and we should all be working to insure that nobody with her kind of view toward the use of military force becomes President.

[TwilightGardener]

5. Wise.

[restorefreedom]

8. here is my takeaway

In a news conference Friday, Obama said Clinton "is not half-baked in terms of her approach to these problems." But he said that "there's a difference between running for president and being president. And the decisions that are being made and the discussions that I'm having with the joint chiefs become much more specific and require, I think, a different kind of judgment."

there is a difference between running for president and being president. except i don't think hillary knows the difference. she will take this hawk stance all the way to another war.

[Buns_of_Fire]

9. I'd like to know more about these "humanitarian corridors".

Specifically, who's going to set them up and guarantee them? It seems to me that a requirement would be "boots-on-the-ground," and I don't think that's the kind of thing that most Americans have much stomach for, right now (to put it mildly).

[liberal_at_heart]

10. Why is it that when it comes to foreign policy and war she doesn't have a problem

stating where she stands and yet on any domestic issue all we get to hear is I'm waiting for more information?