HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Politics & Government » Populist Reform of the Democratic Party (Group) » SOS Hillary: Populists, h...

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 07:58 AM

SOS Hillary: Populists, help me out: What were SOS Hillary's great foreign policy accomplishments?

Please leave out things like most air miles logged.

38 replies, 2803 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 38 replies Author Time Post
Reply SOS Hillary: Populists, help me out: What were SOS Hillary's great foreign policy accomplishments? (Original post)
merrily Jul 2015 OP
djean111 Jul 2015 #1
merrily Jul 2015 #18
Erich Bloodaxe BSN Jul 2015 #2
merrily Jul 2015 #4
Erich Bloodaxe BSN Jul 2015 #6
merrily Jul 2015 #7
frylock Jul 2015 #32
lamp_shade Jul 2015 #3
merrily Jul 2015 #5
tularetom Jul 2015 #9
merrily Jul 2015 #12
tularetom Jul 2015 #23
merrily Jul 2015 #11
Evergreen Emerald Jul 2015 #8
leveymg Jul 2015 #10
Evergreen Emerald Jul 2015 #13
merrily Jul 2015 #15
Evergreen Emerald Jul 2015 #16
merrily Jul 2015 #17
Evergreen Emerald Jul 2015 #20
merrily Jul 2015 #22
Evergreen Emerald Jul 2015 #24
merrily Jul 2015 #25
Nitram Jul 2015 #35
leveymg Jul 2015 #38
merrily Jul 2015 #14
tularetom Jul 2015 #19
merrily Jul 2015 #26
lamp_shade Jul 2015 #21
merrily Jul 2015 #27
lamp_shade Jul 2015 #28
merrily Jul 2015 #29
lamp_shade Jul 2015 #30
merrily Jul 2015 #31
Nitram Jul 2015 #33
merrily Jul 2015 #34
Nitram Jul 2015 #36
merrily Jul 2015 #37

Response to merrily (Original post)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 08:02 AM

1. That is going to be a tough one.

 

Anything good - Hillary gets credit.
Anything not good - Hillary merely followed Obama's orders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #1)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 09:32 AM

18. My reply 11 below summarizes what a group supporting her says. See what you think.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Original post)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 08:04 AM

2. She's given a lot of women's rights speeches worldwide, presumably supported women's rights groups

and legislation around the world. I imagine her supporters could dig up some lists of foreign legislation she's helped get passed for women's rights.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Erich Bloodaxe BSN (Reply #2)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 08:24 AM

4. Thing is, would it have passed without her speech?

If you were a legislator in a foreign country, would you change your vote based solely on a speech made by the SOS of any foreign?

If you read about her accomplishments, you get a lot of "helped," "participated in," "spoke on behalf of." A lot of vague stuff. Assuming it's all true, is that leader behavior and credentials?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #4)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 08:26 AM

6. I don't know.

If you actually want an argument that her actions actually changed anything, you'd need some supporters. I'm not invested enough to try and dig up any foreign press articles that suggest that her visits actually made a difference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Erich Bloodaxe BSN (Reply #6)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 08:29 AM

7. I'm not asking you to look anything up. Thanks for your input, though

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #4)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 12:14 PM

32. "Was instrumental"; "Lead efforts"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to lamp_shade (Reply #3)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 08:26 AM

5. My first impression is that it reads like a puff piece. See also Reply 4.

I'll take a closer look though. Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lamp_shade (Reply #3)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 08:56 AM

9. I don't think "Correct the Record" is exactly an unbiased source

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/05/12/how-a-super-pac-plans-to-coordinate-directly-with-hillary-clintons-campaign/

On Tuesday, Correct the Record, a pro-Clinton rapid-response operation, announced it was splitting off from its parent American Bridge and will work in coordination with the Clinton campaign as a stand-alone super PAC. The group’s move was first reported by the New York Times.

That befuddled many campaign finance experts, who noted that super PACs, by definition, are political committees that solely do independent expenditures, which cannot be coordinated with a candidate or political party. Several said the relationship between the campaign and the super PAC would test the legal limits.

But Correct the Record believes it can avoid the coordination ban by relying on a 2006 Federal Election Commission regulation that declared that content posted online for free, such as blogs, is off limits from regulation. The “Internet exemption” said that such free postings do not constitute campaign expenditures, allowing independent groups to consult with candidates about the content they post on their sites. By adopting the measure, the FEC limited its online jurisdiction to regulating paid political ads.

The rules “totally exempt individuals who engage in political activity on the Internet from the restrictions of the campaign finance laws. The exemption for individual Internet activity in the final rules is categorical and unqualified,” then-FEC Chairman Michael E. Toner said at the time, according to a 2006 Washington Post story. The regulation “protects Internet activities by individuals in all forms, including e-mailing, linking, blogging, or hosting a Web site," said Toner, now a prominent Republican campaign finance attorney.




They're paying people a lot of money to churn out flowery fawning pro-Clinton BS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tularetom (Reply #9)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 09:08 AM

12. Yes, I discerned that immediately, but I summarized it below anyway. See what you think.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #12)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 09:47 AM

23. You're obviously more focused and less ADHD than I am

What they did was to list every global event of significance during Clinton's term as SofS and make it seem that she alone was the driving force behind everything positive that took place for the entire four years.

Although the writing was almost nauseatingly sycophantic, it was a skillful effort at creating a false narrative.

What I mostly did while reading it was

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lamp_shade (Reply #3)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 09:07 AM

11. On a closer look, it looks like something that may have been prepared by the Hillary campaign.

1. Got Russian and China on board with stronger Iran sanctions that may have been responsible for bringing Iran to the table.

2. START Treaty with Russia for fewer missile launchers.

... omitting that she "supported" the raid that got Osama. Didn't everyone? I guess the point here is that she and Panetta wanted a ground operation, while Gates wanted an air strike. However, the decision was not hers, but Obama's. Basically, when asked, she voiced her opinion, as did other advisors.

3. In November 2012, after eight days of violence, Secretary Clinton negotiated a Gaza cease-fire with Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi.

4. "Working closely with Department of Defense colleagues and as part of the President’s national security team, Secretary Clinton played a role in the end of war in Iraq and in beginning a transition in Afghanistan, with all NATO allies having agreed to stand-up a post withdrawal support plan."

5. (This one may be a mixed blessing.) "Secretary Clinton was critical in America’s “pivot to Asia” strategy.....Secretary Clinton earned praise for her work in opening up Burma, a place that had not been visited by a Secretary of State in 50 years."

6. Secretary Clinton worked to build the coalition to oust Qadhafi. As the Washington Post reported upon the end of NATO operations in Libya, “U.S. officials and key allies are offering a detailed new defense of the approach and Clinton’s pivotal role – both within a divided Cabinet and a fragile, assembled-on-the-fly international alliance.”

7. (This one may be a mixed blessing.) Secretary Clinton’s focus on economic engagement resulted in increased investment through three new free trade agreements (Colombia, Panama and South Korea) and 15 Open Skies agreements including with Japan, Brazil, Saudi Arabia and Israel.

8. .....Secretary Clinton (created) the Center for Strategic Counterterrorism Communications to combat Al-Qaeda’s growing influence online. She......helped create the Bureau of Energy Resources to protect our energy infrastructure and influence how nations move to cleaner fuel. (Not sure how she helped with the latter.)

9...... Hillary convinced the White House to allow her to create a new position at the State Department: Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s Issues. (Did Obama need a lot of convincing?) See also replies 2 and 4 above.

All quotes and info in the above is from http://correctrecord.org/11-things-you-should-know-about-hillary/

10. Omitted from the above list: Helped negotiate TPP, describing it as the "gold standard."

I cannot help but wonder what else has been omitted.


As to number 6, I note:
McCain-Hillary in 2009: Libya is “An Important Ally in the War on Terrorism”, Gaddafi is “a Peacemaker in Africa”


http://www.globalresearch.ca/mccain-hillary-in-2009-libya-is-an-important-ally-in-the-war-on-terrorism-gaddafi-is-a-peacemaker-in-africa/24489 (similar to her praise of Assad/)



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Original post)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 08:53 AM

8. This is a RW meme desgined to attack Hillary in an attempt to minimize her expertise.

Since when does anyone need to list "Accomplishments" while SOS? What does that even mean? Is there a quota? Who defines Accomplishment? How many "accomplishments" are considered enough?

This is a right wing meme. It is a made up attack-point designed to minimize her expertise. There was a recent article regarding the RW plan of action: to attempt to attack her because on her qualifications, experience, and expertise.

It is a ridiculous meme. I am surprised Democrats would fall for it. The enemy of my enemy is my friend? How low are we willing to go to attack Hillary before this is over?

If you want an "accomplishment:" She did her job. She worked her ass off to gain back some of the goodwill we lost internationally while Bush/Cheney were in office.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Evergreen Emerald (Reply #8)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 08:59 AM

10. Her greatest proven expertise was regime change and creating room for the Islamic State

Iraq
Libya
Syria
Iran next

Mother of a nation. Quite an accomplishment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #10)


Response to Evergreen Emerald (Reply #13)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 09:22 AM

15. Please self delete and stop posting inappropriately in this group. This is a host request.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #15)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 09:26 AM

16. I am sorry.

I did not realize this was a group. I will stop posting here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Evergreen Emerald (Reply #16)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 09:30 AM

17. The request was for deletion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #17)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 09:40 AM

20. there you go.

My response was deleted. You can imagine my frustration when these types of attacks are used on DU. Unfortunately they are seen on Latest Threads, and I did not realize this was a specific group.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Evergreen Emerald (Reply #20)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 09:45 AM

22. Political discussion often seems like an attack to those who disagree. Thank you for deleting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #22)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 09:55 AM

24. Not necessarily.

Political discussion is not here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Evergreen Emerald (Reply #24)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 09:58 AM

25. Plenty of discussion is here, just not the kind you tolerate. That's the very reason

you probably should post elsewhere.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #10)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 03:56 PM

35. Gee, levey, that's the most simplistic analysis of our country's forieng policy I've ever seen.

The Arab spring caught everyone by surprise. The hope was that it might lead to democracy in totalitarian states, or at least an improvement in that direction. In every nation where it occurred it went differently, as each of these nations is very different. Of course, Iraq didn't start on Obama's watch, but he did withdraw our troops (nor was it an example of the 'spring'). Libya and Syria were both very tough, because there were so many factions, and it was very difficult to know who to back against Gaddafi and Assad. Many thought the US should stay out completely, many thought we should commit more strongly. I personally think we did the best we could in treading a fine line between the two, giving moderates some space to work, but not committing US ground troops where we couldn't foresee an endgame. I don't think we know yet whether the policy is working in Iraq and Syria. As for Iran, the US is making a good faith effort to negotiate and bring Iran back into the community of nations. The president has resisted calls from the right to either attack Iran or increase sanctions. the results aren't yet in on this one either.

I don't know how you can lay the mess in the Middle East at the feet of either Clinton or Obama (or Kerry). There has been no clear way through this, but I believe they've done a good job in an extremely dynamic and complex situation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nitram (Reply #35)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 04:53 PM

38. And that's the propaganda line, the conventional version of events, most of which is a lie.

"The Arab spring caught everyone by surprise." - Hardly a surprise. Various agencies of the US, France, and UK have been supporting and directing Syrian, Libyan, Iraqi exile groups for a long time with the expressed goal of regime change. The nearly simultaneous uprisings in Libya and Syria in early 2011 were coordinated through these exiles and state-sponsored opposition groups operating out of London, Paris, Cairo, and Doha. The simultaneous "Days of Rage" and demonstrations were timed and declared by exile group media operating with the coordination of host states, and amplified and spread globally by state-owned media in Qatar. Qatari and Egyptian special forces were on the ground leading and equipping the armed rebellions in eastern Libya, and the Qataris in Syria from almost Day One. Of course, the U.S. bombing and invasion of Iraq during the previous Administrations thoroughly destabilized the region and set up this chain of events. Or, were you unaware of those facts?

"The hope was that it might lead to democracy in totalitarian states, or at least an improvement in that direction. In every nation where it occurred it went differently, as each of these nations is very different." - The chain of events in each of the so-called Arab Spring uprisings in Libya and Syria, along with the arsonists who attacked police stations and snipers who killed both police and demonstrators, enraging the crowds and leading to the introduction of troops, followed almost exactly the same order and timing. If you don't believe me, look at the timelines for both at Wikipedia.

The rest of your mass media-shaped account is vague wishful thinking, and it would take a while to respond in detail. I will say here that I wish that it were as simple as good vs. evil and that the region-wide uprisings of several years ago, and the events since, were simply a matter of blunder and misunderstanding of isolated local events by Washington, Paris and London and our regional "friends." But, I know that isn't the case, any more so than the Vietnam War was simply a series of well-intended errors. Regime change in Shi'ite countries is a cause with some powerful sponsors and international coalitions driving long-term policies that are sure to create further war and mass suffering.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Evergreen Emerald (Reply #8)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 09:18 AM

14. False. A simple question is not a meme of any kind. It's a question.

Since when does anyone need to list "Accomplishments" while SOS?


Um, when the SOS runs for POTUS.

Who defines Accomplishment?


Well, while you were busy falsely claiming a simple question about the accomplishments of someone running for POTUS is a RW meme and ridiculous, I was busy posting the list prepared by Hillary supporters.

Finally, this forum is not about praising Hillary uncritically. If that's what you want to do, there's Hillary Mojo devoted entirely to that and plenty of other places on this board where that kind of thing is permitted.

As I've posted to you a number of times in this forum, your posts that have nothing to do with the goals of this safe haven group are not consistent with the purpose of this forum and therefore are disruptive and nothing more than trolling this forum. Please stop.

This is a host request.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Evergreen Emerald (Reply #8)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 09:36 AM

19. Apparently the Clinton campaign feels the need to list her "accomplishments"

They have created this "Correct the Record" thingy, loaded with exaggerated and overblown pro-Clinton propaganda, in which they make it seem like she alone was responsible for getting bin Laden, among other superhuman feats she is alleged to have done.

It's written in very childish flowery prose and if you view it with an open mind, it's actually hilarious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tularetom (Reply #19)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 10:00 AM

26. I did pare it down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Evergreen Emerald (Reply #8)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 09:41 AM

21. Correct. The ulterior motive was clear the moment I read it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lamp_shade (Reply #21)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 10:03 AM

27. Actually, I was trying to fact check an article from KOS that was extremely critical of Hillary.

If you were correct, I could simply have posted that article.

Given the reaction from you and Evergreen, perhaps I should have. Maybe I will.

What about your ulterior motive in linking us to a biased website without noting the absence of objectivity?

And, if my motives were so poor, why did I post the list from that site?

Finally, please respect that this is a safe haven group and not a place for ad homs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #27)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 11:35 AM

28. I think I struck a nerve.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lamp_shade (Reply #28)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 11:39 AM

29. Because a false claim was refuted? Please stop trolling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #29)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 11:43 AM

30. Don't EVER call me a troll.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lamp_shade (Reply #30)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 11:49 AM

31. This is a protected group. Imputing bad motives to people whose posts belong here and making

one post after another that adds nothing to the discussion IS trolling here. If you don't like your posting behavior being labeled for exactly the trolling of this group that it is, then stop it.

BTW, I didn't call YOU a troll or any other name..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #31)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 03:40 PM

33. "Please stop trolling" does not mean you are calling the person a troll?

Am I missing something merrily?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nitram (Reply #33)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 03:56 PM

34. Why are you involving yourself?

Wasn't the discussion disrupted enough?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #34)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 03:58 PM

36. "Involving myself?" Is that what you call a question?

Much like Bernie, I don't like to watch people being bullied.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nitram (Reply #36)

Tue Jul 7, 2015, 04:04 PM

37. ....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread