Hillary's naivete: She would negotiate with Iran "with no conditions"

[Colobo]

Clinton Says She'd Negotiate With Iran
By HOLLY RAMER – 41 minutes ago

CANTERBURY, N.H. (AP) — Hillary Rodham Clinton called Barack Obama naive when he said he'd meet with the leaders of Iran without precondition. Now she says she'd do the same thing, too.

During a Democratic presidential debate in July, Obama said he would be willing to meet without precondition in the first year of his presidency with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea.

Standing with him on stage, Clinton said she would first send envoys to test the waters and called Obama's position irresponsible and naive.

But asked about it Thursday by a voter, the New York senator said twice that she, too, would negotiate with Iran "with no conditions."

"I would engage in negotiations with Iran, with no conditions, because we don't really understand how Iran works. We think we do, from the outside, but I think that is misleading," she said at an apple orchard.

She characterized her recent vote to label Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist organization as a way to gain leverage for those negotiations.

Obama and other rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination have been criticizing Clinton's vote late last month in favor of the resolution, comparing it to her 2002 vote authorizing the war in Iraq.

They have suggested that the Iran vote was the first step toward a military invasion there.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5izJr4wFXhrXfr8mlCBthgtCZvMcwD8S7D9280

So if Obama was naive for saying the same damn thing in July, then...

[BootinUp]

1. Excuse me *raises hand*

I thought Obama said he would personally meet with Iranian leaders up front. I don't think that is what Hillary is saying.

[CarolNYC]

3. Yep...

Two totally different things someone's trying to pass off as the same....

[SaveElmer]

2. You are wrong...

The question was if she would meet personally with the leader of Iran etc without precondition...

Nice try though

[Colobo]

4. Complaing to the reporter if you think she's wrong.

Still, I'm glad Hillary's finally following Obama's lead.

[SaveElmer]

5. Ok...so if I started posting the Chicago Sun Times stories

On Obama and Rezko...without comment...

You wouldn't criticize me?

[Colobo]

This is foreign policy we are talking about here, not some fake scandal.

Let stick to the issues.

[SaveElmer]

9. The issue...

Katz, is that you (or the author, or both), is trying to paint Hillary as a hypocrite on this issue which she is not...her(the author's) assertion is demonstrably false by replaying the last debate...

[Colobo]

10. Hillary is not a hypocrite, in my view. She just lacks the judgement

Obama has. :)

[SaveElmer]

12. You think Obama will come out and question...

The judgment of Wes Clark and Dick Durbin this week?

[Colobo]

13. I honestly don't know.

[aquart]

14. Who's Rezco?

[illinoisprogressive]

6. flipping and flopping, flipping and flopping...it catches up...

[mediaman007]

7. I believe she is referring to Bush's* position of pre-conditions in order to

start negotiations. Bush* wants Iran to give him the end result before he even talks to them.

Hillary still would send envoys, but would meet with out asking Iran to jump through hoops before talking.

[msongs]

8. Obama would declare economic war on the Iranian people

by way of sanctions.

BTW, talk is free and as winston churchill said (paraphrasing) talk talk is better than war war

Msongs

[BootinUp]

11. This article stinks to high heaven!!!!!!!

Its a fucking piece of trash. (pardon my french)