Hillary: If Iran Attacked Israel With Nukes 'We Would Be Able To Totally Obliterate Them'

[RamboLiberal]

-----

Clinton further displayed tough talk in an interview airing on Good Morning America Tuesday, ABC News' Chris Cuomo asked Clinton what she would do if Iran attacked Israel with nuclear weapons.

"I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president we will attack Iran," Clinton said. "In the next ten years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them."

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Vote2008/story?id=4698059&page=1

Is she trying to make McCain look like the peacenik? I'm thinking her position/reactions on Iran getting nukes are not going to be much different than McCain's. "What's that Beach Boys song?" Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb bomb Iran.

[beachmom]

1. Okay, she scares me. We don't need another war monger in the WH.

[sellitman]

9. I doubt there would be much left of Israel or Iran for Hillary to worry about.

Lets just hope the Mideasts hate doesnt overpower their will to survive.

Im sure Obama or McCain would do the same.

[pinkpops]

47. No Kidding - Israel wouldn't need any help responding - but why does

crap like this even come up?

[Taxmyth]

85. President Obama to use Diplomacy should Iran attack Israel with nuclear weapons

It comes up because some people just get woozy when hearing rhetorical answers to rhetorical questions. But if Senator Obama favors a different approach than the one outlined by Senator Clinton with regards to this highly unlikely scenario, he needs to be as straight and to the point as she was. Many of his supporters appear to believe that he would not use the same approach as Senator Clinton.....we really need to hear what he has to say on this matter without using generalizations like "appropriate action" or "take no options off of the table".

Heck, that could mean he favors an approach far WORSE than the rhetoric Senator Clinton used.

[Ned_Devine]

2. "I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president we will attack Iran," Clinton said.

Was this the actual quote or has this been taken out of context? that seems like a bit of a reckless statement

[Yael]

5. They are reporting it as a quote and invite interested viewers to see her spew it forth

on Tuesday morning.

"I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president we will attack Iran," Clinton said. "In the next ten years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them."

Watch the full interview with Sen. Hillary Clinton on GMA Tuesday.

(Bolding theirs)

[guruoo]

29. Note the comma at the end.

[DJ13]

3. Its 3AM....the phone rings.......

......a half drunk Hillary goes to answer, but pushes the wrong button.

:nuke:

:scared:

[Barrymores Ghost]

41. LOL!! Of course...

...I'm only laughing because this is is clearly black comedy, and I'm compelled to laugh so that I don't go completely out of my mind.

[BattyDem]

4. Obliterate?

:wtf:

NO ONE running for president in a democracy should ever use the word "obliterate" when talking about another country.

She's as crazy as McCain! :scared:

[redstate_democrat]

6. I'm convinced that this race has obliterated her damn mind.

With her CRAZY ASS.

[Zachstar]

82. Bingo!

[tularetom]

7. And we should prefer her to McCain because?

I don't know what she thinks she's gonna gain by this kind of macho bullshit talking. The only consolation is that perhaps she really believes this is what Amurkins want to hear even though she doesn't believe it herself. If that's the case she's hopelessly naive. If she really believes that shit she's as nutty as McCain.

Side issue: Am I the only DU'er who thought the "Bomb Iran" song parody was pretty clever in the 80's when it first came out? I disliked Carter for personal reasons (I had a relative with a chance to compete in the Olympics who missed out when Carter cancelled US participation in the '80 games in Moscow) but I still thought the song was funny.

[nebula]

28. The perfect running mate for McCrazy

McNutcase/Clinton '08


they're made for each other!

[anonymous171]

8. She's seriously a neocon. Seriously.

[redqueen]

16. Nope.. she's a neo-lib.

They're like neo-cons, but they're pro-choice.

[anonymous171]

18. Oh whoops.

Sorry about that :hi:

[Occam Bandage]

33. Neoliberalism is an economic policy having nothing to do with the American meaning

of the phrase "liberalism." Reagan was the most neoliberal President that the United States has had. Clinton and Obama are neoliberal to a similar extent. Clinton, however, has more neoconservative leanings, IMO.

[redqueen]

38. Wow...

I'd really like to hear more from you on this... I viewed Reagan as neo-lib as well... and of course Clinton... but I'm curious about how he's more neocon than neolib... if you'd care to expand on that I'd be interested to read it...

[PA Democrat]

50. Neoliberalism basics

The main points of neo-liberalism include:

THE RULE OF THE MARKET. Liberating "free" enterprise or private enterprise from any bonds imposed by the government (the state) no matter how much social damage this causes. Greater openness to international trade and investment, as in NAFTA. Reduce wages by de-unionizing workers and eliminating workers' rights that had been won over many years of struggle. No more price controls. All in all, total freedom of movement for capital, goods and services. To convince us this is good for us, they say "an unregulated market is the best way to increase economic growth, which will ultimately benefit everyone." It's like Reagan's "supply-side" and "trickle-down" economics -- but somehow the wealth didn't trickle down very much.

CUTTING PUBLIC EXPENDITURE FOR SOCIAL SERVICES like education and health care. REDUCING THE SAFETY-NET FOR THE POOR, and even maintenance of roads, bridges, water supply -- again in the name of reducing government's role. Of course, they don't oppose government subsidies and tax benefits for business.

DEREGULATION. Reduce government regulation of everything that could diminsh profits, including protecting the environmentand safety on the job.

PRIVATIZATION. Sell state-owned enterprises, goods and services to private investors. This includes banks, key industries, railroads, toll highways, electricity, schools, hospitals and even fresh water. Although usually done in the name of greater efficiency, which is often needed, privatization has mainly had the effect of concentrating wealth even more in a few hands and making the public pay even more for its needs.

ELIMINATING THE CONCEPT OF "THE PUBLIC GOOD" or "COMMUNITY" and replacing it with "individual responsibility." Pressuring the poorest people in a society to find solutions to their lack of health care, education and social security all by themselves -- then blaming them, if they fail, as "lazy."

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=376

[redqueen]

84. Seems pretty much the same as neo-conservatism.

:shrug:

[PA Democrat]

96. I know. The term really confuses people.

I guess that "liberal" economic theory dates back to Adam Smith who wanted to abolish government intervention in economic matters. Its goal was freedom for business from regulations and trade restrictions.

Neo-liberalism is the new and improved way to screw the little guy for corporate profits by making them believe that the government can't do anything right. Remember Reagan's "welfare queen" story and his line about the most frightening words you can hear- "I'm from the federal government and I'm here to help"? Reagan made the first big push for neo-liberal economic policies. Poppy Bush continued. Bill Clinton also did some things, like welfare reform, NAFTA, repeal of Glass-Steagall, that are neo-liberal policies. And we all know the nightmare that is W's economic policies.

I wish they would change the name because it really does seem to be an oxymoron.

Have a great day! As soon as my son gets home from school, we are off to vote for Obama! My husband already voted for him this morning.

[4themind]

53. How is it different than "classical liberalism"?

Application of Locke's principles within the frame work of the american government?

[nebula]

10. She would attack Iran no matter what they do

she wholeheartedly endorses the Bush neocon policy of pre-emption,
the same failed policy that got us into Iraq.

[Hippo_Tron]

11. Iran hasn't attacked anyone since the revolution, they aren't going to suddenly start now

Campaigning on the destruction of Israel for hard-liners in Iran is like campaigning on the end of Roe v Wade for Republicans. They don't want it to actually happen so that they can keep campaigning on it.

[tritsofme]

12. So if Iran nukes our ally Israel, what exactly would you have our response be?

The question was asked and answered.

[Cali_Democrat]

22. Let the UN determine the appropriate response

Enough going it alone. We shouldn't be the world's policeman.

[Barrymores Ghost]

30. It's a straw-man, you flaming git!!!

Do you need to have the word defined for you? Are you that flippin' obtuse?

[WinkyDink]

86. How would you suggest she answer the question, then? "It's a straw-man, git!"??

Well, that would be interesting TV.

[newmajority]

57. Israel can defend themselves

Unlike Iran, they DO have plenty of illegal nuclear weapons.

[PA Democrat]

13. Great. She would get out out of Iraq just in time to start a war with Iran.

[ErinBerin84]

14. "totally obliterate them."

I was sure that she couldn't have used those exact terms, until I clicked on the link.....oh, Hillary.

[redqueen]

15. She's a fucking HAWK.

Anyone who doesn't see that is a fucking moron.

[Barrymores Ghost]

36. She gone completely MENTAL - how could there be any doubt left? n/t

[Cali_Democrat]

17. This woman is seriously disturbed

I don't even hear Bush talking about totally obliterating countries. What a warmongering WITCH!! She is just itching to drop a nuke on someone.

She also never read the intelligence report which said Iran was not developing a nuke.

She also wants to INCREASE our involvement in the Middle East.

America sticking it's nose in the Middle East for decades led to 9/11. Now she wants increased involvement and she is threatening countries there with nuclear annihilation.

:puke:

[high density]

19. ummm

What??

[anonymous171]

20. Is this part of that "uniquely feminine skill set" that SD was talking about? nt

[redqueen]

21. But she's not EVIL! She's flawed, but BRILLIANT!

Yes... that threatening she's doing right now?

That is fucking BRILIIANT!

[Hippo_Tron]

34. Iran knows we're going to nuke them if they nuke Israel, that's nothing new

But even bringing this up is enabling the right wing viewpoints. We need to stop buying this "they're all Islamic nutjobs who really want to destroy Israel" when everybody with a brain knows that they can't actually accomplish that. Ahmadinejad and Khamenei saying that they want to destroy Israel is the Iranian political equivalent of Bush saying he's against abortion and gay marriage. It keeps the hard-liners loyal which is what they need if they want to remain in power.

We should respond to Iran in a serious manner but not in one that is blinded by fear. Like all other politicians these people are only interested in two things. Remaining in power and acquiring more power. Nuking Israel accomplishes neither of those.

[redqueen]

35. Which is why she's increasingly viewed as a DINO.

A neo-lib shill for the PNAC agenda.

[beezlebum]

23. ack! projectile vomit

"I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president we will attack Iran," Clinton said. "In the next ten years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them."

wow. if ANYONE tries to tell me that hillary's IWR" vote was a mistake, if ANYONE tries to tell me kyl/lieb was a mistake, if ANYONE tries to tell me she'll get us out of iraq, if ANYONE tries to tell me she's the "peaceful" candidate, i'm going to scream. and then vomit a la Regan MacNeil.

i'm not positive that barack obama is the ultimate candidate of peace (I wanted kucinich), i'm not 100% certain that he'll avoid war at all costs, or even at least more than boosch, but i'm damned sure hillary is nothing short of a w redux or mccain twin. hillary: the "common sense democrat/democratic war candidate" kristol envisioned and ♥.

[beezlebum]

43. i can't get over it...

i just can't- now more than ever i am opposed to her.

the gloves are off. i have been as nice (with a few exceptions) as possible regarding clinton. i have tried to be respectful, but this blows my mind. respect is now in the negatives. she really would depress me as much as mccain, which would even beat out b*sh at this point.

i wonder if there are actually still people out there who believe her iwr vote was a "mistake." that she was "duped."

sickening. i think i might feel a donation coming on...

[mystieus]

24. What about the innocent women and children?

[Arugula Latte]

48. Hey, that's just collateral damage in Hillaryworld.

She apparently has no remorse about the hundreds of thousands of innocents she helped slaughter in Iraq.

[Barrymores Ghost]

25. Has SHE completely LOST her f*cking MIND???

I'm speechless. Absolutely speechless.

Is THIS the neo-neo-Con f*cking bullsh*t her supporters want her to lead with??? Is this the Bush-ian/Cheney-esque sabre-rattling Chickenhawk crap that inspires them?

She has jumped the f*cking shark.

AGAIN.

[bunnies]

26. Anyone familiar with her positions...

shouldnt be surprised by this. Its a major part of the reason many anti-war dems are against her. She's a hawk with something to prove. Like GWB proving something to daddy... HRC will prove something to Bill.

[SOS]

27. From pandering to insanity

1. Iran has no nuclear weapons
2. 2007 NIE says no Iranian nuke program (how many NIE's is she going to ignore?)
3. Iran is probably aware that the US has 10,000 nuclear ICMBs and that Israel has approximately 200 nuclear warheads.
4. Iran would not launch an attack from Iranian soil. (see #3)
5. Is she counting Hezbollah in Lebanon? If so get ready for WW 3.
6. If she is counting Hezbollah in Lebanon, what's the threshhold? If Hezbollah fires a rocket into Northern Israel, the US slaughters 70 million Iranian men, women and children? Not even Bush was that stupid.
7. Threatening to "obliterate" a nation is insanity.

[redqueen]

32. Excellent response.

But she's BRILLIANT!

How could she have missed all that? :shrug:

[Divernan]

31. Her threat wasn't retaliation; but of preemptive attack based on what she thinks Iran is considering

So she would launch a nuclear holocaust based on what "they might foolishly CONSIDER".

It was horrible enough, and set international law and treaty law back several hundred years when Bush pre-emptively attacked Iraq; Hillary would go to the ultimate horror - a pre-emptive nuclear attack - indiscriminate slaughter of a nation's civilians?

TOTALLY MEGALOMANIACAL ! ! !

And as to the nuclear fallout of "obliterating" a country? At least Bush and Cheney pretend to use weapons that have pinpoint accuracy, ie, taking out only military targets. She can't control the fallout within the borders of Iran. Her insane raving should be scaring the shit out of Azarbaijan, Turkmenistan, Oman, Afghanistan, Iraq, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Turkey, Kuwait & Bahrain.

[tritsofme]

40. Read much?

The question was predicated on Iran attacking Israel with nuclear weapons.

[Barrymores Ghost]

49. Read much yourself?

Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapons program. Anyone who says that they do is full of shit and parroting neo-Con talking points purely for the sake of apologizing for her astonishing idiocy.

She's trying to score eleventh-hour desperation points with PA independents by coming off as a hawk on defense. in other words, she's beyond pandering...she's utterly pathetic, and possible insane.

[tritsofme]

52. She was asked a question about a plausible scenario.

And answered it.

If you think Iran doesn't have any sort of intentions on becoming a nuclear power, you are off in another world.

[safeinOhio]

59. The real question should be

what will you do if Israel attacks Iran? Much more likely, as Iran hasn't attacked anyone since the 1600's. The MSM always ask the wrong questions.

[Barrymores Ghost]

63. In the same way that this Mensa wouldn't think to ask:

"Why would Saddam Hussein even consider attacking _________ (insert U.S. or U.S. ally of choice, here)???

I think these Hillemmings have collectively gone over the edge, with she leading the whole lot of them.

[WinkyDink]

87. Well, Chris Cuomo didn't ASK her that one. Why don't you e-mail him?

[Barrymores Ghost]

61. Do you actually HEAR yourself?

You sound like the Bushies talking about Saddam Hussein...

[gmudem]

62. You think thats a plausible scenario?

Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapons program, forget an actual nuclear weapon. This scenario is only plausible in neo-cons wet dreams.

[Arrowhead2k1]

37. Hillary Clinton:

Ready to talk out of her inflated wrinkly ass on day one.

[Barrymores Ghost]

39. K&R this, folks - this needs to be FRONT page!! n/t

[DrFunkenstein]

42. Who Does She Mean By "Them"?

Her cavalier attitude towards "massive retaliation" not bothered with any troublesome caveats about civilian populations - entirely in keeping with her insistence on keeping nuclear weapons "on the table" when fighting a handful of terrorists.

Meanwhile, Obama has gone on the record saying he will make every effort to eliminate ALL nuclear weapons - including our own. Why didn't ABC bring up that distinction at the debate instead of all those gaffe-based idiocies?

[Arugula Latte]

44. "I'm Hillary Clinton, and I approve of mass murder on a sweeping scale"

Okay, Hillary. You've earned the flaming finger:

[Radical Activist]

45. "would be able to" Said as though she's just looking for an excuse.

She would finally be able to do what she always wanted to do. She gets scarier every day.

[City Lights]

46. Another chickenhawk. Foghorn Clinton huffing and puffing at our enemies.

I've seen this movie and don't like the way it ends. :puke:

She gives me the willies. :scared:

[dano81818]

51. and who got trashed yday for saying she'd be a warmonger

that was me.

[chapel hill dem]

54. Israel has the Samson Option to wipe out enemies with a nuke counterattack.

From wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_option


The Samson Option is a term used to describe Israel’s alleged deterrence strategy of massive retaliation with nuclear weapons as a “last resort” against nations whose military attacks threaten its existence, and possibly against other targets as well.<1> Israel refuses to admit it has nuclear weapons or describe how it would use them, an official policy of nuclear ambiguity, also known as "nuclear opacity." This has made it difficult for anyone outside the Israeli government to definitively describe its true nuclear policy, while still allowing Israel to influence the perceptions, strategies and actions of other governments.<2>

It is estimated that Israel has between 75 and 200 nuclear weapons.<3> Kenneth S. Brower has estimated as many as 400 nuclear weapons.<4> These can be launched from land, sea and air.<5> This gives Israel a second strike option even if much of the country is destroyed.<6>

[johnnydrama]

55. didn't people trash Obama for

saying things like "all options are on the table", or "we'd take the appropriate steps"

Here she says we would be able to totally obliterate them. That's about 100x stronger than what anybody else has said.

[gmudem]

56. Why on earth would Iran nuke Israel?

Besides the fact that they don't have the bomb, why would they nuke Israel? God she is such a fucking idiot.

[newmajority]

58. They wouldn't

But a handful of radical Zionists in Israel and another handful in this country will never accept that reality. Nor will they accept the legitimacy of anybody BUT Israel (in that region) owning so much as a handgun to defend their own countries.

[AlCzervik]

60. Geez the media is just waiting for Iran to attack Israel, they're salivating over the thought of it.

it's disgusting and i wish one of them would just say "Enough, why do you (the media) want that to happen so much, are you that desperate for more ad revenue?"

[oviedodem]

64. Ahhh yes the wonderful world of the DLC!

[Life Long Dem]

65. I think she is trying to let us know this is Bush talking.

:shrug: Because it sure the hell sounds like somethnig from Bush.

[Bonobo]

66. Where are all her breathless defenders? Still don't fucking get it?

[onehandle]

67. If a small country attacked anyone else with nukes, I would hope we'd retaliate.

And 'We Would Be Able To Totally Obliterate Them?'

No shit.

On edit: Iran doesn't have nukes and won't have nukes unless our military corporations want them to. It's a bullshit premise.

[Barrymores Ghost]

68. Hillary is rattling a saber at a STRAW MAN......

...the threat doesn't exist. Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapons program, and wouldn't be stupid enough to try to attack Israel.

Hillary's jumped the shark in a desperate attempt to cling to the last vestiges of her candidacy. And anyone who doesn't see that she's gone over the edge is as scary as she is.

[onehandle]

70. True. The threat doesn't exist.

But we would retaliate in her fictional scenario.

Hopefully this race will all be over soon.

[Barrymores Ghost]

71. Or, we could pre-emptively ATTACK, like Bush and Cheney in THEIR fictional scenario.

Not over soon enough. That lady needs a rubber room.

[Indenturedebtor]

73. Yes we would

But to get on TV and say "When I am President we will Obliterate you"... um please read the article and post again.

I could beat my wife to death. Maybe when she gets home tonight I'll say "Honey I'm going to beat you to death." Um... yah.

[onehandle]

75. She didn't say that we would obliterate them if she was President.

But if they did nuke anyone, we would.

[JBoy]

69. Is it sexist to say she's acting like a man with a small penis?

[UndertheOcean]

72. Wow , what is she smoking ?

wow

[dcindian]

74. The more dead children in the world the better.

I wonder how the innocent Iran neighbors will like the skin falling of their children after Hillary murders them in a nuclear war.

[Arkana]

76. No fucking way.

That has to be out of context or something, because I have a hard time believing that someone as scripted as Hillary Clinton would say something that inflammatory on purpose.

[file83]

77. Hillary sounds EXACTLY like Ahmadinejad saying that. SHE is no leader.

That is a completely irresponsible thing to say. It's not constructive at all. We don't live in a fucking vacuum, the Iranians can take that quote of Hillary's and print it all over their news papers and say, "Look! The next President wants to 'totally obliterate' your children!!!"

Hillary is fucking insane. INSANE.

Who ever thinks that voting for her is a good idea is fucking INSANE too.

[JustinL]

78. she has now officially removed all doubt that Obama is the superior candidate on foreign policy

[JTFrog]

79. Again, I am ashamed that I share gender with this human being.

If she has something to be done in the name of women, let it be to AVOID AND END WARS, not to push for WAR and MORE WAR. Let it be in the name of better EDUCATION for our children, not a vote for NoChildLeftBehind. Let it be to uphold the CONSTITUTION and rights of the citizens, not a vote for the PATRIOT ACT, the MilitaryCommissionsAct or remaining silent on Telecom Immunity. Let it be to reach for true UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE, not a mandatory paycheck to the INSURANCE INDUSTRIES. Let it be to lift up the poor and strengthen our middle class, not to continue the deregulation of banks and bring the likes of GREENSPAN back in the picture.

Hillary voted NO against banning cluster bombs for god sakes. I guess now we know why. She wants to make sure we can obliterate entire populations.

[DCofVA]

91. Done to the tune of "Hail to the Chief"

[MrSlayer]

80. Iran nuking Israel won't be happening anytime soon.

Considering they've shut down their nuke program and all. This is nothing more than a bullshit attempt to look bold by answering a bullshit question. How else would you answer it? Iran is not now and is not on the verge of becoming a nuclear power. The next President is not going to have to deal with Israel being nuked.

[Prophet 451]

81. True but stupid

It's true that teh US is sat on enough stockpiled nukes to reduce Iran to a cloud of radioactive dust but you're not supposed to outright threaten people with them.

[fujiyama]

83. This is the kind of absolute bat shit insane bullshit

we NEED to get AWAY from. She sounds like Ahmedenijad or Bush here. Hell, I don't even know when Bush has spoken in this manner regarding Iran.

Iran does not have nukes and is very unlikely to anytime soon.

[PVnRT]

88. If Iran nukes anyone, the entire world will invade Iran

Saying it like Clinton is unnecessary pandering.

[JBShakes]

89. The biggest question this leaves me with...

is the followup:

"Senator Clinton, during last Wednesday's debate, you proposed a 'Mideast Umbrella', not unlike NATO, which would offer protection to countries we identify as "allies" in the region (including, I'm sure, the socially and human rights ass-backwards monarchies of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait) - are you also willing to threaten Iran with nuclear 'obliteration' if they attack one of the mideast states under your 'umbrella'? Is your proposal actually that America enter into some sort of nuclear murder-suicide pact with multiple countries in the most violent, politically unstable region in the world?"

Sweet Jeebus. She's not playing to "working-class voters". She's playing to the "DO WHATEVER YOU WANT TO OUR RIGHTS AND ECONOMY, JUST KEEP THE SCARY BROWN PEOPLE AWAY" crowd that's kept Bush in office for the last 7 years.

Glad to know I voted for the right person this morning.

[suston96]

90. Ah, so - IF Iran attacks Israel we will attack Iran.... What's wrong with that? nt

[SoonerPride]

93. You're willing to kill 71 millions women, children and innocent people

Because of a single attack?

What if a nuke went off and we blamed Iran, but later it turned out the nuke came from a rogue state or terrorist organization not affiliated with the Iranian government?

Can't you see the absolute nightmare and pandora's box she has opened up?

It is unfathomable and indefensible to ever consider using nuclear weapons to "obliterate" an entire country of men, women, and children.

And cats.

[TheLastMohican]

92. She scares the living crap out of me

I mean could you get any more warmongering than Bush?
Sure, just pick up that gal.

Is it a way to swing a jewish vote? Then this is a very poor attempt at that.

[NGC_6822]

94. This entire thread is predicated on a ridiculous supposition

Hillary nor any other politician should never even answer the
question.

Most of the world DOES believe that Iran is developing a
nuclear weapons technology; that's why the UN Security Council
is repeatedly escalating sanctions against the country.

But, Iran wants the weapons as an insurance policy to
discourage an attack from outside while they carry on their
destabilizing, conventional, subversive warfare all around the
region.

Anyone that buys into the news generating hysteria about Iran
initiating a nuclear strike is a nit.  The whole world would
come down on their head and Iran don't need Hillary to tell
them that.  The problem with Iran is much more subtle, and
actually is more dangerous because of the subtlety.

Get a grip.

[Bensthename]

95. So she loses the moveon group but picks up the Sean Hannity group.

It all evens out..

[suston96]

97. Hillary's Iran video from GMA......

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7359957.stm