It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Hillary Clinton: No airstrikes in Iraq 'at this time'

page: 1
8

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 12:18 PM
link   
From CNN

Washington (CNN) - Hillary Clinton said the United States should not provide military assistance – particularly airstrikes – to the Iraqi government "at this time" in response to the rise of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria and other militants.

Clinton, whose support of the 2002 Iraq War Resolution has hung with her for more than a decade, told the BBC on Thursday that she agreed with the White House's "rejection and reluctance to do the kind of military activities" that the Iraqi government is asking for.


Well we can all rest easier now that Hillary is on the job!


Oh, wait--- Hillary Clinton---"The former secretary of state"-- making press statements on an issue that she--- now a private citizen---with no authority or ability whatsoever to determine US policy or foreign affairs

Is running to the press making statements like she's now the big dog in charge?


Clinton also ruled out troops on the ground during her interview with the BBC, saying that is "not going to happen… at any foreseeable future." The former secretary of state, however, would "never say never" on troops on the group because "the world is so unpredictable."


Does it make anyone but me wonder why CNN and BBC would even bother to post a story when nothing she says or does could have any possible effect on what's happening in Iraq right now or in the imminent future?

That's like asking Martha Stewart to head up the nations immigration reform policy.

Oh but the press is just rolling over like happy puppies to get a statement from old Hillary as if her words have more influence than our duly elected presidents?




posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 12:20 PM
link   
she is and will, for a long time, be an influential character in both US and world politics..... much the same as Bill has.

why!?

dunno. but she is and will be.



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 12:21 PM
link   
Airstrikes which kill children is NOT how you deal with this.

Take out your scalar weapons and drop the crowd of rebels, without killing them.



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 12:22 PM
link   
Clinton eh ?

This Clinton ?

Hillary Clinton: I ‘Could Not Have Predicted’ That Al-Qaida Would Take Over Iraq Read more: dailycaller.com...

This Clinton ?



God help us if she becomes next Potus.



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 12:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: 12m8keall2c
she is and will, for a long time, be an influential character in both US and world politics..... much the same as Bill has.

why!?

dunno. but she is and will be.



Come on... With no political or government office she has no more influence than does Rush Limbaugh.
I pick him as an example as they both whine a lot over what other folks say and think about them...

This time we have a blaring case of Political Madness when the press takes a statement from a now private citizen and treats it as if she just set US policy.

What's going to be her next trick, claim she's deployed the Seventh Fleet?

she can't do that either ya know.



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 12:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
Clinton eh ?

This Clinton ?

Hillary Clinton: I ‘Could Not Have Predicted’ That Al-Qaida Would Take Over Iraq Read more: dailycaller.com...

This Clinton ?



God help us if she becomes next Potus.


Holy moon pie, don't scare me like that!

I think God will shrug his shoulders if that crazy lady
gets in the white house!!!!


originally posted by: Unity_99
Airstrikes which kill children is NOT how you deal with this.

Take out your scalar weapons and drop the crowd of rebels, without killing them.


Airstrikes do kill innocent people, understood..
500,000 of them JUST FLED THOUGH
as not to be killed by ISIS anyway..
Letting ISIS take over there will be a helluva lot more dead
innocent peoples then if we strategically bombed those monsters.
Take out the chopping block for the heads instead??
edit on 13-6-2014 by starfoxxx because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 12:35 PM
link   
a reply to: starfoxxx




Letting ISIS take over there will be a helluva lot more dead innocent peoples then if we strategically bombed those monsters. - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...


They should not have been allowed to grow this big.

They should have been dealt with in Syria, and Iraq.

If they are not stopped ?

Lots of innocent people ARE going to die.

In Iraq, and it's neighbors, hell the entire ME will burn.

Then they will set their sights on US.



In a July 2005 letter to Ayman al-Zawahiri, al-Zarqawi outlined a four-stage plan to expand the Iraq War, which included expelling U.S. forces from Iraq, establishing an Islamic authority (caliphate), spreading the conflict to Iraq's secular neighbors, and engaging in the Arab–Israeli conflict.[76] The affiliated groups were linked to regional attacks outside Iraq consistent with their stated plan, such as the Sharm al-Sheikh bombings (2005) in Egypt which killed some 88 people, including many foreign tourists.


en.wikipedia.org...

Those guys are bad news made worse by our feckless leadership.



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 12:43 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

But there's so many of them!!!



30,000 Iraqi troops fled from just 800 insurgents after three days of sporadic fighting.


and they all had guns and made a lot of noise... They took my tank too...boo-hoo...

Yeah they could have put of stop to 800 militants from doing what they've done--- but they didn't--- and frankly I don't see why it's our problem any more



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 12:48 PM
link   
a reply to: HardCorps

We haven't thought the ME was our problem for the last 6 administrations.

And they have always come knocking on our door.

Like September 11th, First World Trade Center Attacks, the USS Cole, Kobar Towers, Beruit Embassy bombing, Benghazi, Somalia,Yemen.

For decades we stuck our heads in the sand thinking. 'They wouldn't dare', but the last decade of war, and those others see the reality of it all.



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 12:59 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

on the contrary, lots of us old salts think

Like September 11th, First World Trade Center Attacks, the USS Cole, Kobar Towers, Beruit Embassy bombing, Benghazi, Somalia,Yemen. -

are all early flags that announced the start of WWIII.

Back in WWII it was the Nazi Party, grew into a mass movement...
Now we have the radical Jihadist doing the very same things... Committing many of the very same crimes, genocide invasion of neighboring countries forcing party doctrine upon the citizenry.

They see it happening... but the real question is what can we do to stop it?

Don't look at me for an answer...It's all I can do to keep my daughters from pounding on each other over a whose doll is it dispute...I usually spank the two of them and send them to their room... don't think that'll work with Isis and Iraq though


edit on 13-6-2014 by HardCorps because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 01:08 PM
link   
a reply to: HardCorps




They see it happening... but the real question is what can we do to stop it?


Nothing.

They have to sort their snip out, and get out of the dark ages.

'Terrorism' in the Middle East kind is nothing but a marriage made in hell between religious beliefs, and political beliefs

There is only one way as far as I know that it will ever end, and that is if they implement what the West learned long ago.

Create a separation of church, and state.

Debate instead of bullets, and bombs, and suicide vests, and killing bunny rabbits.

On that day there would be peace in the middle east.

It's easy to destroy.

Harder to build.

They have been destroying themselves for centuries.

It is time they start building their futures.

On that day it will be a sight to see, but for 2000+ years doesn't look like that day will ever come.
edit on 13-6-2014 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 01:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: 12m8keall2c
she is and will, for a long time, be an influential character in both US and world politics..... much the same as Bill has.

why!?

dunno. but she is and will be.



Because the socialist MSM want her to be their next dear leader for no other reason than her gender.



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 01:51 PM
link   
I would have thought Hillary would stay out of this, Obama has made a fool of her for the past 5+ years.

Oh well, once a damn fool , always an Obama manipulated fool, you go Hillary ,show us what your NOT made of.



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 02:28 PM
link   
a reply to: HardCorps

I think it became your problem when you sanctioned the hanging of Saddam.

Cheney was a lot smarter in the 90's. He knee better than to topple the government instead of just the military.

I believe the saying goes... "you f@$k em, you feed em"



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 03:26 PM
link   
Who would you actually air strike on anyways? They all running around killing each other.



posted on Jun, 13 2014 @ 03:29 PM
link   
Well, I appreciate her opinion and all...as a private citizen with absolutely no authority to do more than pontificate.

However..the last time she had any personal duty relating to Americans in a situation where things were falling and being over-run? 4 good men died, 20 barely escaped with a rescue that wasn't ordered, and she screamed later 'what difference does it make?'

Well.. indeed.. What difference does her opinion make, anyway, to coin a phrase back at her?



new topics

top topics



 
8

log in

join