reply to post by Wonderer2012
If you note....at the 1:17 mark, Hillary says '...and frankly there are those that will say...' or something real close to that...leading into the
comment about an attack unifying and legitimatizing 'the regime.' Obviously 'those that will say' are IRANIAN since we here in America do not tend to
refer to our administration as a 'regime.'
THEN...at around 1:26, she goes on to say that an argument is made constantly on the hard line side of the Iranian government that 'we're not going to
give anything up and in fact, we're going to provoke it...' This, AGAIN, is obviously a reference to what is being said on the Iranian side...made
clear by the part about not giving anything up. It is Iran who is holding back and 'not giving anything up,' being the ones accused of hiding their
true intent behind more a benign facade. She says that their rationale is that if they are provoked by an attack, then they can come out in power in
the Middle East...
This makes Mr. Baker's insistence on being the ones to initiate said attack truly LAUGHABLE. Right! If that's what the 'hard-line' want in
Iran...what? We just play into their idea and facilitate it with a provoked attack?
It is remarkably wise to RESTRAIN ourselves in this situation no matter what because first of all...we still lack definitive proof and we are
constantly under a persuasive attack by Bibi to go along with what Israel wants...which, imo, is the same thing, essentially, that Hillary says the
hard-line Iranian government wants by provoking the attack that Israel also wants to provoke us into...Israel wants to be THE power in the ME and
frankly, Iran is the only threat holding up their plans in that measure.
When she says that the President makes very clear that all options are on the table...most take that as saying that attack is still very much a
possibility but the flip side and innuendo in that is also that NOT attacking is also a real and maybe more legitimate possibility. It is double-speak
for sure...but in a two-party system, what choice is there, many times?
Her laughter and comment about 'we're trying hard' seems to me to be a mixture of her reaction to hearing exactly what she expected to hear from
someone such as Mr. Baker and she does not say WHAT it is that they are trying hard to do, exactly. Her laughter is not hysterical but seems to be one
of true amusement, imo. I would have reacted the very same way in her position, and I hold firmly to the idea that attacking anyone for any reason is
just NOT WISE or warranted in this day and age...not to mention the current situation of the US in regard to war and attacks, et. al.
A female Secretary of State is a natural deterrence when it comes to the US's proven penchant for stirring up trouble and waging wars for various and
I did not like Hillary at all up until recently...certain things I've observed in a new light of increased understanding which I did not have before
have given me a new admiration for the woman and I think she is a breath of fresh air. The problem with most these days is that we are so used to
breathing stagnant stinky political air that we have forgotten that fresh air does exist and is both healthy and refreshing...we fail to recognize it
because we are conditioned that way.
I'm really interested in what she said after the point at which the video clip creator cut it short. Context is really so important, as well this
person obviously knows, who made and posted this clip.
edit on 10/9/2012 by queenannie38 because: (no reason given)