Clinton says 'Phucket" to Iran

[Darkwind]

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Did anyone else catch the Secretary of State in Phuket today?

I can't find the youtube video, but she was 'splainin how the U.S. under Mr. Obama would not tolerate a nuclear Iran....

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/23/w...?bl&ex=1248408000&en=26edfbfbe564636f&ei=5087

 

[Soaring]

Hillary Clinton was the absolute worst sec of state that Obama could have chosen. If I were a foreign leader, I wouldn't take her seriously. She is nothing more than a paper tiger. And, if I were a foreigh leader, I wouldn't take Obama seriously either. He has done absolutely nothing to secure the borders of the United States, much less secure the borders of Middle Eastern countries. He is a joke.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Obama doesn't have to tolerate a nuclear Iran. He's the President of the United States not of the world.

 

[Caroljo]

Obama doesn't have to tolerate a nuclear Iran. He's the President of the United States not of the world.

I think someone needs to remind him of this....he doesn't know it!

 

[Jon]

Hillary Clinton was the absolute worst sec of state that Obama could have chosen.

She's the only thing Obama has gotten right so far.

 

[Lycurgus]

This so called nuclear umbrella would prove useless IMO, as I would expect Israel to have other planned responses should Iran come close to the completion of a deliverable weapon. Further, Obama is not respected by Israel, in terms of their trusting him for their security or overall interests.

Israel sees Obama for what he really is.

Though I have a fair number of complaints with the Israeli government, in this case I would completely support a preemptive strike by them or even war. For them to assume that Iran would act rationally would be a tragic mistake.

 

[Lycurgus]

If given a message with teeth in it or if given the green light to get tough, I believe that Hillary is more than capable of that. I am confident that Hillary could sit across the table from anyone in the world and hold her ground, the problem is the man she speaks for.

 

[concept]

So are we changing our story again with regards to Iran?

 

[probus]

think about how badly hillary lost to this putz-- she had the whole democratic party in her pocket-- all the money, the world was her "oyster"-- hell, she even braved snipers in Bosnia and now she takes a job that effectively takes her "off the board" in terms of politics for 4 years-- anybody hear that snarling she was making last week about "not breaking my larynx just my elbow"?-- that was the great satan reminding basketball jones that she could still become "relevant" if she continues to be bypassed and ignored-- she wants back in so bad she can taste it but boy, did she blow it "big time"-- Regards, probus

 

[Darkwind]

Obama doesn't have to tolerate a nuclear Iran. He's the President of the United States not of the world.

So, by that rationale, he should only be intolerant of terror nations that use nukes against the United States....

The entire world needs to take the stand that we will not tolerate a nuclear Iran.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Obama doesn't have to tolerate a nuclear Iran. He's the President of the United States not of the world.

So, by that rationale, he should only be intolerant of terror nations that use nukes against the United States....

The entire world needs to take the stand that we will not tolerate a nuclear Iran.

Well there's no evidence that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, so maybe it's time to scale back on the aggressive rhetoric towards them.

 

[crpravens]

Obama doesn't have to tolerate a nuclear Iran. He's the President of the United States not of the world.

So, by that rationale, he should only be intolerant of terror nations that use nukes against the United States....

The entire world needs to take the stand that we will not tolerate a nuclear Iran.

Well there's no evidence that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, so maybe it's time to scale back on the aggressive rhetoric towards them.

Right, they are a peaceful nation and want no trouble.

 

[Sunni Man]

So, by that rationale, he should only be intolerant of terror nations that use nukes against the United States....

The entire world needs to take the stand that we will not tolerate a nuclear Iran.

Well there's no evidence that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, so maybe it's time to scale back on the aggressive rhetoric towards them.

Right, they are a peaceful nation and want no trouble.

Iran is a peace loving nation.

They have not attacked any other country in over 300 years.

 

[crpravens]

Well there's no evidence that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, so maybe it's time to scale back on the aggressive rhetoric towards them.

Right, they are a peaceful nation and want no trouble.

Iran is a peace loving nation.

They have not attacked any other country in over 300 years.

So I guess the death to Israel and the US is just harmless talk?

What about the trouble with taking our US citizens hostage for over a year?

 

[Sunni Man]

Right, they are a peaceful nation and want no trouble.

Iran is a peace loving nation.

They have not attacked any other country in over 300 years.

So I guess the death to Israel and the US is just harmless talk?

Basically it is just the Iranians venting their dislike of U.S. and Israelie policies.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

So, by that rationale, he should only be intolerant of terror nations that use nukes against the United States....

The entire world needs to take the stand that we will not tolerate a nuclear Iran.

Well there's no evidence that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, so maybe it's time to scale back on the aggressive rhetoric towards them.

Right, they are a peaceful nation and want no trouble.

Regardless of whether they want trouble or not there still isn't any evidence they're developing a nuclear weapon. It's our aggressive rhetoric that will likely make them think a nuclear weapon might make a nice deterrent to stop us from invading them.

 

[rhodescholar]

Well there's no evidence that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, so maybe it's time to scale back on the aggressive rhetoric towards them.

Still parrotting the same horseshit in here, eh KK?

Grow a brain fucking idiot.

 

[rhodescholar]

They have not attacked any other country in over 300 years.

In or out of uniform, idiot?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Well there's no evidence that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, so maybe it's time to scale back on the aggressive rhetoric towards them.

Still parrotting the same horseshit in here, eh KK?

Grow a brain fucking idiot.

I thought you put me on ignore?

 

[rhodescholar]

I thought you put me on ignore?

You are on ignore, I just occasionally check your post to see if you can surprise me by growing a brain and ceasing spewing the lie "you have no evidence..." about iran's nuclear weapons program, but like all idiots, you don't disappoint...