Hillary wants what?

Question

Hillary Clinton wants to send more troops to Afghanistan? She waffles worse then EGGO. Or am I being to harsh on her?

Answer 1

No, she will say anything to get elected, that's what she wants.

Answer 2

Hillary voted for the war in Iraq, as many did because they trusted the information given to them by the President. She now acknowledges that we made a mistake and it's time to put a stop to it. She went over to Iraq, and came back with an actual plan. It's not as if she decided to suddenly get involved in the military, she serves on the Senate Committee on Armed Services with three subcommittee assignments, on Airland, on Emerging Threats and Capabilities, and on Readiness and Management Support.

She would like to send more troops into Afghanistan because, as she also stated, cells of Taliban are exploding with growth and are becoming stronger and more numerous in that area. So rather than send those extra troops into Baghdad, which will be the same waste of time it was the last two times, she proposes using those troops for the real war on terror instead of them being nothing but policemen trying to stop the factions from murdering each other. I fail to see how looking at a situation, reevaluating, and coming up with new ideas and strageties as the circumstances change is waffling. I never want a Commander-in-Chief who doesn't have the good sense to reevaluate and change their position when it becomes necessary. Every time a politican changes their mind these days people scream flip-flop right away. Not me, I expect those we elected to have enough humility to admit they may have been wrong and change their position when the circumstances warrant it.

Answer 3

Haven't heard that- know that she is against increasing the nu of troops sent to Iraq,perhaps I missed this news although read the paper daily and watch the news but is possible- Had the plan in place NOW for Iraq been in place from the very beginning wouldn't have this mess and the same for Afghanistan-AL Quida is gaining more and more in power in Afghanistan and it is vital that they do not get any more and the USA cannot afford to let that happen for Afghanistan is a vital free world territory with very dire and grave consequences for ALL if AL Quida gets too strong there.

Answer 4

Yes you are being too harsh.

The reason is because you are only picking a small portion out of what she has stated since returning from her ME visit.

First of all, she isn't waffling. Of all the senators that voted for the Iraqi War, she has remained one of the few left that continued to support invading Iraq. I watched her in an interview just yesterday on PBS. She still isn't saying that we should leave Iraq and she isn't blatantly opposing Bush.

What she is saying is that Bush shouldn't send in more troops under his current strategy. She isn't even opposes to more troops. She simply says 'not without changing what we are doing now.'

As far as Afghanistan, she feels as she always has that we have a just cause there and should complete the job.

I have no clue where you came up with the term 'waffles' in relations to Hillary. Waffling is one thing no one could accuse Hillary of doing even when it would have been more popular for her to change her position.

Answer 5

Waffles how? She's been for both wars the whole time. That being said I don't want her to be prez. I think she was only for the Iraq war cuz she wanted to look strong on defense. Obama's my man.

Answer 6

She has wanted more troops on the front all along. She'd better tell Palosi.

Answer 7

As a Liberal, I can assure you that we don't want Clinton.

She supported the war, still supports it, and is way far to the right to be acceptable to us. In another generation, she would have been a moderate Republican.

Answer 8

How can you be too harsh on her? Your opinion will never phase her one bit.

Answer 9

You're being polite.